Professional Malpractice & Ethics

Weekly Summaries Distributed February 13, 2015 Nora v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. Bankruptcy, Legal Ethics, Professional Malpractice & Ethics  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit PNC Bank v. Spencer Legal Ethics, Professional Malpractice & Ethics  U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Receive this and other FREE daily opinion summaries from Justia

Nora v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Docket: 14-1887 Opinion Date: February 11, 2015 Areas of Law: Bankruptcy, Legal Ethics, Professional Malpractice & Ethics HSBC initiated a Wisconsin foreclosure action on the Rinaldi’s mortgage. The Rinaldis counterclaimed, alleging that the mortgage paperwork had been fraudulently altered and that HSBC lacked standing to enforce the mortgage. The Rinaldis lost at summary judgment and did not appeal. The court later vacated its foreclosure judgment after HSBC agreed to modify the loan. The Rinaldis filed a new state lawsuit reasserting their counterclaims. Before the court ruled on the defendants’ motion to dismiss, the Rinaldis filed for bankruptcy. In those proceedings, HSBC filed a proof of claim for the mortgage. The Rinaldis objected and filed adversary claims, alleging fraud, abuse of process, tortious interference, breach of contract, and violations of RICO and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The bankruptcy court found in favor of HSBC and recommended denial of the adversarial claims. The district court agreed, noting the Rinaldis’ failure to comply with Federal Rules. The court dismissed the Rinaldis’ adversary claims as meritless and warned that the Rinaldis would face sanctions if they filed additional frivolous filings because their tactics had “vexatious and time- and resource-consuming” and their filings “nigh-unintelligible.” After additional filings of the same type, the Rinaldis voluntarily dismissed their bankruptcy. Their attorney filed additional frivolous motions. The court ordered the attorney to pay $1,000. The Seventh Circuit upheld the sanction. http://j.st/4A5V View Case On: Justia Google Scholar

PNC Bank v. Spencer Court: U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit Docket: 13-2676 Opinion Date: February 11, 2015 Areas of Law: Legal Ethics, Professional Malpractice & Ethics Spencer stopped paying her mortgage in 2008. In Wisconsin state court foreclosure proceedings, Spencer’s attorney, Nora, adopted an “object-to-everything litigation strategy and buried the state court in a blizzard of motions.” While a hearing on a summary judgment motion was pending in state court, Nora removed the case to federal court. Finding no objectively reasonable basis for removal, the district court remanded the case and awarded attorney’s fees and costs to the lender, 28 U.S.C. 1447(c). The Seventh Circuit dismissed Spencer’s appeal as frivolous; the district court did not order her to pay anything. The court affirmed the award as to Spencer “because she has not offered even a colorable argument that removal was reasonable” and ordered Nora to show cause why she should not be sanctioned for litigating a frivolous appeal. Several months later, noting Nora’s similar behavior in another case, the court imposed an increased sanction of $2,500, suspended until the time, if ever, that Nora submits further inappropriate filings, and directed the clerk of court to forward a copy of the order and earlier opinion to the Office of Lawyer Regulation of the Wisconsin Supreme Court. http://j.st/4A5F View Case On: Justia Google Scholar