Prince Song Cambilargiu v. Bank of America N.A., No. 13-2106 (8th Cir. 2013)

Annotate this Case

Court Description: Civil case - Foreclosure. Plaintiff's claims challenging the validity of defendant's foreclosure were barred by res judicata; show-me-the-note arguments have been repeatedly rejected; argument that plaintiff had paid the mortgage by tendering valid draft documents is rejected as the drafts were not drawn on a bank, contained no drawee and conditioned payment on the passage of 50 years.

Download PDF
United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________ No. 13-2106 ___________________________ Prince Song Cambilargiu lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant Randal S. Brinkman; Carol M. Brinkman lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiffs v. Bank of America, National Association, as successor by merger to BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, fka Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP; Federal National Mortgage Association; Great Southern Bank; Does 1-20 lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees ____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis ____________ Submitted: December 19, 2013 Filed: December 30, 2013 [Unpublished] ____________ Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. ____________ PER CURIAM. Prince Song Cambilargiu appeals the district court s1 dismissal of his complaint and denial of injunctive relief. After careful de novo review, we affirm. See Levy v. Ohl, 477 F.3d 988, 991 (8th Cir. 2007) (standard of review). Cambilargiu, Randal Brinkman, and Carol Brinkman filed this action in Minnesota state court, and the named defendants removed the case to federal court. Plaintiffs claimed that Bank of America (BOA) unlawfully foreclosed the Brinkmans mortgage because BOA did not hold valid title to the promissory note secured by the mortgage; and that Cambilargiu redeemed the property under Minnesota Statute § 580.23, and paid the Brinkmans second mortgage with Great Southern Bank (GSB), by tendering valid draft instruments to BOA and GSB. We hold that the district court properly dismissed the claims challenging the validity of BOA s foreclosure. These claims were litigated in the Brinkmans first lawsuit challenging BOA s foreclosure, and thus were barred by res judicata. See Brinkman v. Bank of Am., No. 11-cv-3240 (D. Minn. Aug. 17, 2012); see also Semtek Int l Inc. v. Lockheed Martin Corp., 531 U.S. 497, 508-09 (2001) (Minnesota law governs res judicata analysis); Rucker v. Schmidt, 794 N.W.2d 114, 117-18 (Minn. 2011) (elements of res judicata). Moreover, the show-me-the-note theory asserted in these claims has been routinely rejected by courts interpreting Minnesota law. See Butler v. Bank of Am., 690 F.3d 959, 962-63 (8th Cir. 2012). The district court also properly concluded that Cambilargiu s draft instruments were invalid because they were not drawn on a bank, contained no drawee, and conditioned payment upon the passage of 50 years. See Minn. Stat. §§ 336.3-103, 336.3-104, 336.3-106. The documents instead were third-party promises to pay the 1 The Honorable Paul A. Magnuson, United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. -2- Brinkmans debt in 50 years, which BOA and GSB were free to reject. Accordingly, the claims premised on the validity of these drafts were properly dismissed. The judgment is 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.