Eckert Seamans Not Liable for Property Lost in Foreclosure, Judge Rules
Though state law sets down rules for how possessions should be handled after a foreclosure, the foreclosing party's attorneys aren't responsible for ensuring they are followed, the judge ruled.
March 15, 2018 at 02:43 PM
3 minute read
A federal judge in Connecticut has dismissed a suit against the law firm Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott brought by an evictee who sought to hold the firm liable for property lost in a foreclosure action.
U.S. District Judge Vanessa Bryant of the District of Connecticut ruled Wednesday that while state law establishes a procedure for the state marshal to store and sell an evictee's possessions, the law firm representing the foreclosing party is not obligated to ensure that procedure is followed.
“The ejectment statute does not impose any duty upon the mortgagee or its attorney in effectuating the ejectment. Here, defendant Eckert Seamans is the law firm that represented the original mortgagee, Accredited,” Bryant wrote. “Plaintiff has failed to show that Eckert Seamans owed him any duty to ensure that the ejectment comported with state law.”
Bryant ruled that for the same reasons, the plaintiff's claims for civil theft also should be dismissed. She noted that the “mere allegation” that Eckert Seamans removed the property fails to allege it “acted with the requisite intent” to deprive the plaintiff of his property.
The judge also ruled the claims by the plaintiff, Karl Paul Vossbrinck, were time-barred. Vossbrinck alleged he was ejected from his home and subsequently lost possession of home appliances and other articles worth more than $200,000 in October 2012. He did not file suit until Feb. 21, 2017, more than a year after the statute of limitations had run out, the judge said.
Vossbrinck “has not raised any equitable principles or stated any facts that would cause the court to find the statute of limitations should be tolled,” the judge wrote. “Therefore, even if Defendant Eckert Seamans could have been held liable for the ejectment, the claims would have been time-barred.”
The plaintiff alleged that when he was evicted, he left behind “photographs, a commercial range, a washing machine and dryer, a full kitchen in two downstairs guest apartments, and a wood burning stove,” according to the decision.
He alleged that some of the possessions were left on the premises, while others were removed by a state marshal. Ultimately, according to his complaint, they were listed for sale at a value of $363,600 by a person affiliated with Prudential Real Estate.
Vossbrinck is litigating the case pro se. In an email Thursday evening, he said he plans to file an amended complaint as permitted by Judge Bryant. “If that fails I will appeal,” he added.
Tracy Williams of Eckert Seamans' White Plains, New York, office, who filed the motion to dismiss for the firm, said she was not immediately able to comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRead the Document: 'Google Must Divest Chrome,' DOJ Says, Proposing Remedies in Search Monopoly Case
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250