Webb v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC
| Decision Date | 30 September 2013 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No. ELH-11-2105 |
| Parties | SANDY N. WEBB, Plaintiff, v. GREEN TREE SERVICING, LLC, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Maryland |
Sandy N. Webb, plaintiff,1 sued her mortgage servicer, Green Tree Servicing, LLC ("Green Tree"), defendant, alleging several torts and statutory violations arising out of Green Tree's conduct with respect to her mortgage.2 In particular, in her Amended Complaint (ECF 26), plaintiff asserted five counts: interference with a business relationship (Count I); breach of contract (Count II); trespass to land (Count III); violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq. (Count VI); and common law negligence based onbreach of the statutory duties imposed by the FDCPA (Count VII). Those five counts survived challenges to the sufficiency of pleading. See Webb v. Green Tree Serv'g, LLC, Civ. No. ELH-11-2105, 2011 WL 6141464 (D. Md. Dec. 9, 2011) (ECF 16 & 17) ("Webb I") (granting in part and denying in part motion to dismiss) and 2012 WL 2065539 (D. Md. June 7, 2012) (ECF 52 & 53) ("Webb II") (granting in part and denying in part motion to strike amended complaint). In so ruling, I determined that all of the common law claims in this case are governed by Maryland law. See Webb I, 2011 WL 6141464, at *4 n.12; Webb II, 2012 WL 2065539, at *6 n.7.3
Thereafter, the case proceeded to discovery. In the course of discovery, Green Tree filed a Third-Party Complaint (ECF 39) against Five Brothers Mortgage Company Services and Securing, Inc. ("Five Brothers"), a business entity that plaintiff alleged had acted as Green Tree's agent. Upon the conclusion of discovery, the Third-Party Complaint was voluntarily dismissed, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a). See ECF 70 & 73.
Three motions are now at issue. Green Tree filed a Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF 74) and a supporting memorandum (ECF 74-1) (collectively, the "Motion"); plaintiff filed a Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment ("Cross-Motion") (ECF 75); and Green Tree filed aMotion for Sanctions pursuant to Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ("Sanctions Motion") (ECF 77).4 The summary judgment motions have been fully briefed,5 and no hearing is necessary to resolve them. See Local Rule 105.6. For the reasons that follow, I will grant Green Tree's Motion and deny plaintiff's Cross-Motion. Pursuant to Local Rule 105.8(b), I will direct plaintiff to respond to the Sanctions Motion and, in the interim, deny that motion, without prejudice to Green Tree's right to renew the Sanctions Motion following plaintiff's submission.6
At all times relevant, Ms. Webb owned a parcel of real property in Grasonville, Maryland, containing a single family home, which she purchased in December 2006 (the "Property" or the "Residence"). See Deposition of Sandy N. Webb at 31 ("Webb Dep.").7 Ms. Webb financed her purchase of the Property by means of a mortgage loan in the amount of $209,900 from National City Mortgage ("National City"), a lending institution that is not a party to this case. The loan was evidenced by a promissory note (the "Note"), see Ex.B to Motion(ECF 74-3), dated December 21, 2006, between Ms. Webb as "Borrower" and National City as "Lender." Under the Note, plaintiff was obligated to repay the mortgage loan over a thirty year period, with interest at a fixed annual rate of 6.375%, by monthly payments of $1,309.51 due on the first of each month. See id. at 1. The loan obligation was secured by a Deed of Trust executed by Ms. Webb, also dated December 21, 2006, see Deed of Trust, Ex.C to Motion (ECF 74-4), placing the Property in trust for the benefit of National City, as security for repayment under the Note.8
Ms. Webb resided at the Property from mid December 2006 until May 2008. See Webb Dep. at 41, 46, 55-56. After unsuccessfully placing the Property on the market for sale in the Spring of 2008, see id. at 54-56, Ms. Webb moved to Oregon in May 2008. Id. at 46. Beginning in June 2008, Ms. Webb rented the Property to a series of tenants. See id. at 56.
At some point, PNC Bank became National City's successor by merger. Subsequently, PNC Bank assigned the Deed of Trust and the Note, "together with all interest secured thereby, all liens, and any rights due or to become due thereon," to Green Tree, by an Assignment of Mortgage (the "Assignment") filed in the Land Records of Queen Anne's County, Maryland, on March 30, 2010. Assignment, Ex.1 to Cross-Motion (ECF 75-1 at 1-2).9
By a Lease Agreement (the "Lease") dated August 6, 2010, Ms. Webb rented the Property to a tenant, Christina Klamp, for a term described in the Lease as "a term of 12 months, beginning on 8/15/10, and ending at 11:59 PM on 8/30/11." Lease at 1, Ex.22 to Cross-Motion (ECF 75-22 at 2-6). The monthly rent under the Lease was $1,200. See id.
In September 2010, just over a month after the Lease was executed, Ms. Webb's husband,10 a Naval reservist, sustained a serious injury to his back while on duty in San Diego. See Webb Dep. at 135. Ms. Webb's husband underwent hospitalization due to the injury and was unable to work for several months, which placed significant financial strain on the couple. See id. at 134-37. Because their "income was dramatically reduced overnight" due to her husband's injury, id. at 135, Ms. Webb ceased making monthly payments toward the mortgage on the Property as of October 2010; the payment due on September 1, 2010, was the last monthly mortgage payment that was made by Webb. See id. at 134.
The acts of Green Tree and its alleged agent, Five Brothers, that are at issue in this suit occurred during Ms. Klamp's tenancy, after Ms. Webb became delinquent on her mortgage payments. In order to frame the issues properly, it is necessary to set out the alleged facts as plaintiff presented them in her complaint,11 before presenting the undisputed material facts drawn from the summary judgment record that is now before the Court.
Although Ms. Webb was in default of her payment obligations in January 2011, "the Residence had not been foreclosed on." Amended Complaint ¶ 10. Ms. Webb "was informed on January 18, 2011 by her tenant" (i.e., Ms. Klamp, although the complaint does not identify the tenant by name) that Ernest Wood,12 a representative of Green Tree, "was calling her and asking questions about Mrs. Webb's whereabouts because Green Tree 'needed to get a hold of her regarding her mortgage status.'" Id. ¶ 13. The tenant (i.e., Ms. Klamp) "was contacted at work and home by Green Tree about the homeowner's mortgage status," and Mr. Wood was "harassing the tenant or telling her inappropriate and private information about the collection matter," despite the fact that "Mrs. Webb was in contact with Green Tree and Green Tree knew where Mrs. Webb lived because she was in weekly contact via phone with Green Tree's representative." Id. Ms. Webb told Mr. Wood "on January 19 & 20, 2011 that he could not contact the tenant living at the Residence, either at the home or at work." Id. However, Mr. Wood "continued calling the tenant at work and home on the days of January 18, 19 & 20." Id.
On January 27, 2011, an unidentified person "was walking around the Residence and approached the tenant, and told the tenant they were coming back the next day to clear the tenant's stuff out of the Residence, put new locks on the doors, and board up the windows because the home had been foreclosed by the bank." Id. ¶ 7. This unidentified person allegedly was an "employee" of Five Brothers. Id. ¶ 8. The Five Brothers employee "was found on the Residence property looking around and clearly inside the private areas of the yard and peering through windows." Id. "The tenant contacted Mrs. Webb because she was 'freaked-out' and confused about the situation." Id. ¶ 7.
Ms. Webb alleged that she was able to speak by phone with the Five Brothers employee at the Property, who gave her Five Brothers' toll-free phone number, stating: "'[I]t didn't matter what [Mrs. Webb] had to say, it only mattered to the employee if the Residence was on a list to be cleared and boarded up because he [(the employee)] takes his direction only from the mortgage company who owns the home.'" Id. ¶ 8 (quoting employee) (brackets and alterations in original). According to plaintiff, she had not received any notice of an inspection of the Property from Green Tree. Id. ¶ 29.
Despite spending "a large part of January 27, 2011 on the phone" with representatives of Five Brothers and Green Tree "trying to clear up the confusion and the improperly ordered . . . home clean-out," Ms. Webb claimed that she was unable to receive assurance that the Residence would not be cleared out. Id. ¶ 8. When Ms. Webb called Five Brothers' toll-free number, a Five Brothers employee told her that "'if she paid her bills this wouldn't be a problem,'" and then hung up on her. Id. ¶ 9 (quoting employee). Ms. Webb called back and spoke with a "supervisor who told her the only way it would call off the moving/close-up crew was if themortgage lender told her to take the Residence off the list of recently acquired homes," and that "Five Brothers needed nothing besides the phone call from the bank to schedule a clean-out when the bank owned the property." Id. Ms. Webb called Green Tree but was unable to speak with Mr. Wood and was unable to achieve a resolution of the situation. See id. ¶ 10-11. According to the complaint, Ms. Webb's "tenant sent her father to the Residence on January 28, 2011 to ensure no one entered the Residence and stole her furniture and personal effects or locked her out of the Residence by changing the locks." Id. ¶ 11.
Webb spoke with Wood on January 28, 2011, and Wood "repeatedly stated he had every right to secure the Residence as it 'had been foreclosed upon.'" Id. ¶ 12 (quoting Wood). Wood "kept stating that the house was vacant and had been foreclosed upon so he...
To continue reading
Request your trial