Wong v. Bann-Cor Mortgage
878 F. Supp. 2d 989
W.D. Mo.2012Background
- Plaintiffs filed a Missouri MSMLA class action arising from fees and interest charged on Bann-Cor-originated second mortgages; the suit grew to include numerous assignees and trustees over years.
- The Seventh Amended Complaint seeks to recover improper charges and violations of MSMLA §§ 408.231–241, § 408.233.1, and § 408.236.
- The Court certified a class earlier, and several defendants were stayed or dismissed previously; new motions to dismiss the Seventh Amended Complaint were filed.
- To streamline, the Court reorganized discussion around standing, statute of limitations, and failure to state a claim.
- The Court squarely addresses whether moving defendants have Article III standing, whether claims are time-barred, and whether the pleading states a plausible MSMLA claim.
- The Court ultimately grants in part and denies in part the various motions, with standing rulings leading to dismissal of CitiMortgage, Countrywide Trust, Wells Fargo in their individual capacities, and PSB 1997-4 Trust on standing and/or pleading grounds; other defendants’ claims survive or are narrowed by limitations or failure to state a claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing of moving defendants | Schwartz class supports standing for class-wide claims | No connection between defendants and named/plaintiff class | Standing inadequate; claims against CitiMortgage, Countrywide Trust, Wells Fargo, PSB 1997-4 dismissed |
| Accrual and statute of limitations | Six-year accrual from discovery; continuing violation theory may apply | Accrual unknown; some claims time-barred; continuing violation rejected for some defendants | Bank One accrual timing unresolved; Celia and Old Republic claims dismissed; Real Time claims saved for summary judgment; others denied or deferred |
| Failure to state a claim (Rule 12(b)(6)) | Complaint sufficiently alleges MSMLA violations against moving defendants | Pleading too vague; overuse of and/or and information-and-belief placeholders | Fr. Credit Management Corp. denied; Real Time denied-in-part; others granted-in-part or denied dependently |
| Relation of joinders and pleadings to class representatives | Amendments cure deficiencies by adding representative connections | Court previously required named representatives connected to each defendant | Determinations influenced by lack of named-plaintiff connections; several motions granted on standing/pleading |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requires injury, causation, redressability)
- Hodak v. City of St. Peters, 535 F.3d 899 (8th Cir. 2008) (standing requirements applied by court of appeals)
- Graham v. McGrath, 243 S.W.3d 459 (Mo.Ct.App. 2007) (Missouri tolling/limitations principles (general))
- Owen v. General Motors Corp., 533 F.3d 913 (8th Cir. 2008) (analysis of limitations and discovery rules in appropriate context)
- Schwartz v. Bann-Cor Mortgage, 197 S.W.3d 168 (Mo.App.W.D. 2006) (Six-year limitations and HOEPA-based reasoning discussed (law of the case))
- Washington v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., 655 F.3d 869 (8th Cir. 2011) (HOEPA/assignes liability and limitations framework applied)