Jackson v. U.S. Bank National Association et al

Filing 11

Memorandum Opinion and Order granting in part and denying in part 8 Motion to Dismiss, or Alternatively, Motion for More Definite Statement. Specifically, the court grants Defendants' Motion for More Definite Statement. Plaintiff shall file an amended pleading by 2/15/2013, and she shall do so in accordance with the standards herein enumerated, taking into account the deficiencies pointed out by the court. The court denies without prejudice Defendants' Motion to Dismiss. (Ordered by Judge Sam A Lindsay on 1/16/2013) (ctf)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
DALLAS DIVISION
STEPHNEY JACKSON,

§
§
Plaintiff,
§
§
v.
§
§
U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, §
and BANK OF AMERICA,
§
§
Defendants.
§

Civil Action No. 3:12-CV-1770-L

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Before the court is Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or Alternatively, Motion for More
Definite Statement, filed July 2, 2012. Plaintiff Stephney Jackson (“Plaintiff” or “Jackson”) did
not file a response to the motion. After careful consideration of the motion, the court grants in
part and denies in part Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss, or Alternatively, Motion for More
Definite Statement.
I.

Background
Jackson initially filed this action on June 7, 2012, against U.S. Bank National

Association, and Bank of America. Jackson’s Complaint states that she applied for a loan
modification and that Defendants wrongfully foreclosed and committed fraud and other
“wrong[ful] acts.

On July 2, 2012, Defendants moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims or

alternatively request that she be required to replead her claims.

Memorandum Opinion and Order – Page 1

II.

Standards
A.

Rule 12(b)(6) - Failure to State a Claim

To defeat a motion to dismiss filed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure, a plaintiff must plead “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on
its face.” Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 570 (2007); Reliable Consultants, Inc.
v. Earle, 517 F.3d 738, 742 (5th Cir. 2008); Guidry v. American Pub. Life Ins. Co., 512 F.3d 177,
180 (5th Cir. 2007). A claim meets the plausibility test “when the plaintiff pleads factual content
that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the
misconduct alleged. The plausibility standard is not akin to a ‘probability requirement,’ but it
asks for more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal,
556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (internal citations omitted). While a complaint need not contain
detailed factual allegations, it must set forth “more than labels and conclusions, and a formulaic
recitation of the elements of a cause of action will not do.” Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 (citation
omitted). The “[f]actual allegations of [a complaint] must be enough to raise a right to relief
above the speculative level . . . on the assumption that all the allegations in the complaint are true
(even if doubtful in fact).” Id. (quotation marks, citations, and footnote omitted). When the
allegations of the pleading do not allow the court to infer more than the mere possibility of
wrongdoing, they fall short of showing that the pleader is entitled to relief. Iqbal, 556 U.S. at
679.
In reviewing a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, the court must accept all well-pleaded facts in the
complaint as true and view them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Sonnier v. State
Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co., 509 F.3d 673, 675 (5th Cir. 2007); Martin K. Eby Constr. Co. v.
Dallas Area Rapid Transit, 369 F.3d 464, 467 (5th Cir. 2004); Baker v. Putnal, 75 F.3d 190, 196
Memorandum Opinion and Order – Page 2

(5th Cir. 1996). In ruling on such a motion, the court cannot look beyond the pleadings. Id.;
Spivey v. Robertson, 197 F.3d 772, 774 (5th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 530 U.S. 1229 (2000). The
pleadings include the complaint and any documents attached to it. Collins v. Morgan Stanley
Dean Witter, 224 F.3d 496, 498-99 (5th Cir. 2000). Likewise, “‘[d]ocuments that a defendant
attaches to a motion to dismiss are considered part of the pleadings if they are referred to in the
plaintiff’s complaint and are central to [the plaintiff’s] claims.’” Id. (quoting Venture Assocs.
Corp. v. Zenith Data Sys. Corp., 987 F.2d 429, 431 (7th Cir. 1993)).
The ultimate question in a Rule 12(b)(6) motion is whether the complaint states a valid
claim when it is viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. Great Plains Trust Co. v.
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, 313 F.3d 305, 312 (5th Cir. 2002). While well-pleaded facts of a
complaint are to be accepted as true, legal conclusions are not “entitled to the assumption of
truth.” Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679 (citation omitted). Further, a court is not to strain to find
inferences favorable to the plaintiff and is not to accept conclusory allegations, unwarranted
deductions, or legal conclusions. R2 Invs. LDC v. Phillips, 401 F.3d 638, 642 (5th Cir. 2005)
(citations omitted). The court does not evaluate the plaintiff’s likelihood of success; instead, it
only determines whether the plaintiff has pleaded a legally cognizable claim. United States ex
rel. Riley v. St. Luke’s Episcopal Hosp., 355 F.3d 370, 376 (5th Cir. 2004). Stated another way,
when a court deals with a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, its task is to test the sufficiency of the
allegations contained in the pleadings to determine whether they are adequate enough to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted. Mann v. Adams Realty Co., 556 F.2d 288, 293 (5th Cir.
1977); Doe v. Hillsboro Indep. Sch. Dist., 81 F.3d 1395, 1401 (5th Cir. 1996), rev’d on other
grounds, 113 F.3d 1412 (5th Cir. 1997) (en banc). Accordingly, denial of a 12(b)(6) motion has

Memorandum Opinion and Order – Page 3

no bearing on whether a plaintiff ultimately establishes the necessary proof to prevail on a claim
that withstands a 12(b)(6) challenge. Adams, 556 F.2d at 293.
B.

Rule 8(a) - Pleading Requirements

Rule 8(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires the pleading to contain “a
short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Rule 8 only
requires “notice” pleading. Accordingly, it is not necessary that the pleader set forth each and
every element or factual allegation of a claim. The “short and plain statement,” however, must
contain sufficient allegations of fact “that will give the defendant fair notice of what the
plaintiff’s claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.” Leatherman v. Tarrant Cnty. Narcotics
Intelligence and Coordination Unit, 507 U.S. 163, 168 (1993).
III.

Analysis
Defendants contend that Plaintiff has failed to plead any facts to support her claims of

wrongful foreclosure and fraud.

Plaintiff did not file a response to Defendants’ motion.

Defendants request that Plaintiff’s claims be dismissed pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), or
alternatively, that Plaintiff be required to replead her claims under Rule 12(e) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure. Rule 12(e) provides that “[a] party may move for a more definite
statement of a pleading to which a responsive pleading is allowed but which is so vague or
ambiguous that the party cannot reasonably prepare a response.” The court agrees that Plaintiff
has not alleged sufficient facts to support her wrongful foreclosure and fraud claims. Because
Plaintiff is proceeding pro se and has not previously amended her Complaint, the court, rather
than dismiss her claims for failure to state a claim, will permit her to file an amended Complaint
by February 15, 2013, that addresses the deficiencies noted in Defendants’ motion.

Memorandum Opinion and Order – Page 4

IV.

Conclusion
For the reasons herein stated, the court grants in part and denies in part Defendants’

Motion to Dismiss, or Alternatively, Motion for More Definite Statement. Specifically, the court
grants Defendants’ Motion for More Definite Statement. Although Plaintiff fails to state a claim
upon which relief can be granted, the court believes that she should be allowed an opportunity to
amend her pleading. Plaintiff shall file an amended pleading by February 15, 2013, and she
shall do so in accordance with the standards herein enumerated, taking into account the
deficiencies pointed out by the court. Failure of Plaintiff to replead as directed subjects these
claims to dismissal for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted or failure to
comply with a court order pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) or Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure. The court denies without prejudice Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss.
It is so ordered this 16th day of January, 2013.

_________________________________
Sam A. Lindsay
United States District Judge

Memorandum Opinion and Order – Page 5