Beattie v. Skyline Corporation

Filing 442

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AS TO POST-TRIAL MOTIONS denying 372 MOTION by Jonathan Beattie For An Award of Statutory Penalties Pursuant to CMH Homes, Inc.'s Violations of the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act; granting 386 M OTION by Heather Beattie, Jonathan Beattie for Post-Judgment Interest; denying 387 MOTION by Heather Beattie, Jonathan Beattie for Equitable Relief Pursuant to CMH Homes, Inc.'s Violations of the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Ac t; denying 413 RENEWED MOTION by CMH Homes, Inc. for Judgment as a Matter of Law Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b); denying 415 RENEWED MOTION by Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance, Inc. for Judgment as a Matter of Law Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 (b); denying 417 MOTION by Jonathan Beattie for Prejudgment Interest; denying 408 MOTION by Heather Beattie, Jonathan Beattie for Review of 405 Costs Taxed by the Clerk of Court; granting 400 MOTION by Jonathan Beattie for Leave to File Surre ply Regarding Defendants' Motion to Set Post-Trial Briefing and Discovery Schedule; granting 409 MOTION by CMH Homes, Inc. for Leave to File Surreply to 403 Reply to Response; granting 420 MOTION by Jonathan Beattie for Leave to File Reply Memorandum. Signed by Judge Robert C. Chambers on 7/9/2015. (cc: attys; any unrepresented parties) (mkw)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF WEST VIRGINIA
HUNTINGTON DIVISION

JONATHAN BEATTIE and
HEATHER BEATTIE,
Plaintiffs,
v.

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:12-2528

CMH HOMES, INC., d/b/a LUV HOMES #760 and
VANDERBILT MORTGAGE AND FINANCE, INC.,
Defendants,

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER AS TO POST-TRIAL MOTIONS

Following a lengthy jury trial, the jury returned a verdict partially in favor of Plaintiff
Jonathan Beattie as to six violations of the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act, and
partially in favor of the defendants. Subsequently, a legion of motions have been filed by the
parties, adding to what has already been an unduly complex case. After considering each motion,
the Court ORDERS as follows:
1) Plaintiff Jonathan Beattie’s Motion for an Award of Statutory Penalties Pursuant to
CMH Homes, Inc.’s Violations of the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act (ECF
NO. 372) is DENIED. The jury found six specific and separate violations of the provisions of the
West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act found in Section 46A-6-106 of the West
Virginia Code. Here, the violations claimed by Plaintiff and ultimately found by the jury all arise
under Section 46A-6-102(7).

The Court concludes that Section 46A-6-106(a) permits a

consumer, such as Plaintiff, to recover actual damages, or two hundred dollars, whichever is

greater. The jury award is clearly greater; the statutory penalty scheme provided in Sections
46A-5-101 and 106 is thus inapplicable to these violations.
2) Plaintiff’s Motion for Post-Judgment Interest (ECF No. 386) is GRANTED. Plaintiff
Jonathan Beattie is entitled to interest at the rate provided by law on the jury’s award of damages
until paid.
3) Plaintiff’s Motion for Equitable Relief Pursuant to CMH Homes, Inc.’s Violations of
the West Virginia Consumer Credit and Protection Act (ECF No. 387) is DENIED. The Court
finds that the violations found by the jury do not support the relief sought by Plaintiff. The Court
finds that the defects in the manufactured home were not as substantial as Plaintiff claimed, that
some repairs were made and others offered but refused by Plaintiff, and that Plaintiff’s use of the
home was not substantially impaired. Given these findings, Plaintiff is not entitled to equitable
relief.
4) Defendant CMH Homes, Inc.’s Renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law
Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) (ECF No. 413) is DENIED. The Court finds there was
substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict.

Plaintiff did rely on Defendant’s

representations that it would install the home in conformity with its contractual and legal duties.
Reliance on the core elements of the purchase is sufficient. The jury had ample evidence that the
violations caused damage to Plaintiff, such as inconvenience, temporary interference with use and
enjoyment of the home, and other consequences.

Defendant’s remaining arguments were

previously considered and rejected.
5) Defendant Vanderbilt Mortgage and Finance, Inc.’s Renewed Motion for Judgment as
a Matter of Law Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(b) (ECF No. 415) is DENIED. First, the Court
reaffirms its rejection of Defendant’s arguments concerning the effect of Plaintiffs’ bankruptcy

proceeding and reaffirmation of the debt. Further, the Court finds that the violations found by the
jury arise from the consumer credit sale even if the underlying conduct occurred after the sale.
6)

Plaintiff Jonathan Beattie’s Motion for Prejudgment Interest (ECF No. 417) is

DENIED. The West Virginia statutes cited by Plaintiff are inapplicable to the West Virginia
Consumer Credit and Protection Act violations found by the jury.
7) Plaintiffs’ Motion for Review of Costs Taxed by the Clerk of Court (ECF No. 408) is
DENIED.
8)

Plaintiff Jonathan Beattie’s Motion for Leave to File Surreply Regarding Defendants’

Motion to Set Post-Trial Briefing and Discovery Schedule (ECF NO. 400) is GRANTED.
9)

Defendant CMH Homes, Inc.’s Motion for Leave to File Surreply to Reply to

Response (ECF No. 409) is GRANTED.
10) Plaintiff Jonathan Beattie’s Motion for Leave to File Reply Memorandum (ECF No.
420) is GRANTED.
The Court DIRECTS the Clerk to send a copy of this written Opinion and Order to counsel
of record and any unrepresented parties.

ENTER:

July 9, 2015