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.

Hagy v. Demers

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit

February 16, 2018

James R. Hagy, III, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
Demers & Adams; David J. Demers, Defendants-Appellants, Patricia R. Hagy, Plaintiff, Green Tree Servicing, LLC; Kevin Winehold; ProAssurance Casualty Company, Defendants.

          Argued: January 31, 2018

          Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio at Columbus. No. 2:11-cv-00530-Terence P. Kemp, Magistrate Judge.

         ARGUED:

          Adam J. Bennett, COOKE DEMERS LLC, New Albany, Ohio, for Appellant.

          Edward A. Icove, ICOVE LEGAL GROUP, LTD., Cleveland, Ohio, for Appellee.

         ON BRIEF:

          Adam J. Bennett, David J. Demers, COOKE DEMERS LLC, New Albany, Ohio, for Appellant.

          Edward A. Icove, ICOVE LEGAL GROUP, LTD., Cleveland, Ohio, Kristen Finzel Lewis, SOUTHEASTERN OHIO LEGAL SERVICE, New Philadelphia, Ohio, for Appellee.

          Before: SUHRHEINRICH, SUTTON, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.

          OPINION

          SUTTON, Circuit Judge.

          David Demers, an attorney, sent a letter on behalf of his client to the attorney for James and Patricia Hagy. The letter indicated that the Hagys would not have to pay the balance on their loan and that the lender would not pursue any other remedies against the Hagys. That seemed like good news for the Hagys. Little did Demers know that this epistle would lead to six years (and counting) of litigation against him and his firm for violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Because the complaint failed to identify a cognizable injury traceable to Demers (and his firm) and because Congress cannot override this baseline requirement of Article III of the U.S. Constitution by labeling the violation of any requirement of a statute a cognizable injury, we must dismiss the appeal and, with it, the underlying case.

         I.

         In 2002, James and Patricia Hagy took out a loan to purchase a mobile home and some property on which to park it. In 2010, they defaulted on their loan payments. Green Tree Servicing, a mortgage servicing company, initiated foreclosure proceedings against the Hagys.

         Patricia Hagy called the law firm that represented Green Tree, the star-crossed Demers & Adams, with hopes of settling the claim. It worked. On June 8, 2010, David Demers sent the Hagys a letter containing a Warranty Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure. "In return for [the Hagys] executing the Deed, " the letter said, "Green Tree has advised me that it will waive any deficiency balance." R. 18-3 at 1. The Hagys executed the Deed on June 24, 2010. And on June 30, 2010, Demers sent another letter, this time to the Hagys' attorney, James Sandy. That letter confirmed receipt of the executed Deed and reaffirmed that "Green Tree will not attempt to collect any deficiency balance which ...


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.