Brunk v. Conseco Bank, Inc. et al

Filing 91

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER.. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant U.S. Bank shall respond to plaintiffs motion for reconsideration within 14 days. Response to Court due by 7/1/2021.. Signed by District Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr on 6/17/21. (MRS)

Case: 1:17-cv-00188-SNLJ Doc. #: 91 Filed: 06/17/21 Page: 1 of 2 PageID #: 865

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
SOUTHEASTERN DIVISION
GLENDA BRUNK,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
v.
)
)
CONSECO BANK INC. and U.S.
)
BANK N.A. AS TRUSTEE FOR
)
CONSECO FINANCE HOME EQUITY )
LOAN TRUST 2002-A,
)
)
Defendants.
)

Case No. 1:17-CV-188-SNLJ

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Glenda Brunk filed this lawsuit against defendant U.S. Bank as
trustee for Conseco Finance Home Equity Loan Trust 2002-A and against defendant
Conseco Bank, Inc., in an attempt to avoid foreclosure of her home. Conseco Bank did
not answer the complaint and has never appeared; this Court granted a default judgment
against it on September 19, 2018 [#34]. On March 31, 2021, this Court granted
defendant U.S. Bank’s motion for summary judgment on the remaining two counts,
which were Count V for invalid appointment of trustee, and Count VI for violation of the
Truth In Lending Act (“TILA”) for failing to notify plaintiff that defendant was the new
owner of her debt [#80].
On April 28, 2021, plaintiff moved for reconsideration [#89] under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 59(b) because she says that her home, a manufactured home, is
personalty and not real estate. She says the home is as a result not secured either by the

1

Case: 1:17-cv-00188-SNLJ Doc. #: 91 Filed: 06/17/21 Page: 2 of 2 PageID #: 866

Note nor the mortgage to which the Conseco Finance Home Equity Loan Trust 2002-A
pertained, but rather is secured under a “UCC9 lien owned by Conseco Financial Services
Corp.” [#89 at 1.] Plaintiff now asks “What is the monetary value of [plaintiff’s] default
judgment against Conseco Bank?” and “Can this be used as an offset against a UCC 9
lien held by the bank’s subsidiary?”
Defendant U.S. Bank did not respond. This matter is currently on appeal, and the
Court of Appeals stayed the briefing schedule pending resolution of this matter. The
Court will order defendant U.S. Bank to respond.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that defendant U.S. Bank shall respond to plaintiff’s
motion for reconsideration within 14 days.
Dated this 17th day of June, 2021.

STEPHEN N. LIMBAUGH, JR.
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2