Gladys Gardner v. Ally Financial Incorporated, No. 11-1708 (4th Cir. 2013)Annotate this Case
This opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on July 18, 2012.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 11-1708 GLADYS GARDNER, Individually similarly situated, on behalf of all persons Plaintiff Appellant, v. ALLY FINANCIAL INCORPORATED, f/k/a GMAC INCORPORATED, Defendant and 3rd-Party Plaintiff Appellee. No. 11-1731 RANDOLPH SCOTT, Individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, Plaintiff Appellant, v. NUVELL NATIONAL AUTO FINANCE, LLC, d/b/a Nuvell Auto Finance; NUVELL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC, National Defendants and 3rd-Party Plaintiffs Appellees. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. (1:10-cv-01094-JFM; 1:09-cv-03110-JFM) Argued: May 18, 2012 Decided: March 25, 2013 Before AGEE, DAVIS, and THACKER, Circuit Judges. Reversed and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion. ARGUED: Benjamin Howard Carney, GORDON & WOLF, CHTD., Towson, Maryland, for Appellants. Andrew Seth Doctoroff, HONIGMAN, MILLER, SCHWARTZ & COHN, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: Martin E. Wolf, QUINN, GORDON & WOLF, CHTD., Baltimore, Maryland; Mark H. Steinbach, O'TOOLE, ROTHWELL, NASSAU & STEINBACH, Washington, D.C.; John J. Roddy, Elizabeth A. Ryan, RODDY, KLEIN & RYAN, Boston, Massachusetts, for Appellants. Jason R. Abel, HONIGMAN, MILLER, SCHWARTZ & COHN, Detroit, Michigan; Kimberly A. Manuelides, Geoffrey M. Gamble, SAUL EWING LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. 2 PER CURIAM: The background of this case is set forth in Gardner v. Ally Financial, Inc., 488 F. App x 709 (4th Cir. 2012). There, we certified to the Court of Appeals of Maryland the following question: Where tangible personal property financed pursuant to Maryland s Creditor Grantor Closed End Credit Act ( CLEC ), Md. Code Ann., Com. Law §§ 12-1001 et seq., is subsequently repossessed and sold by the credit grantor at an auction that is publicly advertised but requires a $1,000 refundable fee for a person to enter and observe the auction, regardless of whether the person intends to bid, is the sale a private sale under CLEC, and thus subject to the post-sale disclosure requirements in Md. Code Ann., Com. Law § 12-1021(j)(2), or is it a public auction (or public sale ), subject instead to the requirements of § 12-1021(k)? Id. at 711. The Court of Appeals of Maryland determined, the auctions at issue were private sales under CLEC, Section 121021(j). Gardner v. Ally Financial, Inc., -- A.3d --, 2013 WL 765013 at *1 (Md. Mar. 13, 2013). Accordingly, we conclude that the district court erred in deciding the repossessed vehicles were . . . sold at public sales. Scott v. Nuvell Financial Servs., Inc., 789 F. Supp. 2d 637, 638 (D. Md. 2011). Therefore, court and remand we to reverse the the District judgment of of Maryland the for district further proceedings, consistent with the Court of Appeals of Maryland s decision. REVERSED AND REMANDED 3