J.P. Morgan Chase Bank Nat'l Ass'n V. Hill
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
STATEOFMAINE SUPERIOR COURT Sagadahoc, ss. J.P. MORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION Plaintiff v. Docket No. BATSC-RE-12-021 SUSAN M. HILL Defendant ORDER This residential foreclosure case is before the court as a result of a Report of Noncompliance submitted by the assigned mediator for the Foreclosure Diversion Program. k.tt /\!I l.L __ ,_. r· .I' /'t ¢\IT .).t··._:·f-fi A- The mediator reported Plaintiff as non-compliant Each party filed an initial response to the Report and each party filed a reply to each other's response. Counsel for the parties appeared January 7, 2014 and argued the parties' positions. The discussion was held in chambers and not recorded. Based on the entire record, the court is not persuaded that sanctions are appropriate at this point The mediator's Report is based on delay and inaction on the Plaintiffs part, and there is evidence to support that position. The mediation got underway in 2012, but it was not until a session August 6, 2013 that the Plaintiff advised of its decision denying a loan modification, based on insufficient income of the Defendant. Plaintiffs decision was apparently not issued in writing, and the Defendant to this day is not aware of the extent to which her income was deemed insufficient. On the other hand, the Plaintiffpoints to delay on the Defendant's part since the August 6, 2013 mediation that makes it difficult for the court to assess fault against one party and not the other. Specifically, the record of the August 6 mediation session reflects that the Defendant said her income had changed and that "Defendant [was] to resubmit application for review." Her materials were filed a month later, and after Plaintiff asked for clarification on an issue, another month passed before the question was answered via e-mail. The court clearly agrees that there has been significant unnecessary delay in the mediation process, but is unable to say that one party is substantially more at fault than the other. Accordingly, no sanctions will be imposed at this time, although the court will keep that issue open for the time being, pending the outcome of the process set forth below. The court is retaining jurisdiction for the moment in order to get the mediation process and the process for loan modification back on track. The deadlines and dates for moving the process ahead that set forth below were discussed and agreed upon among the court and counsel. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: 1. By no later than January 14, 2014, Plaintiffwill provide Defendant with a complete list of any and all documents or materials that the Plaintiff will require in order to decide whether to grant a loan modification to Defendant. Plaintiffs list will be limited requesting updated or current versions of documents and materials previously requested by Plaintiff In other words, it is not expected that Plaintiff will be requesting significant documents or materials that it has not previously identified as being needed. 2. By no later than January 22, 2014, Defendant will provide Plaintiff with complete, legible documents or materials in response to all items on the Plaintiffs previously provided list. 2 S. Plaintiffwill render a decision on loan modification within SO days of receiving a complete, legible response to its list. The decision will be issued in writing and transmitted to Defendant or her attorney. 4. The clerk will schedule this case for a telephonic conference of counsel February 4, 2014. WJ! Pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 79(a), the clerk is hereby directed to incorporate this Decision and Judgment by reference in the docket..~ ~~ ~ MiiOrtOil DatedJanuary9,2014 A. Justice, Superior Court 3 I JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION - PLAINTIFF Attorney for: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION JEROME J GAMACHE - RETAINED 07/23/2012 AINSWORTH THELIN & RAFTICE, PA 7 OCEAN ST PO BOX 2412 SOUTH PORTLAND ME 04116-2412 SUPERIOR COURT SAGADAHOC, ss. Docket No BATSC-RE-2012-00021 DOCKET RECORD Attorney for: JPMORGAN CHASE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION DAVID E STEARNS - RETAINED 01/07/2014 AINSWORTH THELIN & RAFTICE, PA 7 OCEAN ST PO BOX 2412 SOUTH PORTLAND ME 04116-2412 vs SUSAN M HILL - DEFENDANT 10 FRONT STREET -TOPSHAM ME 04086 .Attorney for: SUSAN M HILL RITA M FARRY - RETAINED 12/12/2013 SHANKMAN & ASSOCIATES 305 MAIN STREET YARMOUTH ME 04096 Attorney for: SUSAN M HILL NEIL S SHANKMAN - RETAINED SHANKMAN & ASSOCIATES 472 MAIN ST STE 1 LEWISTON ME 04240 SUSAN M HILL TRUSTEE OF 10 FRONT STREET - PARTIES IN INTEREST C/0 SUSAN M HILL 10 FRONT STREET TOPSHAM ME 04086 Filing Document: COMPLAINT Filing Date: 07/23/2012 Minor Case Type: FORECLOSURE Docket Events: - --.~ TV'\r'TTMRNT - COMPLAINT FILED ON 07/23/2012
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.
