Joseph Schafer v. Citibank, N.A., No. 10-2043 (4th Cir. 2011)

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 10-2043 JOSEPH SCHAFER; MAUREEN SCHAFER, Plaintiffs Appellants, v. CITIBANK, N.A., as trustee for Bear Stearns ALT-A Trust 2006-5; BEAR STEARNS ALT-A TRUST 2006-5, A New York common law trust; JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., f/k/a EMC Mortgage Corporation, as successor in interest to EMC Mortgage, LLC; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED, a Delaware Corporation; COMMONWEALTH TRUSTEES, LLC, Defendants Appellees, and FIRST GUARANTY MORTGAGE CORPORATION, a Virginia Corporation; DAVID A. NEAL, a Virginia Resident, Original Trustee, Defendants. -------------------------------------VIRGINIA POVERTY LAW CENTER; NATIONAL CONSUMER LAW CENTER; NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CONSUMER ADVOCATES; HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES MADE EQUAL; VIRGINIA INTERFAITH CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY, Amici Supporting Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District Judge. (1:10-cv-00010-GBL-TCB) Submitted: September 19, 2011 Decided: September 28, 2011 Before WILKINSON, KEENAN, and DIAZ, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Christopher E. Brown, R. Michael Smith, BROWN, BROWN & BROWN, P.C., Alexandria, Virginia, for Appellants. Eric N. Heyer, THOMPSON & HINE LLP, Washington, D.C.; Mark D. Meyer, ROSENBERG & ASSOCIATES, LLC, Bethesda, Maryland, for Appellees. Thomas D. Domonoske, LEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTER, Harrisonburg, Virginia; Brenda Castaneda, LEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTER, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Amici Supporting Appellants. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 2 PER CURIAM: Joseph and Maureen Schafer appeal the district court s order granting Defendants Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss Plaintiffs state law claims for declaratory judgment, breach of fiduciary duty, and quiet title, as well as their claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C.A. ยงยง 1692-1692p (West 2009 & Supp. 2011). Potential amici curiae have filed a motion to file an amici curiae brief, along with an amici curiae brief, and a motion to certify a question to the Supreme Court of Virginia. no reversible error. We have reviewed the record and find Accordingly, although we grant the motion to file the amici curiae brief, we deny the motion to certify a question to the district court s Supreme order. 1:10-cv-00010-GBL-TCB Court See (E.D. of Virginia Schafer Va. Aug. v. and Citibank, 3, 2010); affirm the N.A., No. see also Horvath v. Bank of N.Y., N.A., 641 F.3d 617 (4th Cir. 2011). dispense with oral argument because the facts and We legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 3

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.