United States District Court, D. New Jersey
DEANE V. WALKER, Plaintiff,
CARRINGTON MORTGAGE SERVICES LLC, BANK OF AMERICA NA, PARKER MCCAY PA, Defendants.
V. WALKER Appearing pro se
SANDHYA M. FELTES KAPLIN, STEWART, MELOFF, REITER &
STEIN, PC On behalf of Defendants Carrington Mortgage
Services LLC and Bank Of America NA
CHRISTOPHER SAYLES STEVEN AARON KROLL OMAR D. ARNOUK CONNELL
FOLEY LLP On behalf of Defendant Parker McCay PA
L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J.
matter that concerns Plaintiff's claims that Defendants
violated her rights under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act,
15 U.S.C. § 1691 et seq., and the federal Fair Housing
Act, 42 U.S.C. 3601, et seq., by failing to help her
participate in a mortgage modification program. Presently
before the Court are the motions of Defendants to dismiss
Plaintiff's claims against them. For the reasons
expressed below, Defendants' motions will be granted.
to her complaint, Plaintiff, Deane V. Walker, obtained a
mortgage from Defendant Bank of America, NA for her home in
Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey, and the loan was serviced by
Defendant Carrington Mortgage Services LLC. Plaintiff claims
that she had some set-backs in life, including suffering from
breast cancer, and she fell behind on her mortgage payments.
Plaintiff claims that she informed Defendants about her
troubles and requested to participate in a mortgage
modification program funded by the federal government so that
she could keep her home. Plaintiff claims that instead of
assisting her with the mortgage modification process,
Defendants stalled in order to foreclose on Plaintiff because
her default was more financially advantageous to Defendants
than a mortgage modification.
further alleges that when Bank of America brought a
foreclosure action against her in New Jersey state court,
Bank of America's lawyers, Defendant Parker McCay, did
not follow the judge's request that Plaintiff be allowed
to properly apply for a mortgage modification. Plaintiff also
alleges that Parker McCay ignored the state court judge's
order and proceeded to file a motion to strike
Plaintiff's answer and counterclaim in the foreclosure
action, which was granted by a judge different from the one
assigned to her case.
on Defendants' actions, Plaintiff claims that she made a
desperate and irrational decision to list her house as a
short-sale. Plaintiff also claims that Defendants'
actions violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act
(“ECOA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1691 et seq., and the
federal Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. 3601,
et seq., because they discriminated against her in their
actions to preclude her from obtaining a loan modification.
Plaintiff seeks damages in the amount of $1 million, the
dismissal of the mortgage lien on her property, and the
invalidation of the short-sale contract.
have moved to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint, arguing that
her claims fail as a matter of law. Plaintiff has opposed the
Subject matter jurisdiction
removed Plaintiff's complaint from New Jersey state court
to this Court, which has jurisdiction over Plaintiff's
federal claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1331.
Standard for ...