Site Loader

Procedural Background

District Court Proceedings

The FTC filed a problem against Lanier, Robles, Rennick, Lanier Law, plus the D.C. organizations, alleging they had marketed and offered home loan help relief solutions in breach of area 5(a) associated with the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 4 the Mortgage Assistance Relief solutions Rule (legislation O) (MARS Rule), 5 in addition to Telemarketing product product Sales Rule (TSR). 6 particularly, the FTC alleged the defendants had misrepresented their capability to acquire home loan changes, charged consumers advance charges, did not add necessary disclosures in their communications, initiated calls in violation associated with TSR, and did not spend the necessary charges to gain access to the nationwide Do-Not-Call list.

The FTC relocated for summary judgment, therefore the region court granted the movement. The court figured the defendants violated area 5 of this FTCA by simply making product misrepresentations that caused consumer that is substantial and also by breaking the MARS Rule plus the TSR. The district court determined that the defendants violated the MARS Rule once they demanded and received charges with regards to their solutions just before doing any work; misrepresented the chances of acquiring that loan modification, particularly pertaining to reductions in monthly premiums, rates of interest, and major balances; and neglected to make proper disclosures. Finally, the court determined that Lanier ended up being independently responsible for the functions for the business entities. 7 The region court determined that his authority and control of the defendants along with his familiarity with their methods put him “squarely in the center of the misleading enterprise,” making him individually accountable for the misconduct. Purchase at 72-74 (Doc. 281).

On August 12, 2016, the region court entered an injunction that is permanent Lanier and their co-defendants. The region court additionally joined judgment and only the FTC when you look at the number of $13,586,713. This really is Lanier’s appeal. 8

Appellate Procedures

On October 10, 2016, Lanier filed a notice that is timely of, by which he described himself plus the entities comprising Lanier Law while the “Lanier Defendants”:

Defendant, Lanier Law, et al., hereinafter the “Lanier Defendants,” hereby appeals into the united states of america Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit through the judgment that is final of District Court dated August 12, 2016 in addition to purchase of July 7, 2016 ․

Notice of Appeal (Doc. 303). Following the appeal had been docketed, Lanier attempted to enter a look on the behalf of himself and Lanier Law in this Court, nevertheless the form was returned by the Clerk unfiled because Lanier’s application for admission into the Eleventh Circuit club was rejected.

In reaction, on 29, 2016, Lanier filed an amended notice of appeal in the district court november:

Defendant, Michael W. Lanier, Esq, separately, ․ hereby appeals towards the united states of america Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ․ Lanier is admitted to train ahead of the Federal District Court, but had been rejected admission to rehearse in the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals also as pro hac vice admission here.

Am. Notice of Appeal (Doc. 309). In a page to your Court, Lanier explained that their amended appeal was meant to “reflect” he would “represent himself, pro se, and therefore none associated with corporate (Lanier) defendants would join him within the appeal.” Lanier Law ended up being then dismissed through the appeal.

Even though the appeal ended up being pending, this Court asked the events to deal with whether Lanier’s 29, 2016, amended notice https://badcreditloans4all.com/payday-loans-ia/spencer/ of appeal was timely to appeal from the district court’s final judgment on behalf of Lanier personally november. After briefing by both parties, the Court determined it was perhaps maybe not, but reserved the concern of whether Lanier’s 10, 2016 notice on behalf of “Lanier Law, et al.” perfected his appeal in his personal capacity october.

Post Author: habiba

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *