Diann Iacobucci, et al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [13-11356 Affirmed ] Judge: JLW , Judge: PRO , Judge: CH Mandate pull date is 05/29/2014 [13-11356]
Date Filed: 05/08/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
DIANN IACOBUCCI; DANIEL BURGERS,
United States Court of Appeals
May 8, 2014
Lyle W. Cayce
WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as
Trustee for CitiGroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-WFHE4, Asset-Backed
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-WFHE4,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
USDC No. 3:13-CV-1425
Before WIENER, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
This appeal arises in the context of a foreclosure that prompted
Plaintiffs-Appellants Iacobucci and Burgers (“Plaintiffs”) to sue DefendantsAppellees (“Defendants”) in state court. After Defendants removed that suit
to the district court, they filed a Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) motion
to dismiss, relying principally on the Texas four-year limitations period for
Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH
CIR. R. 47.5.4.
Date Filed: 05/08/2014
constitutional claims of the nature asserted by Plaintiffs under §50(a)(6)(B) of
Article XVI of the Texas Constitution.
In its carefully crafted Memorandum Opinion and Order of November
13, 2013, the district court patiently reviewed the law applicable to the facts
asserted by Plaintiffs and concluded that their state constitutional claims are
time barred and that they cannot maintain any of their ancillary claims, e.g.,
breach of contract, Texas Debt Collection Act, Texas Deceptive Trade Practices
Act, and fraud and fraudulent misrepresentation. For essentially the same
reasons cogently explained in its Order, the district court’s dismissal of
Plaintiffs’ action is, in all respects,
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?