Kagan v. Selene Fin. L.P.
Decision Date | 28 September 2016 |
Docket Number | Case No. 15-CV-5936 (KMK) |
Citation | 210 F.Supp.3d 535 |
Parties | Helen Sue KAGAN, on behalf of Plaintiff and a class, Plaintiff, v. SELENE FINANCE L.P. and Selene Ventures GP, LLC, Defendants. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York |
Tiffany N. Hardy, Esq., Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC, Chicago, IL, Counsel for Plaintiff.
Abraham Kleinman, Esq., Kleinman LLC, Uniondale, NY, Counsel for Plaintiff.
Jason E. Manning, Esq., Troutman Sanders LLP, Richmond, VA, Counsel for Defendants.
John C. Lynch, Esq., Troutman Sanders LLP, Virginia Beach, VA, Counsel for Defendants.
Helen Sue Kagan ("Plaintiff") brings this Action, on behalf of herself and a class, alleging that Selene Finance L.P. ("Selene Finance") and Selene Ventures GP, LLC ("Selene Ventures," and collectively, "Defendants") engaged in unlawful credit and collection practices in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (Dkt. No. 1.) Before the Court is Defendants' Motion To Dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (the "Motion"). (Dkt. No. 29.) For the following reasons, the Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
The following facts are drawn from Plaintiff's Complaint and are taken as true for the purpose of resolving the instant Motion.1
Plaintiff is an individual who resides in a single-family home that she owns. (Compl. ¶ 4 (Dkt. No. 1).) Selene Finance is a limited partnership entity, (id. ¶ 5), and a "special servicer" of residential mortgages, (id. ¶ 6).2 Selene Finance was established in October 2007 to service nonperforming and subperforming residential mortgage loans, i.e., to collect delinquent debts. (Id. ¶ 8.) By 2012, it expanded into servicing prime mortgage loans. (Id. ¶ 9.) Selene Finance regularly acquires delinquent loans, (id. ¶ 11), and then attempts to collect such loans through use of the mails and telephone system, (id. ¶ 12).3 Selene Ventures is a limited liability company and the general partner of Selene Finance. (Id. ¶ 14.)
Selene Finance has been attempting to collect from Plaintiff a residential mortgage debt incurred for personal, family, or household purposes. (Id. ¶ 15, 17.) The debt was in default at the time Selene Finance first became involved with it. (Id. ¶ 16.) On or about September 4, 2014, Selene Finance sent Plaintiff a letter regarding her debt, intended as the "Notice of Debt" required by § 1692g (the "Notice").
4 Subsequently, on or about September 18, 2014, Selene Finance sent Plaintiff a letter seeking a loan modification. On September 30, 2014, Selene Finance sent Plaintiff another letter regarding her loan payments. On or about October 1, 2014, Plaintiff submitted a written debt dispute. Thereafter, Selene Finance acknowledged the receipt of Plaintiff's letter and provided a timeline for Selene Finance's response. On or about October 28, 2014, Selene Finance sent Plaintiff a "Notice of Default and Intent to Accelerate." 5
Between June 8, 2015 and June 20, 2015, Plaintiff received the following voicemail messages from Selene Finance:
(the "Voicemail Messages"). (Compl. ¶ 26.)
Plaintiff commenced this putative Class Action against Defendants on July 29, 2015, alleging violations of the FDCPA. (Dkt. No. 1.) Pursuant to a briefing schedule adopted by the Court on November 30, 2015, (Dkt. No. 28), Defendants filed their Motion and supporting papers on January 12, 2016, (Dkt. Nos. 29–30). Plaintiff filed her opposition on February 23, 2016, (Dkt. No. 39), and Defendants filed their reply on March 4, 2016, (Dkt. No. 40).
The Supreme Court has held that although a complaint "does not need detailed factual allegations" to survive a motion to dismiss, "a plaintiff's obligation to provide the grounds of [her] entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly , 550 U.S. 544, 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955, 167 L.Ed.2d 929 (2007) (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted). Indeed, Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure"demands more than an unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusation." Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). "Nor does a complaint suffice if it tenders naked assertions devoid of further factual enhancement." Id. (alteration and internal quotation marks omitted). Rather, a complaint's "[f]actual allegations must be enough to raise a right to relief above the speculative level." Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555, 127 S.Ct. 1955. Although "once a claim has been stated adequately, it may be supported by showing any set of facts consistent with the allegations in the complaint," id. at 563, 127 S.Ct. 1955, and a plaintiff must allege "only enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face," id. at 570, 127 S.Ct. 1955, if a plaintiff has not "nudged [her] claims across the line from conceivable to plausible, the[ ] complaint must be dismissed," id. ; see also Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679, 129 S.Ct. 1937 ( ; id. at 678–79, 129 S.Ct. 1937 ( ).
"[W]hen ruling on a defendant's motion to dismiss, a judge must accept as true all of the factual allegations contained in the complaint." Erickson v. Pardus, 551 U.S. 89, 94, 127 S.Ct. 2197, 167 L.Ed.2d 1081 (2007) (per curiam); see also Aegis Ins. Servs., Inc. v. 7 World Trade Co., 737 F.3d 166, 176 (2d Cir. 2013) ( ). Further, "[f]or the purpose of resolving [a] motion to dismiss, the [c]ourt ... draw[s] all reasonable inferences in favor of the plaintiff." Daniel v. T & M Prot. Res., Inc., 992 F.Supp.2d 302, 304 n.1 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (citing Koch v. Christie's Int'l PLC, 699 F.3d 141, 145 (2d Cir. 2012) ).
Lastly, a court ruling on a Rule 12(b)(6) motion "may consider the complaint[,] ... any written instrument attached to the complaint as an exhibit [,] or any statements or documents incorporated in it by reference," as well as "matters of which judicial notice may be taken, and documents either in [the] plaintiffs' possession or of which [the] plaintiffs had knowledge and relied on in bringing suit." Kalyanaram v. Am. Ass'n of Univ. Professors at N.Y. Inst. of Tech., Inc., 742 F.3d 42, 44 n.1 (2d Cir. 2014) (alterations and internal quotation marks omitted); see also Leonard F. v. Isr. Disc. Bank of N.Y., 199 F.3d 99, 107 (2d Cir. 1999) ; Wang v. Palmisano, 157 F.Supp.3d 306, 317 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) (same).
The purpose of the FDCPA is to eliminate abusive debt collection practices and establish "certain rights for consumers whose debts are placed in the hands of professional debt collectors for collection." Kropelnicki v. Siegel, 290 F.3d 118, 127 (2d Cir. 2002) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Plummer v. Atl. Credit & Fin., Inc., 66 F.Supp.3d 484, 487 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (same). "Debt collectors that violate the FDCPA are strictly liable, meaning that a consumer need not show intentional conduct by the debt collector to be entitled to damages." Easterling v. Collecto, Inc., 692 F.3d 229, 234 (2d Cir. 2012) (internal quotation marks omitted). Moreover, a single violation is...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Thomas v. Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc.
...courts in this circuit have found that notices that track the statutory language comply with the FDCPA. See Kagan v. Selene Fin. L.P., 210 F. Supp. 3d 535, 543 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) (citing, inter alia, Sebrow v. NCO Fin. Sys., Inc., No. 08-CV-1725, 2009 WL 2707341, at *3 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 27, 2009)......
- Perez v. First Bankers Trust Servs., Inc.
-
Somerset v. Stephen Einstein & Assocs., P.C.
...requirement of materiality." Massey v. On-Site Manager, Inc. , 285 F.R.D. 239, 248 (E.D.N.Y. 2012) ; see also Kagan v. Selene Fin. L.P. , 210 F.Supp.3d 535, 548 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) (" § 1692e(11) requires that a debt collector identify itself as such in all communications.... Where, as here, th......
-
Wilkins v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC
... ... violates the Act.” Jacobson v. Healthcare Fin ... Servs., Inc., 516 F.3d 85, 91 (2d Cir. 2008) (citing 15 ... under the FDCPA is a question of law. See Kagan v. Selene ... Fin. L.P., 210 F.Supp.3d 535, 545 (S.D.N.Y. 2016) ... ...