A relatively new decision was outlined in an article posted here on December 2, 2014, “CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENTS, INCLUDING IN LENDER FORCE-PLACED INSURANCE (“LFPI”) CASES.”
The new decision came in the case of Keller v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2014 WL 6684895 (W.D. Wash. November 25, 2014). In it, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington refused to immediately dismiss a lawsuit filed by homeowners as a class action in Washington State over alleged practices of lenders and their agents in force-placing insurance.
The Court instead provisionally granted the named plaintiffs-homeowner’s motion to temporarily enjoin the defendants’ foreclosure sale of their home. The Federal Judge in the Western District of Washington ordered a temporary injunction subject to proof from the plaintiffs that they timely “opted out” of a Florida class action settlement which seemed to involve the same issues of alleged lender force-placed insurance practices:
Accordingly, as set forth below, the court will grant limited injunctive relief to allow plaintiffs an opportunity to come forward with evidence or argument that demonstrates that they opted out of the [Florida] settlement or that their claims are somehow not covered by the settlement.
Keller v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2014 WL 6684895 *2-*3 (W.D. Wash. November 25, 2014).
The Florida class action settlement was written and reached in a case called Fladell.
An earlier decision in a different District has come to light involving the same defendants and the same Florida class action settlement: Ali v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2014 WL 819385 (W.D. Okla. March 3, 2014). The Judge in Oklahoma took a different approach to the same issue, however. The Oklahoma Court found that “the alleged conduct of Wells Fargo on which Plaintiff bases her claims [in the Oklahoma case] constitutes the same factual predicate for the class claims in Fladell. A settlement in Fladell will likely prevent class members from subsequently asserting claims relying upon a legal theory or theories different from that relied upon in the class action complaint, but depending upon the same factual predicate.” Ali v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2014 WL 819385 *2 (W.D. Okla. March 3, 2014). Based on this finding, if the Oklahoma plaintiff did not “opt out” of the class certified in the Florida case, said the Oklahoma Judge, then the plaintiff’s case was resolved in Florida:
Under these circumstances, the Court finds a stay of this case is appropriate.
Ali v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2014 WL 819385 *2 (W.D. Okla. March 3, 2014).
On the same date that this Order was entered, the Oklahoma Court entered a second, separate Order which is not reported. In the unreported Order, the Court provided that any of the parties could request to reopen the proceedings closed by the reported Order. In any event, all parties were enjoined to report the disposition of the Florida class action settlement to the Oklahoma Judge.
PACER, the Public Access to Court Electronic Records which includes the Oklahoma Court’s electronic docket, shows that nothing was filed by the Clerk since the date of these Orders on March 3, 2014. No party has requested that the Oklahoma proceedings be reopened, apparently, and there is no record that any party has notified the Oklahoma Court of the Florida Fladell class action results, either.
It appears that a look at Fladell is in order. “Watch this space.”
The author is at work on a book on “Lender Force-Placed Insurance” which the American Bar Association has scheduled for publication in the Spring of 2015.
Please Read The Disclaimer. ©2014 by Dennis J. Wall. All rights reserved. No claim to Original U.S. Government Works.