Urrego v. Samuel White P.C., No. 3:2017cv00437 - Document 49 (E.D. Va. 2019)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION. Signed by District Judge M. Hannah Lauck on 12/30/2019. Copy mailed to plaintiff. (tjoh, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Urrego v. Samuel White P.C. Doc. 49 Dockets.Justia.com Amended Campi. 6-9.) While the Court must liberally construe Urrego's pleadings, it cannot "advocate and develop, sua sponte . .. claims that the [litigant] failed to clearly raise on the ace of [the] complaint." Newkirk, 2014 WL 4072212, at* I. Because White does not qualify as a creditor under TILA or HOEPA and Urrego fails to allege acts indicating any violation of those statutes, the Court must dismiss Urrego's Amended Complaint on those grounds. IV. Conclusion The Court previously provided Urrego the opportunity to amend her complaint, allowing her to clarify her cause of action. Because the Court offered Urrego an opportunity to address the deiciencies in her initial complaint and to state a claim-the Court presumes that Urrego has stated her best case. See Goode v. Cent. Va. legal Aid Soc'y, Inc., 807 F.3d 619 (4th Cir. 2015); Domino Sugar Cmp. v. Sugar Workers local Union 392, 10 F.3d 1064 (4th Cir. 1993); see also Grady v. White, 686 F. App'x 153, 154 (4th Cir. 2017) (dismissing without remand because district court previously aforded Plaintif the chance to amend his complaint). For the reasons stated above, the Court grants the Motion to Dismiss and dismisses with prejudice Urrego's Amended Complaint. Date: December 30, 2019 Richmond, Virginia 12
]]>
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.
