Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Woodruff v. Nationstar Mortgage

United States District Court, N.D. Georgia, Atlanta Division

June 22, 2015

RICK WOODRUFF, Plaintiff,
v.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, Defendant.

OPINION AND ORDER

WILLIAM S. DUFFEY, Jr., District Judge.

This matter is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Gerrilyn G. Brill's Final Report and Recommendation ("R&R") [7], which recommends granting Nationstar Mortgage's ("Defendant" or "Nationstar") Motion to Dismiss [3] Plaintiff Rick Woodruff's ("Plaintiff" or "Woodruff") Complaint [1.1 at 3-4].

I. BACKGROUND

On November 23, 2005, Plaintiff executed, in favor of CitiMortgage, Inc. ("CitiMortgage"), a promissory note in the amount of $182, 500, and a security deed ("Security Deed") to real property located at 100 Timberwalk, Peachtree City, Georgia ("the Property"). (Security Deed [3.2] at 1-4).[1], [2] Under the terms of the Security Deed, Plaintiff "grant[ed] and convey[ed] to [CitiMortgage] and [CitiMortgage's] successors and assigns, with power of sale, the [Property]." (Id.).

On November 24, 2010, CitiMortgage assigned its rights, title, and interest in the Security Deed to Nationstar. (Assignment [3.3]).

On February 4, 2014, Nationstar, pursuant to the power of sale in the Security Deed, conducted a foreclosure sale of the Property. (See Deed Under Power [3.4]).

On October 1, 2014, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed his Complaint in the Superior Court of DeKalb County, Georgia, [3] asserting claims for wrongful foreclosure and quiet title. In his two-page Complaint, Plaintiff asserts that he "is questioning the Defendant's right to foreclosure since they are only the servicer of the loan, " that Defendant "[i]llegally foreclosed on [the Property] without following the proper guidelines, " and that "Defendant did not give him the 30 Day Borrower Response Period once his modification under the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) was denied." (Compl. at 1). Plaintiff requests a "Forensic Audit and a Securitization Audit, " "the name and address of the trustee over the mortgage and foreclosure, " "proof that he has not been a victim of ROBO SIGNING, " and that Defendant "PRODUCE THE NOTE." (Id. at 2). Plaintiff also seeks compensatory damages and attorney's fees and costs.

On December 15, 2014, Defendant removed the DeKalb County Action to this Court based on diversity jurisdiction [1].

On December 22, 2014, Defendant filed its Motion to Dismiss. Plaintiff did not respond to Defendant's Motion, and pursuant to Local Rule 7.1B, Defendant's Motion is deemed unopposed. LR 7.1B, NDGa.

On February 19, 2015, Magistrate Judge Brill issued her R&R, recommending that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss be granted.

The parties did not file objections to the R&R.

II. DISCUSSION

A. Legal Standards

1. Review of a Magistrate ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.