Bryant v. Madison Management Services, LLC

District Court, D. Nevada·Decided March 7, 2024·No. 2:20-cv-00594·Unknown

Opinion

1 George Haines, Esq. Nevada Bar No. 9411 8985 S. Eastern Avenue, Ste. 100 3 Beltway Corporate Center 4 Las Vegas, NV 89123 Telephone: (702) 880-5554 5 ghaines@freedomlegalteam.com Counsel for Plaintiff Lisa A. Bryant 6 7 Marc E. Dann, Esq. Ohio Bar No. 44115 (admitted pro hac) 1500 Madison Avenue 9 Lakewood, OH 44107 10 Telephone: (216) 373-0539 mdann@dannlaw.com 11 Counsel for Plaintiff Lisa A. Bryant 12 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 15 : 16 LISA A. BRYANT, : : 17 Plaintiff, : Case No.: 2:20-cv-00594-CDS-EJY : 18 v. : 19 : MADISON MANAGEMENT SERVICES, : 20 LLC, and WALDMAN & PORRAS, PLLC, : JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER : 21 Defendants. : 22 : : 23 24 After pretrial proceedings in this case, 25 IT IS ORDERED: 26 I. NATURE OF ACTION 27 28 1 Plaintiff Lisa A. Bryant (“Plaintiff”) is the owner of real property and improvements 2 thereupon located at and commonly known as 719 North Racetrack Road, Henderson, NV 89015, 3 Parcel No. 179-04-506-001 (the “Home”). Plaintiff alleges that unbeknownst to her, a second note 4 was procured through Accredited Home Lenders, Inc. in the amount of $90,250.00 which was then 5 allegedly secured by a recorded deed of trust on the Home (collectively, the “Second Mortgage 6 7 Loan”). 8 This is an action for violations of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 9 et seq. (“FDCPA”) and slander of title. Regarding the FDCPA claims, Plaintiff alleges that 10 Defendants attempted to collect from Plaintiff on a fraudulent Second Mortgage by claiming that 11 the Second Mortgage Loan was validly due and owing from Plaintiff. Plaintiff also alleges that 12 13 Defendants slandered her title by issuing and filing a notice of default and election to sell (“notice 14 of default”) on the Home despite a reconveyance of Second Mortgage Loan being filed on August 15 20, 2018. 16 II. STATEMENT OF JURISDICTION 17 Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court pursuant to Fair Debt Collections Practices Act, 15 18 19 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”); Mims v. Arrow Fin. Servs., LLC, 132 S. Ct. 740 (2012). 21 The following facts are admitted by the parties and require no proof: 22 23 1. On or about March 26, 2004, Plaintiff purchased the real property and improvements 24 thereupon located at and commonly known as 719 North Racetrack Road, Henderson, 25 NV 89015, Parcel No. 179-04-506-001 (the “Home”). 26 27 28 1 2. On or about March 26, 2004, Plaintiff obtained a loan as evidenced by a note and deed 2 of trust on the Home allegedly securing said note (collectively, the “First Mortgage 3 Loan”). 4 3. Defendant Madison Management Services, LLC (“Madison”) is doing business in the 5 State of Nevada as a business entity operating as a mortgage servicer. 6 7 4. Defendant Waldman & Porras, PLLC (“W&P”) is a Nevada professional limited 8 liability company which has members and employees engaged in the practice of law in 9 the State of Nevada and operates as a Trustee in the area of residential home 10 foreclosure. 11 5. Defendant Madison currently services the Second Mortgage Loan on behalf of PVK 12 13 Properties, LLC (“PVK”), the assignee of the Second Mortgage Loan per an 14 Assignment of Mortgage record in the Clark County Recorder’s office on 9/21/2017 as 15 Instrument # 201709210002298. The Deed of Trust was recorded on December 5, 2006 16 as Instrument # 200612050002545. 17 6. Madison obtained servicing rights to the Second Mortgage Loan in or around 18 19 September 2017 from Bayview Loan Management Services, LLC. 20 7. Madison, through their counsel W&P, sent correspondence to Bryant dated May 25, 21 2018 and captioned “NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND INTENT TO ACCELERATE 22 AND ENFORCE THE POWER OF SALE” claiming that the Second Mortgage Loan 23 was in default for failure to make the payment due for August 1, 2014 and that the 24 25 amount required to reinstate the Second Mortgage Loan and cure the alleged default 26 was $41,438.41. 27 28 1 8. On or about August 20, 2018, First American Title Insurance Company recorded a 2 Deed of Reconveyance as Instrument Number 201808200002705 while it did not have 3 ownership or possession of a valid lien in the chain of title to the property in question; 4 and 5 9. On or about October 10, 2019, Defendants issued and filed a notice of default and 6 7 election to sell the Home based upon the alleged default on the Second Mortgage Loan 8 (the “Notice”). 9 IV. FACTS NOT CONTESTED 10

11 The following facts, though not admitted, will not be contested at trial by evidence to the 12 contrary: 13 14 a. Plaintiff: None. 15 b. Defendant: None. 16

18 a. Plaintiff:

19 1. Whether Waldman & Porras, PLLC is a “debt collector” in this case; 20 2. Whether Defendants’ filing of a notice of default and election to sell the Home 21 on or about October 10, 2019 prevented Plaintiff from refinancing her Home; 22 3. Whether Defendants failed to substantially comply with NRS 107.080(2)(c) as 23 24 the Notice allegedly misrepresented the character, amount, or legal status of the 25 debt represented by the Second Mortgage Loan; 26 27 28 1 4. Whether Defendants allegedly misrepresented to Plaintiff that she was in default 2 on obligations under the Second Mortgage Loan by claiming she owed sums 3 which, were not in fact due, and that they would foreclose upon the Home; 4 5. Whether Defendants’ alleged willful and wrongful actions have caused Plaintiff 5 to suffer emotional distress driven by fear, anxiety, and concern that Defendants 6 7 will allegedly wrongfully seek to foreclose upon the Second Mortgage Loan and 8 sell her Home unless she agrees to pay sums for which she allegedly is not 9 obligated to despite the fact that she allegedly did not enter into the Second 10 Mortgage Loan and allegedly received no funds from the same; 11 6. The amount of Plaintiff’s statutory damages; 12 13 7. The extent and nature of Plaintiff’s injunctive relief against Defendants; 14 8. The amount of Plaintiff’s punitive damages; and 15 9. The amount of actual damages. 16

17 b. Defendant: 18 1. Whether Waldman & Porras, PLLC is a “debt collector” in this case; 19 20 2. Whether Madison Management Services, LLC is a “debt collector” in this case; 21 3. Whether PVK Properties, LLC and/or Madison Management Services, LLC 22 properly held the 2nd Deed of Trust in the chain of title to attempt to foreclose on 23 the property; 24 4. Whether First American Title acted outside the scope of its authority in recording 25 26 a Deed of Reconveyance; 27 28 1 5. Whether Plaintiff acknowledged the debt and attempted to settle claimed amounts 2 due and owing to satisfy the lien, which would be considered an admission by 3 party opponent; 4 6. Whether Plaintiff attempted to secure outside funding or financial support to 5 satisfy the lien; 6 7 7. Whether the loan documents were signed by Plaintiff; and 8 8. Whether there was fraud perpetrated by Plaintiff. 9 9. Whether or not there was notary fraud. 10 a. Whether or not Plaintiff entered into the recorded deed of trust that was witnessed 11 and notarized; 12 13 b. The amount of damages including fees and costs awarded to Defendants if 14 Defendants are the prevailing party; 15

17 a. Plaintiff: 18

19 1. Whether Defendants allegedly violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3) filing of a notice of 20 default and election to sell the Home on or about October 10, 2019; 21 2. Whether Defendants allegedly violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692a

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

Bryant v. Madison Management Services, LLC, (D. Nev. 2024).

Bryant v. Madison Management Services, LLC (Bryant v. Madison Management Services, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Definitions
15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3)
§ 1692
19 U.S.C. § 1692