Swanson v. Bank of America
Filing
4
ORDER STAYING CASE AND SETTING ESCROW PAYMENTS Signed by District Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff. (MVer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MACK SWANSON,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 12-cv-11328
v.
District Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
Defendant.
Crystal N. Hopkins (P70792)
Hopkins & Associates PLC
Attorney for Plaintiff
PO Box 2141
Royal Oak, MI 48068
(248) 519-7980
crystalh@hopkinsassociateslaw.com
Lindsey R. Johnson (P67081)
Maddin, Hauser, Wartell, Roth & Heller, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendant
28400 Northwestern Highway, 3rd Floor
Southfield, MI 48034
(248) 354-4030
ljohnson@maddinhauser.com
STIPULATION STAYING CASE FOR 120 DAYS
AND TO SET ESCROW PAYMENTS
NOW COME the parties, Defendant Bank of America N.A. (“BANA”) and Plaintiff
Mack Swanson (“Plaintiff”), by and through their respective counsel, and hereby stipulate and
agree as follows:
1.
The parties stipulate and agree that in light of their settlement negotiations
intended to resolve the matter by means of a possible loan modification, the proceedings shall be
stayed for 120 days from the date of the entry of this order to allow for possible resolution of this
matter, pending the outcome of the loan modification review. The parties acknowledge that
BANA has agreed to review Plaintiff’s loan for a possible modification, and there is no
guarantee that such modification will be approved or offered.
1
2.
The parties stipulate and agree that Plaintiff shall have twenty one (21) days from
the date of the entry of this order to return a completed loan modification application to BANA.
3.
The parties stipulate and agree that Plaintiff shall pay monthly escrow payments
of $650.00, no later than the first day of each month starting on June 1, 2012, until the resolution
of this matter. The escrow payments shall be paid to Hopkins & Associates PLC to be held in
trust. If Plaintiff is approved for a loan modification, the escrow shall be paid to BANA and
applied to amounts outstanding on the Loan. If Plaintiff is not approved for a loan modification,
the escrow shall be returned to Plaintiff. This order does not alter Plaintiff’s obligations under
any agreement between the parties, and it should be in no way construed as a waiver by the
owner of the Loan to collect the amounts due and owing on the Loan.
4.
The parties stipulate and agree that if any party believes that settlement is no
longer fruitful or beneficial, then the party may serve a proposed order ending the stay. If that is
the case, BANA will have an additional 21 days to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint after the
entry of the order ending the stay.
5.
The parties stipulate and agree that, provided the stay remains in effect and is not
cancelled by any party pursuant to the preceding paragraph, BANA will have an additional 21
days to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint after the expiration of the stay.
STIPULATED TO BY:
/s/ Crystal N. Hopkins____
Crystal N. Hopkins P70792)
Hopkins & Associates PLC
Attorney for Plaintiff
PO Box 2141
Royal Oak, MI 48068
(248) 519-7980
crystalh@hopkinsassociateslaw.com
Dated: May 4, 2012
/s/ Lindsey R. Johnson
Lindsey R. Johnson (P67081)
Maddin, Hauser, Wartell, Roth & Heller, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendant
28400 Northwestern Highway, 3rd Floor
Southfield, MI 48034
(248) 354-4030
ljohnson@maddinhauser.com
Dated: May 4, 2012
2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
MACK SWANSON,
Plaintiff,
Case No. 12-cv-11328
v.
District Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.,
Defendant.
STIPULATED ORDER STAYING CASE FOR 120 DAYS
AND TO SET ESCROW PAYMENTS
Pursuant to the parties’ Stipulated Order Staying Proceedings for 120 Days and to Set
Escrow Payments filed in the above matter;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the proceedings shall be stayed for 120 days from the
date of the entry of this order to allow for possible resolution of this matter, pending the outcome
of the loan modification review.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall have twenty one (21) days from the date
of the entry of this order to return a completed loan modification application to BANA.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff shall pay monthly escrow payments of
$650.00, no later than the first day of each month starting on June 1, 2012, until the resolution of
this matter. The escrow payments shall be paid to Hopkins & Associates PLC to be held in trust.
If Plaintiff is approved for a loan modification, the escrow shall be paid to BANA and applied to
amounts outstanding on the Loan. If Plaintiff is not approved for a loan modification, the escrow
shall be returned to Plaintiff.
This order does not alter Plaintiff’s obligations under any
3
agreement between the parties, and it should be in no way construed as a waiver by the owner of
the Loan to collect the amounts due and owing on the Loan.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if any party believes that settlement is no longer
fruitful or beneficial, then the party may serve a proposed order ending the stay. If that is the
case, BANA will have an additional 21 days to respond to Plaintiff’s complaint after the entry of
the order ending the stay.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that provided the stay remains in effect and is not cancelled
by any party pursuant to the preceding paragraph, BANA will have an additional 21 days to
respond to Plaintiff’s complaint after the expiration of the stay.
Dated: May 7, 2012
s/Lawrence P. Zatkoff
U.S. District Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff
4
Approved as to form:
/s/ Crystal N. Hopkins____
Crystal N. Hopkins P70792)
Hopkins & Associates PLC
Attorney for Plaintiff
PO Box 2141
Royal Oak, MI 48068
(248) 519-7980
crystalh@hopkinsassociateslaw.com
Dated: May 4, 2012
/s/ Lindsey R. Johnson
Lindsey R. Johnson (P67081)
Maddin, Hauser, Wartell, Roth & Heller, P.C.
Attorneys for Defendant
28400 Northwestern Highway, 3rd Floor
Southfield, MI 48034
(248) 354-4030
ljohnson@maddinhauser.com
Dated: May 4, 2012
5
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?