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.

Garrett v. Pennymac Loan Services

United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania

June 14, 2018

JUNE GARRETT Plaintiff,
v.
PENNYMAC LOAN SERVICES, et al., Defendants.

          MEMORANDUM

          A. Richard Caputo, United States District Judge.

         Presently before this Court is a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) issued by Magistrate Judge Saporito. June Garrett (“Plaintiff”) filed several objections to the R&R claiming that Magistrate Judge Saporito failed to consider ongoing violations of her due process rights when he recommended denying her Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. I will adopt Magistrate Judge Saporito's Report and Recommendation and deny Plaintiff's Motion because she has failed to properly document that she will experience irreparable harm absent injunctive relief.

         I. Background

         A. Factual History

         In August 2010, Defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. (“Chase”) initiated a foreclosure proceeding on the home of Plaintiff and her husband, Lundes Garrett, located at 8 Rose Drive, Saylorsburg PA 18353.[1] (Doc. 9, at 2.) The home was sold at sheriff's sale on July 29, 2016 and Plaintiff and her husband were forcibly removed on March 28, 2018. (Doc. 10, at 3.)

         According to the pro se Memorandum in Support filed by Plaintiff, she and her husband had executed a mortgage agreement with Wachovia Corporation in August 2003. (Doc. 9, at 7.) The parties dispute the events of the acquisition, but eventually Chase obtained ownership of the mortgage. The property purchased with the proceeds of this mortgage-8 Rose Drive Saylorsburg, PA 18353-was foreclosed on by Chase in August 2013. (Doc. 34-2, at 2.) Plaintiff believes this foreclosure resulted from a fraudulent mortgage assignment. Supporting this theory, Chase was required to delay the foreclosure proceeding as a result of an on-going federal investigation.[2] (Doc. 9, at 9.) Despite this, Chase resumed its foreclosure proceeding in July 2013. Prior to the completion of foreclosure Chase transferred its mortgage interest in the property to Defendant PennyMac Loan Services ("PennyMac"). (Doc. 9, at 12.)

         Attempting to remain in her home, Plaintiff filed a Complaint with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”). This Complaint was unsuccessful. Now, Plaintiff believes the denial of this Complaint was the result of a larger conspiracy with Chase to perpetrate a fraud against her. (Doc. 9, at 13.)

         In addition to the alleged fraud, Plaintiff suggests that she was not provided adequate notice of: (1) a hearing on an application to lift an automatic stay in her bankruptcy proceeding; (2) a hearing on objections to her Chapter 13 Plan presented in her bankruptcy proceeding; (3) the sheriff sale of the property located at 8 Rose Drive, Saylorsburg PA 18353; and (4) the ejectment proceeding, which removed her from the property located at 8 Rose Drive, Saylorsburg PA 18353. (Doc. 9, at 14.) Defendants disagree and note that she was either provided adequate notice, or notice was not required.[3] (Doc. 34, at 2-5.)

         Finally, Plaintiff asserts that PennyMac is currently holding unspecified personal property left in the house by Plaintiff and her husband, because Plaintiff's husband “has filed too many lawsuits against [PennyMac].” (Doc. 9, at 15.)

         B. Procedural History

         On April 11, 2018, Plaintiff filed an Emergency Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction. After a review of the necessary facts and law, Magistrate Judge Saporito issued an R&R, which recommended that this Court deny Plaintiff's Motion. In response, Plaintiff filed objections and Defendants responded.

         This case is now ripe for review.

         II. Legal Standard

         A. Report ...


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.