Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Conrad v. Caliber Home Loans, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Massachusetts

April 25, 2017

CINDY COLBERT CONRAD, Plaintiff,
v.
CALIBER HOME LOANS, INC.; U.S. BANK TRUST, N.A., as trustee for LSF9 MASTER PARTICIPATION TRUST; and JONATHAN CODY, Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

          F. Dennis Saylor IV, United States District Judge

         This is an action alleging unlawful foreclosure and destruction of property. In December 2013, plaintiff Cindy Colbert Conrad defaulted on a loan secured by a mortgage on her home. In September 2016, the mortgagee, U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., as trustee for LSF9 Master Participation Trust, (“U.S. Bank”) conducted a foreclosure sale. Conrad has brought five counts under state and federal law against U.S. Bank and the loan servicer, Caliber Home Loans, Inc., alleging that the foreclosure sale was unlawful and seeking to enjoin the transfer of the property. She has brought a sixth count for destruction of property against Jonathan Cody, the ultimate purchaser of the property.

         Prior to any discovery taking place, defendants U.S. Bank and Caliber moved for summary judgment. For the following reasons, the motion for summary judgment will be granted, and the Court will remand the remaining claim against Cody sua sponte to state court.

         I. Background

         On August 25, 2005, Cindy Colbert Conrad executed a mortgage for $350, 000 on her home located at 25 Curtis Road in Boxford, Massachusetts (“the property”). (Id. ¶ 4).[1] The mortgage secured a note to Monument Mortgage Company, Inc. (Def. SMF ¶ 1). U.S. Bank is the current mortgagee. (Id. ¶ 2). Defendant Caliber Home Loans, Inc., is the servicer for the mortgage loan. (Mansi Aff., Ex. G). According to the complaint, Jonathan Cody was the ultimate potential purchaser following the foreclosure sale. (Compl. ¶ 17).

         A. Foreclosure Claims

         The mortgage designated Cindy Conrad as the borrower; Monument Mortgage Company, Inc. as the lender; and the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”) as the mortgagee and nominee for Monument and its successors and assigns. (Mansi Aff., Ex. C at 1). On January 17, 2013, MERS assigned the mortgage to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Id. Ex. D). On April 25, 2016, Wells Fargo assigned the mortgage to U.S. Bank. (Id. Ex. E).

         The note includes an allonge dated August 25, 2005. (Id. Ex. B). The allonge endorses the note from Monument to Ohio Savings Bank. Robert Diamond, an authorized agent of Ohio Savings Bank, then endorsed the note in blank. (Id.). On August 25, 2015, U.S. Bank took possession of the note through its document custodian, Wells Fargo. (Def. SMF ¶ 2). U.S. Bank has continuously possessed the note since that date through its custodian. (Id.).

         On December 1, 2013, Conrad defaulted on the loan. (Id. ¶ 7). On January 30, 2015, Wells Fargo, the prior loan servicer, sent a 150-day right-to-cure notice to Conrad at the property by certified and first-class mail. (Id. ¶ 8; Mansi Aff. ¶ 14, Ex. F). Conrad did not cure the default. (Def. SMF ¶ 9).

         On June 14, 2016, Caliber, acting pursuant to a limited power of attorney, recorded an affidavit certifying compliance with Mass. Gen. Laws. ch. 244, §§ 35B and 35C in the Southern Essex County Registry of Deeds. (Mansi Aff., Ex. G). The power of attorney authorized Caliber to, among other things, “[d]emand, sue for, recover, collect and receive each and every sum of money, debt, account and interest . . . belonging to or claimed by [U.S. Bank], and to use or take any lawful means for recovery by legal process or otherwise.” (Id. Ex. A).

         The complaint alleges that on September 12, 2016, Harmon Law Offices conducted a foreclosure sale of the property on behalf of U.S. Bank. (Compl. ¶ 14). It further alleges that a “Memorandum of Terms and Conditions of Sale” was executed in favor of Siddharth Gehlot for a purchase price of $382, 000. (Id. ¶ 15). According to the complaint, Gehlot's bid was ultimately assigned to defendant Jonathan Cody. (Id. ¶¶ 16-17).

         B. Destruction of Property Claim

         The complaint alleges that on October 17, 2016, Cody requested that Conrad allow workers onto the property to “do some ‘yard work.'” (Compl. ¶ 56). Conrad consented to allow workers to trim the grass and shrubs. (Id. ¶ 57). She was away from home while the work was being conducted and returned later to discover that the workers had removed “all of her shrubbery.” (Id. ¶ 58). She contends that the workers' actions exceeded her authorization and seeks monetary damages for destruction of property. (Id. ¶ 60).

         C. Procedu ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.