Brigliadora v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 8:2010cv01944 - Document 19 (M.D. Fla. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER granting 6 Motion to dismiss. Plaintiff hasup to and including March 28, 2011, to file an amended complaint or this case will be dismissed and closed. The parties shall file a Case Management Report within thirty days of the filing of the amended complaint. Signed by Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich on 3/17/2011. (SN)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Brigliadora v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Doc. 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION FRANK J. BRIGLIADORA, / Plaintiff, Case No. 8:10-cv-01944-EAK-TG\V v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Defendant. / ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS This cause is before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6). This Court reviewed Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6), Plaintiffs Complaint for Damages (Doc. 2), and Plaintiffs Response to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 13). For the reasons set forth below, this Court grants the Motionto Dismiss, but in so doing also grants the Plaintiff leave to amend his complaint. I. BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On May 19, 2008, Plaintiff entered into a Prime Equity Line of Credit Agreement (the ""Agreement"") with Defendant (Doc 2, p. 1, ex. A). Plaintiff then received a letter dated April 28, 2010. from Defendant slating that Plaintiffs credit limit was being lowered "due to a substantial decline in the value of the property securing the account" (Doc. 2, p. 2, ex. B). Furthermore, the letter stales thai Plaintiff "may request reinstatement" by contacting Defendant at a specific phone number or address if Plaintiff believes Defendant's reduction decision to be in error (Doc. 2. p. 2. ex. B). Following this, Plaintiff, Ihrough his undersigned counsel, sent a letter dated May Dockets.Justia.com 21. 2010. to Defendant requesting reinstatement of the prior credit limit because Plaintiff found the appraisal summery sheet deficient, incomplete, and inaccurate (Doc. 2, p. 2, ex. C). Because Defendant has failed to reinstate or begin the process of restoring Plaintiffs credit limit to its original amount. Plaintiff has filed a Complaint for Damages (Doc. 2) against Defendant (Doc. 2. p. 2). Plaintiff alleges in Count One of the Complaint that Defendant reduced Plaintiffs credit limit without a proper appraisal of the collateral, which is required by Federal Reserve Board Regulation /.. 12 C.F.R. §226 (Doc. 2. p. 2). Plaintiffasserts that Defendant's continual refusal to reinstate Plaintiffs credit limit to its original amount is a breach of the Agreement. Regulaiion Z. and Defendant's letter dated April 28. 2010 (Doc. 2, p. 2). As a result of Defendant's alleged breach of the Agreement. Regulaiion Z. and Defendant's letter dated April 28. 2010, Plaintiff alleges that he has suffered and continues to suffer financial harm (Doc. 2, p. 2). Additionally, Plaintiff alleges in Count Two of the Complaint that Plaintiff is entitled to statutory damages in the amount of twice Plaintiffs finance charge pursuant to Defendant's violation of the Truth and Lending Act ("TILA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1601 el. .see/. (Doc. 2, p. 3). II. STANDARD OF REVIEW Under Rule 12(b)(6). a defendant may move to dismiss a complaint for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (b)(6). The trial court is required to accept the allegations in the complaint as true and construe them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Mills v. Foremost Ins. Co.. 511 F.3d 1300. 1303 (1 lth Cir. 2008) (quoting Castro v. Sec'y of Homeland Sec. All F.3d 1334. 1336 (1 lth Cir. 2006)). In considering a motion to dismiss, the court limits its considerations to the pleadings and exhibits attached thereto. GSW. Inc. v. Long Co.. Co.. 999 F.2d 1508. 1510 (11th Cir. 1993). To survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a plaintiffs complaint must include "enough feels lo slate a claim to relief that is plausible on its face." Bell All. ('orp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544. 570 (2007). Rule 8(a)(2) requires a complaint to contain "a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief." Fed. R. Civ. P. 8 (a)(2). "While a complaint attacked by a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss does not need detailed factual allegations, a plaintiffs obligation to provide the grounds of his entitlement to relief requires more than labels and conclusions." Twombly. 550 U.S. at 555. In other words, "a formulaic recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do." Id. Thus, Rule 8(a) does not require "detailed factual allegations." but it does demand more than ""unadorned, the-defendant-unlawfully-harmed-me accusations" Ashcrofl v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937. 1949 (2009). As stated in Am, Denial Ass'n v. Cigna Corp.. 605 F.3d 1283. 1288-90 (1 lth Cir. 2010), courts should follow the suggestion of the Court in Iqbal and apply a "'iwo-pronged approach" when considering a motion to dismiss by applying the following principles: (1) eliminale any allegations in the complaint that are merely legal conclusions; and (2) where there are well-pleaded factual allegations, "assume their veracity and then determine whether they plausibly give rise to an entitlement to relief." Iqbal. 129 S. Ct. at 1950. III. DISCUSSION In order lo overcome Defendant's Motion lo Dismiss. Plaintiffs Complaint must allege factual allegations rather than mere legal conclusions. Therefore, this Court will focus its attention on Plaintiffs well-pled factual allegations and disregard Plaintiffs legal conclusions as suggested in Iqbal. Id. A. Count One In Count One of Plaintiff s Complaint. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant reduced Plaintiffs credit limit without a proper appraisal of the collateral, which is required by Federal Reserve 3 Board Regulation Z. 12 C.F.R. §226 (Doc. 2. p. 2). Plaintiff asserts that Defendant's continual refusal to reinstate Plaintiffs credit limit to its original amount is a breach of the Agreement. Regulation Z. and Defendant's letter dated April 28, 2010 (Doc. 2. p. 2). As a result of Defendant's alleged breach of the Agreement, Regulation Z, and Defendant's letterdated April 28. 2010. Plaintiffalleges that he has suffered and continues lo suffer financial harm (Doc. 2, p. 2). These allegations by Plaintiff are legal conclusions thai require factual support. Plaintiff fails to state in his Complaint why Defendant's decision lo reduce Plaintiffs credit limit was error. Even within Plaintiffs letter dated May 21. 2010. Plaintiff only notifies Defendant that Plaintiff believes Defendant's decision is incorrect because the appraisal summary sheet is deficient, incomplete, and inaccurate. Plaintiff fails to support these allegations in his letter or Complaint with factual details that provide the grounds of his entitlement lo relief. In other words. Plaintiff has not provided any facts or reasons that explain why Plaintiff believes Defendant's actions were in error. A mere statement that Defendant acted wrongfully without well-pled facts supporting the statement is deemed a legal conclusion by this Court, and. thus, it will not be recognized by this Court because it does not meet the requirements to survive a motion to dismiss. Furthermore. Plaintiff claims that he has suffered and continues to suffer financial harm as a result of Defendant's actions, or lack thereof. Nowhere in Plaintiffs Complaint or attached exhibits is there any discussion as lo how Plaintiff has been injured by Defendant's behavior. Consequently, this Court views this statement by Plaintiff as a legal conclusion lacking factual support, which is unacceptable under the current standards. B. Count Two In Count Two of Plaintiffs Complaint. Plaintiffalleges that he is entitled to statutory damages in the amount of twice Plaintiffs finance charge pursuant to Defendant's violation of the Truth and Lending Act ("TILA"), 15 U.S.C. § 1601 el. seq. (Doc. 2, p. 3). This statement by Plaintiff lacks supporting facts, such as what specific actions taken by Defendant have resulted in Plaintiffs belief that he is entitled to these statutory damages. Once again, this Court requires plaintiffs to provide more than mere legal conclusions to withstand a motion to dismiss, and because Count Two of Plaintiffs claim is a legal conclusion unsupported by well-pled factual allegations, this Complaint will not suffice as it currently stands. IV. CONCLUSION Plaintiff cannot simply submit a Complaint with the attached Agreement to this Court and allege a violation of the Agreement without identifying Defendant's actions or inactions that constitute a material breach of the Agreement and how Plaintiff has been harmed because of Defendant's actions or inactions. Therefore, because Plaintiffs Complaint fails to provide sufficient well-pled factual allegations and asserts unsupported legal conclusions, this Court finds Plaintiffs Complaint insufficient to meet the current pleading standards required in Rule 8(a)(2). Twombly. and Iqbal. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. 6) be GRANTED. Plaintiff has up to and including March 28, 2011. to file an amended complaint or this case will bedismissed and closed. The parties shall file a Case Management Report within thirty days of the filing of the amended complaint. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa. Florida this / / ffriay of March, 2011. Copies furnished to: All Parties and Counsel of Record
]]>
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.
