Henderson et al v. Bella Assett Management et al

Filing 14

Memorandum Opinion and Order Granting Motion to Dismiss filed by Bella Assett Management, David Lagat. The court ORDERS that all claims and causes of action asserted by plaintiffs in the above-captioned action against defendants be, and are hereby, dismissed. (see order for further specifics) (Ordered by Judge John McBryde on 4/1/2015) (mpw)

FILED

U.S. DISTRICT COURT
NOJtTHERN

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT'
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXA.
FORT WORTH DIVISION

I

BRIAN AND ERICA HENDERSON,
Plaintiffs,

.

[

A1<raL I (){)15\
I

__ j

Hqwt~

§
§

vs.

§
§

BELLA ASSET MANAGEMENT AND
DAVID LAGAT,
Defendants.

OF TEXAS

CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT CrH
By ____________

§
§

NO. 4:14-CV-1032-A

§
§
§
§

MEMORANDUM OPINION
and
ORDER
Before the court for consideration and decision is the
unopposed motion and brief of defendants, Bella Asset Management,
LLC, and David Lagat, to dismiss for the failure of plaintiffs,
Brian Henderson and Erica Henderson, to state a claim upon which
relief may be granted.

The court has concluded that such motion

should be granted, and all claims and causes of action asserted
by plaintiffs against defendants should be dismissed.
I.

Nature of the Plaintiffs' Complaint
The complaint filed by plaintiffs on December 19, 2014,
contains allegations that indicate that they are tenants in
property owned or managed by defendants.

Plaintiffs allege in

paragraph 14 of the complaint that they were served by defendants
with notice to vacate for non-payment of rent.

~

They allege in

paragraph 22 that defendants are parties to a lease agreement,

.I
'

apparently pertaining to the property in question.

In paragraph

23 of the complaint, plaintiffs allege that defendants took court
action and had plaintiffs evicted from their premises.
Plaintiffs make conclusory assertions in their complaint
that defendants are debt collectors, and are subject to various
federal and state statutes pertaining to conduct of debt
collectors.
II.
Grounds of the Motion to Dismiss
In reliance on the decisions of the Supreme Court in Bell
Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555

(2007) and Ashcroft v.

Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 669 (2009), defendants take the position
that the allegations made by plaintiffs that they are debt
collectors are mere legal conclusions that are unsupported by any
factual allegations, and that the allegations of plaintiffs'
complaint do not provide sufficient facts to infer that any right
of relief claimed by plaintiffs against defendants is plausible.
III.
Analysis
A.

Standards Applicable to the Relief Sought by the Motion to
Dismiss
Rule 8(a) (2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure

provides, in a general way, the applicable standard of pleading.
It requires that a complaint contain "a short and plain statement
2

of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief,"
Fed. R. Civ. P. B(a) (2), "in order to give the defendant fair
notice of what the claim is and the grounds upon which it rests,"
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007)
quotation marks and ellipsis omitted) .

(internal

Although a complaint need

not contain detailed factual allegations, the "showing"
contemplated by Rule 8 requires the plaintiff to do more than
simply allege legal conclusions or recite the elements of a cause
of action.

Twombly, 550 U.S. at 555 & n.3.

Thus, while a court

must accept all of the factual allegations in the complaint as
true, it need not credit bare legal conclusions that are
unsupported by any factual underpinnings.
556 U.S. 662, 669 (2009)

See Ashcroft v. Iqbal,

("While legal conclusions can provide

the framework of a complaint, they must be supported by factual
allegations.").
Moreover, to survive a motion to dismiss for failure to
state a claim under Rule 12(b) (6), the facts pleaded must allow
the court to infer that the plaintiff's right to relief is
plausible.

Id.

To allege a plausible right to relief, the facts

pleaded must suggest liability; allegations that are merely
consistent with unlawful conduct are insufficient.
U.S. at 566-69.

Twombly, 550

"Determining whether a complaint states a

plausible claim for relief .

.

[is] a context-specific task
3

~-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

that requires the reviewing court to draw on its judicial
experience and common sense."
B.

Iqbal, 556 U.S. at 679.

The Applicable Standards Are Not Satisfied by the
Allegations of the Complaint
The only reasonable inference to be drawn from the

allegations of the complaint is that plaintiffs have leased the
property in question from defendants, and that defendants took
actions to cause plaintiffs to be evicted from the property.

No

facts are alleged that would lead to a plausible conclusion that
either defendant is a debt collector or that either defendant is
subject to any of the federal or state laws plaintiffs claim
defendants violated.

Therefore, plaintiffs have failed to state

a cause of action upon which relief may be granted against either
defendant.

IV.
Order
For the reasons stated above,
The court ORDERS that all claims and causes of action
asserted by plaintiffs in the above-captioned action against
defendants be, and are hereby, dismissed.
SIGNED April 1, 2015.