Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lumpkins v. United States Gov't

United States District Court, D. Columbia.

February 23, 2015

BARBARA B. LUMPKINS, Plaintiff,
v.
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, et al., Defendants

Decided February 22, 2015

For GREGORY N. BRITTO, Non-Party Respondent: Gregory Nelson Britto, LEAD ATTORNEY, SHAPIRO, BROWN & ALT, LLP, Manassas, VA.

BARBARA B. LUMPKINS, Plaintiff, Pro se, Lawrenceville, GA.

For UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT, Defendant: Rafique Omar Anderson, William Mark Nebeker, LEAD ATTORNEYS, U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Civil Division, Washington, DC.

For JAY C. ZAINEY, personally, SUSAN E. MORGAN, personally, Defendants: Rafique Omar Anderson, LEAD ATTORNEY, U.S. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, Civil Division, Washington, DC.

For BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., officially, OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, officially, BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, officially, KENT A. LAMBERT, Officially and Personally, KATIE L. DYSART, Officially and Personally, Defendants: Craig Rust, J. David Folds, LEAD ATTORNEYS, BAKER DONELSON BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ PC, Washington, DC.

For LLOYD J. MEDLEY, personally, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, officially, JAMES B. CALDWELL, personally, MELVIN ZENO, personally, TERRI F. LOVE, personally, JAMES F. MCKAY, III, personally, DENNIS R. BAGNERIS, SR., personally, Defendants: David Glen Sanders, LEAD ATTORNEY, LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Litigation Division, Baton Rouge, la.

For SHAPIRO & DAIGREPONT, LLC, officially, PENNY M. DAIGREPONT, Officially and Personally, EVA M. SIMKOVITZ, Officially and Personally, KATHARINE M. MELESURGO, Officially and Personally, LINDSAY M. GRAHAM, Officially and Personally, Defendants: Gregory Nelson Britto, LEAD ATTORNEY, SHAPIRO, BROWN & ALT, LLP, Manassas, VA; Lindsay G. Faulkner, PRO HAC VICE, SHAPIRO & DAIGREPONT, LLC, Metairie, LA; Zara Zeringue, PRO HAC VICE, MAGEE, ZERINGUE & RICHARDSON, Covington, LA.

MEMORANDUM OPINION [Dkt. ## 6, 7, 12, 15, 21, 34, 37]

RICHARD J. LEON, United States District Judge.

Plaintiff Barbara Lumpkins, proceeding pro se, filed the instant suit against defendants Jay C. Zainey; Susan E. Morgan; Lloyd J. Medley; Melvin Zeno; Terri F. Love; James F. McKay III; and Dennis R. Bagneris, Sr. (the " Judicial Defendants" ); the United States Government; Bank of America, N.A.; Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC; Louisiana Department of Justice; James B. Caldwell; Shapiro & Daigrepont, LLC; Penny M. Daigrepont; Eva M. Simkovitz; Katharine M. Melesurgo; Lindsay M. Graham; Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell, & Berkowitz; Kent A. Lambert; and Katie L. Dysart (the " non-Judicial Defendants" ) (all collectively, " defendants" ). The claims arise out of actions taken during the foreclosure and sale of property located at 7838 Tulsa Street, New Orleans (" Mortgaged Property" ); plaintiff alleges violations of various provisions of federal law, the United States Constitution, and Louisiana law. See Complaint, at p.5 [Dkt. # 1]. Currently pending before the Court are five motions to dismiss, see Mot. to Dismiss by Bagneris, Love, McKay [Dkt. # 6]; Mot. to Dismiss by Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, Bank of America, N.A., Dysart, Lambert, and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC [Dkt. # 7]; Mot. to Dismiss by Daigrepont, Graham, Melesurgo, Shapiro & Daigrepont, LLC, and Simkovitz [Dkt. # 12]; Mot. to Dismiss by Medley and Zeno [Dkt. # 15]; Mot. to Dismiss by Caldwell and Louisiana Dep't of Justice [Dkt. # 21], a motion to set aside an entry of default, see Mot. to Set Aside Default [Dkt. # 34], and a motion for summary judgment, see Mot. for Summary Judgment by Morgan and Zainey [Dkt. # 37].[1] Because I agree with the Judicial Defendants that they are immune from suit, and because I agree with the remaining defendants that this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction to hear the case, the motions are GRANTED and the case is DISMISSED.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiff's claims arise out of a successful 2011 foreclosure proceeding against plaintiff Lumpkins and her husband (who is not a party to this case) before the Civil District Court of the Parish of Orleans, State of Louisiana. Compl. at p.3. A judicial foreclosure sale of the property was held on December 8, 2011, by public auction, and defendant Bank of America was the successful bidder at the auction, and thereafter took title by a sheriff's deed. See Mem. in Support of Mot. to Dismiss [Dkt. # 7-1] and accompanying exhibits [Dkt. ## 7-2-7-14].

Following the completion of the 2011 foreclosure proceeding, plaintiff instituted a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on January 3, 2012, against Bank of America; Bank of America's loan servicing agent, Ocwen; Bank of America's foreclosure counsel, and other defendants including the Orleans Parish Civil Sheriff's Office, many of whom are also defendants in the present case. See Complaint, Lumpkins v. Bank of America, No. 12-0009 (E.D. La. filed on Jan. 3, 2012), ECF No. 1. In this prior federal lawsuit, plaintiff attempted to re-litigate many of the same issues that were litigated in the state foreclosure proceeding; plaintiff essentially alleged a wrongful seizure and sale of the mortgaged property. Id. The case was initially assigned to Judge Zainey and later reassigned to Judge Morgan, both of whom are defendants in this case. See Order Reassigning Case, filed April 5, 2012, ECF No. 35. The case was ultimately dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction on December 10, 2012 under the Rooker--Feldman abstention doctrine. See Order and Reasons, Lumpkins v. Bank of America, Civ. 2012 No. 0009 (E.D. La. filed on Dec. 10, 2012), ECF Nos. 66 and 67.

Plaintiff filed the present suit on February 24, 2014, requesting as relief, inter alia, an injunction against defendants on the basis that the foreclosure of the Mortgaged Property was improper. See Compl. ¶ ¶ 51-52. Plaintiff's complaint, while largely incomprehensible, appears to attempt to allege violations of the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346(b); violations of the First, Fifth, Seventh, and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983; a conspiracy to violate civil rights under 42 U.S.C. § § 1985 & 1986; violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § § 1681 & 1692; and violations of various provisions of state law including the Louisiana Unfair Trade and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.