Williams et al v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC et al
| Patricia Clarke and Dwight A. Williams |
| Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC and Knuckles, Komosinski & Elliott, LLP |
| 1:2014cv07427 |
| December 22, 2014 |
| US District Court for the Eastern District of New York |
| Brooklyn Office |
| Lois Bloom |
| Kiyo A. Matsumoto |
| Consumer Credit |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
69
ORDER granting 62 Motion for Summary Judgment. For the reasons set forth in the attached Memorandum and Order, the court grants defendant Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC's 62 Motion for Summary Judgment in its entirety. The Clerk of Court is r espectfully directed to enter judgment in favor of the defendant, serve the pro se plaintiffs with a copy of this Memorandum and Order and the judgment, note service on the docket, and close the case. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 5/31/2019. (Spriggs, Steven)
|
|
Filing
23
ORDER. For the reasons described in the annexed opinion, the court concludes that plaintiffs have: (1) stated a claim under the FCRA against Bayview; (2) stated a claim under the FDCPA against Bayview for debt collection activities unrelated to the f oreclosure proceeding; (3) failed to state a claim under the FDCPA against Knuckles because Knuckles is alleged only to have litigated the foreclosure suits; (4) failed to state a claim against either Bayview or Knuckles under N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 7; 349; (5) failed to state a claim against either Bayview or Knuckles for invasion of privacy; and (6) failed to state a claim for negligent hiring against either defendant. The court grants plaintiffs 30 days to amend their complaint to allege plau sible facts, if any, against Knuckles for alleged violations of the FDCPA. Failure to amend within 30 days will result in the dismissal, with prejudice, of Knuckles. Plaintiffs should title their amended complaint "Second Amended Complaint." ; Amendment of the N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 349 claims, invasion of privacy claims, and negligent hiring claims would be futile because there is no indication that plaintiffs could state significant plausible facts to sustain those claims. The court , therefore, dismisses the state law claims with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to serve of a copy of this order on the pro se plaintiffs and note service on the docket. Ordered by Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto on 1/22/2016. (Jacobson, Jonathan)
|
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the New York Eastern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
