Adegbenro v. Bank of America, N.A

S.D. Texas

Adegbenro v. Bank of America, N.A

District Court, S.D. Texas·Decided June 27, 2023·No. 4:22-cv-00828·Unknown

Opinion

□ Southern District of Texas ENTERED June 28, 2023 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Nathan Ochsner, Clerk SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

ADESNUMBO ADEGBENRO, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:22-CV-00828 § BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., § § Defendant. § ORDER Before the Court is United States Magistrate Judge Yvonne Y. Ho’s Memorandum and Recommendation filed on June 12, 2023. Doc. #43. The deadline for filing objections has passed, and no objections have been filed. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has reviewed the Memorandum and Recommendation for clear error. See United States y. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989). Finding no clear error, the Court adopts the Memorandum and Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Strike (Doc. #37) Plaintiff's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment—filed as Doc. #36—is GRANTED. Additionally, Defendant’s Motion to Strike (Doc. #42) Plaintiff's additional Cross Motion for Summary Judgment—filed as Doc. #40— is GRANTED. Lastly, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #34)! is GRANTED IN PART with respect to Plaintiff's claims for quiet title (Claim 2), conspiracy to defraud (Claim 4),

' Defendant’s Rule 12(c) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. #15) was converted into a motion for summary judgment to be resolved in conjunction with Defendant’s explicit Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #34).

breach of the implied or express covenants of good faith and fair dealing (Claim 5), wrongful foreclosure (Claim 7), under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (Claim 8), negligence (Claim 9), and most of his breach-of-contract theories (Claim 3). Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #34) is DENIED IN PART with respect to Plaintiff’s breach of contract theory that Bank of America improperly charged inspection fees (Claim 3), Plaintiff's TILA and RESPA claims (Doc. #1, Ex. 2 at 3-4, 6, 13 FJ 7-14, 27, 43 & n.1), and Plaintiffs requests for declaratory and injunctive relief (Claims 1 and 10). It is so ORDERED.

JUN 2.7 2023 AL Date | The Honorable Alfred H. Bennett United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

□ Southern District of Texas ENTERED June 28, 2023 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Nathan Ochsner, Clerk SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

ADESNUMBO ADEGBENRO, § § Plaintiff, § § VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:22-CV-00828 § BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., § § Defendant. § ORDER Before the Court is United States Magistrate Judge Yvonne Y. Ho’s Memorandum and Recommendation filed on June 12, 2023. Doc. #43. The deadline for filing objections has passed, and no objections have been filed. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has reviewed the Memorandum and Recommendation for clear error. See United States y. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (Sth Cir. 1989). Finding no clear error, the Court adopts the Memorandum and Recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, Defendant’s Motion to Strike (Doc. #37) Plaintiff's Cross Motion for Summary Judgment—filed as Doc. #36—is GRANTED. Additionally, Defendant’s Motion to Strike (Doc. #42) Plaintiff's additional Cross Motion for Summary Judgment—filed as Doc. #40— is GRANTED. Lastly, Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #34)! is GRANTED IN PART with respect to Plaintiff's claims for quiet title (Claim 2), conspiracy to defraud (Claim 4),

' Defendant’s Rule 12(c) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. #15) was converted into a motion for summary judgment to be resolved in conjunction with Defendant’s explicit Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #34).

breach of the implied or express covenants of good faith and fair dealing (Claim 5), wrongful foreclosure (Claim 7), under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (Claim 8), negligence (Claim 9), and most of his breach-of-contract theories (Claim 3). Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. #34) is DENIED IN PART with respect to Plaintiff’s breach of contract theory that Bank of America improperly charged inspection fees (Claim 3), Plaintiff's TILA and RESPA claims (Doc. #1, Ex. 2 at 3-4, 6, 13 FJ 7-14, 27, 43 & n.1), and Plaintiffs requests for declaratory and injunctive relief (Claims 1 and 10). It is so ORDERED.

JUN 2.7 2023 AL Date | The Honorable Alfred H. Bennett United States District Judge

Adegbenro v. Bank of America, N.A, (S.D. Tex. 2023).

Pincite

Adegbenro v. Bank of America, N.A (Adegbenro v. Bank of America, N.A) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related