810 F.3d 103 (1st Cir. 2016), 15-1270, Giroux v. Federal National Mortgage Association
|Citation:||810 F.3d 103|
|Opinion Judge:||TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge.|
|Party Name:||SHAREL L. GIROUX, Plaintiff, Appellant, v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION, its Successor & Assigns, and MERSCORP HOLDINGS INC., its Successor & Assigns, Defendants, Appellees|
|Attorney:||Michael J. DiCola, on brief for appellant. Phoebe N. Coddington and Winston & Strawn, LLP, on brief for appellees.|
|Judge Panel:||Before Howard, Chief Judge, Torruella and Thompson, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||January 13, 2016|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the First Circuit|
Sharel Giroux executed a promissory note secured by a mortgage on her home. The mortgage and note were assigned to Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae). Giroux filed suit in a New Hampshire state court contending that Fannie Mae and others lacked sufficient rights to assign the note. Giroux’s claim was dismissed for lack of standing. After a foreclosure sale was scheduled, Giroux... (see full summary)
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE. Hon. Paul J. Barbadoro, U.S. District Judge.
Plaintiff-Appellant Sharel Giroux filed suit against Defendants-Appellees Federal National Mortgage Association (" Fannie Mae" ) and MERSCORP Holdings, Inc., seeking an order enjoining the foreclosure sale of her home. The district court dismissed her claim, finding that it was barred on res judicata grounds in light of a similar case that she had brought in Belknap Superior Court in New Hampshire and which had been dismissed. Giroux moved to vacate the district court's judgment under Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a request which the district court summarily denied. Giroux solely appeals the denial of her Rule 60 motion, contending that the district court was required to provide reasoning for its order under Ungar v. Palestine Liberation Org., 599 F.3d 79 (1st Cir. 2010). We affirm.
In January 2007, Giroux executed a promissory note with American Home Mortgage Corporation (" AHMC" ), secured by a mortgage on her home held by Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems, Inc. (" MERS" ) as nominee for AHMC. In November 2008, the mortgage and note were assigned to Fannie Mae. In August 2011, Giroux filed suit in Belknap Superior Court, contending that Fannie Mae, Bank
of America Corporation,1 MERS, and BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, lacked sufficient rights to enforce, transfer, or assign the note. Her claim was dismissed for lack of standing. Giroux subsequently appealed to the New Hampshire Supreme Court, which affirmed the decision of the superior court.
A foreclosure sale was scheduled for January 7, 2014. On January 6, Giroux filed a new complaint against Fannie Mae and MERSCORP Holdings2 in Merrimack Superior Court in New Hampshire seeking to enjoin the sale. The action was removed to the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. In June 2014, the district court dismissed Giroux's action, explaining that, because her most recent claims could have been brought before the Belknap Superior Court, her action was barred on res judicata grounds. In October, Giroux filed a motion to vacate the judgment under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which the district court subsequently denied in a one-word order. She appeals that decision here.
1. Standard of Review
" [R]elief under Rule 60(b) is extraordinary in nature and...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP