Unthank v. Freedom Mortg. Corp.

• Decision Date: 25 March 2013
• Docket Number: Civil No. - JFM-13-100
• Parties: JOHN R. UNTHANK, ET AL. v. FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORP., ET AL.
• Court: U.S. District Court — District of Maryland

JOHN R. UNTHANK, ET AL.

v.FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORP., ET AL.

Civil No. - JFM-13-100

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND

Date: March 25, 2013

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs have instituted this action against Freedom Mortgage Corporation, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. and Sequoia Mortgage Trust. Defendants Freedom Mortgage Corporation and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. have filed a motion to dismiss. Sequoia Mortgage Trust has not responded to the complaint, and plaintiffs have filed a motion for default and for a default judgment against Sequoia Mortgage Trust. However, the argument made by Freedom Mortgage Corporation and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. in support of its motion to dismiss is meritorious and applies equally to plaintiffs' claims against Sequoia Mortgage Trust. Therefore, this action will be dismissed as to all defendants.

The gravamen of plaintiff's claims is based upon the allegation that defendants were not permitted to transfer or securitize their loan without informing plaintiffs. The law is clear, however, that defendant were entitled to transfer and/or securitize the mortgage note at issue in this case. See, e.g., Suss v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 2010 WL 2733097, at *5-6 (D. Md. July 9, 2010), Blum v. Fremont Investment & Loan, 2012 WL 2137962 (D. Md. June 12, 2012). Because the premise of plaintiff's claims fails, plaintiffs have failed to state any claim upon which relief can be granted.

Page 2

A separate order dismissing this action is being entered herewith.

______________

J. Frederick Motz

United States District Judge