Cases

Affirmed.

Dismissed.

Dismissed.

338 S.W.3d 612 (2010) Nannette NEDD-JOHNSON, Appellant, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., et al., Appellees. No. 05-10-00980-CV. Court of Appeals of Texas, Dallas. December 16, 2010. Charles Shavers, The Law Offices for Charles Shavers & Associates, Dallas, TX, for Appellant. Chris Pochyla, Barrett Burke Wilson Castle Daffin & Frappier, LLP, Addison, TX, for

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT THEODORE H. JOHNSON & PENNY D. ) JOHNSON, ) ) Appellants, )

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia ATLANTA,____________________ February 05, 2015 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order: A15A0883. REGINALD JOHNSON v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. This case originated as a dispossessory proceeding in magistrate court. Following an adverse ruling, Reginald Johnson appealed the magistrate court’s decision to superior court. On October 9, 2014, the sup

Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v Johnson (2019 NY Slip Op 04024) Wells Fargo Bank N.A. v Johnson 2019 NY Slip Op 04024 Decided on May 22, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department Published by New York State Law Reporting Burea

[Cite as Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Johnson, 2016-Ohio-1114.] IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT LUCAS COUNTY Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., etc. Court of Appeals No. L-15-1111 Appellee Trial Court No. CI0201403086 v. Kelly Johnson, et al. DECISION AND J

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT IRENE JOHNSON PRIDGEN and KAREY JOHNSON, SR., Appellants, v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, as owner trustee of the Residential Credit Opportunities Trust VII-A, Appellee. No. 2D22-2588 December 27, 2023 Appea

ORDER JEFFREY L. VIKEN, CHIEF JUDGE BACKGROUND Multiple plaintiffs filed this action against defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Docket 6). Each plaintiff was an employee of defendant who was fired in approximately the last five years because of the plaintiffs criminal background information. Id. at pp. 3, 6, 12, 16, 22, 23, 25, 29-30, 32-33, 36 & 39-40; see Docket 12 at p.

Klingensmith, J. Lorenzo and Lahoma Dixon (“Borrowers”) appeal a final judgment of foreclosure entered against them. Because the initial plaintiff, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Bank”), sent a default letter to Borrow*900ers that failed to substantially comply with paragraph 22 of the mortgage, we reverse.1 After Borrowers de

KELLY, Circuit Judge. Michael Johnson is a homeowner attempting to save his. home from foreclosure. Johnson alleges that the mortgage trust that claims to hold his mortgage was not validly assigned the mortgage, and therefore, his mortgage may not be foreclosed by the trust. Wells Fargo, acting as trustee for the mortgage trust, moved for summary judgment. The district court <

*559 OPINION AND ORDER JESSE M. FURMAN, District Judge. This case — a civil fraud case brought by the United States against Defendants Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo” or the “Bank”) and Kurt Lofrano (together with the Bank, “Defendants”) — presents an issue of first impression within the Second Circuit: whether, or under what circumst

AFFIRMED.

CLARK, J., dissenting. Because I cannot agree that the trial court abused its discretion by dismissing the action without prejudice to Wells Fargo’s ability to file its claims in a new action, I respectfully dissent. There was no question that the original complaint for foreclosure was not verified, in violation of rule 1.110, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. While the borrower failed to

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER WALLACE CAPEL, JR., United States Magistrate Judge. Before the court is Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 16) and Supplement to the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 30). Upon consideration of the Motion (Docs. 16 & 30), the briefs filed in opposition to and in support of the Motion, and the record as a whole, the court finds that the Motion for Summary Judgme

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART MOTION FOR JUDGMENT FOLLOWING REMAND WILLIAM ALSUP, District Judge. Introduction After a bench trial in this certified consumer class action, certain overdraft practices by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. that imposed hundreds of millions of dollars in overdraft fees on depositors were held unfair and fraudulent. Our court of appeals affirmed in part an

ORDER JAMES E. GRITZNER', Chief Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Motion to Dismiss by Defendants Wells Fargo Bank N.A. d/b/a/ Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (Wells Fargo), Keth Malone, and Brian Freese (collectively, Defendants), as well as Motion for Leave to Amend First Amended Petition and Jury Demand and Motion for Leave to Amend Second Amended Petition and Jury Demand by Plaintiffs Rachelle

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Phadael v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co. Ams., 83 So.3d 893 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); Cowan v. Bank of New York Mellon, 74 So.3d 591 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). MAY, C.J., TAYLOR and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

OPINION AND ORDER JESSE M. FURMAN, District Judge: The United States brings this civil fraud action against Defendant Wells Fargo *599Bank, N.A. (“Wells Fargo” or the “Bank”), alleging that the Bank engaged in misconduct in originating and underwriting government-insured home mortgage loans. The Government seeks damages and civil penalti