Dismissed. The lawsuit NPI, The City of Cleveland et al had brought against 21 lenders has apparently been ruled on, and not the way many of us would have hoped. Here is a link from Law.com regarding the latest news, fairly hot off the press (and thanks to Lou Tisler for alerting me about this).
The U.S. District Court is where this case was being reviewed and where it was dismissed. If it’s dismissed and not heard, does that mean there are no other ways to pursue this in a different level of court? That is my interpretation anyway.
Here is a pdf file also linked from Law.com – it’s the entire brief which is 36 pages, not so brief. But worth reviewing anyway. I’m disappointed, although not necessarily surprised. It had gone on so long I was hoping that meant it would be considered.
Any legal minds out there who can shed more light on other ways this can be pursued?
At the Levin Forum last week there was much talk about this along with a discussion about how two of the 21 lenders/servicers were working with the City to resolve the issue with their entire (large) inventory of vacant homes. Would this work with a large bank like Deutsche? Thoughts?
This excerpt from the Court decision seems to be saying the City was asking the courts to do something that could already be handled through legislation – can’t wait to hear City response on this.
A municipality like the City “may not do indirectly” through litigation “that which it
cannot do directly” through legislation.
City of Atlanta, 560 S.E.2d at 530. Section 1.63 bars the
City’s lawsuit, just as it would any attempt to legislate on these issues.
Peace Out – 3C
1 response so far ↓
1 Lawsuit is Dismissed but Judge Pianka May Have a Better Plan Anyway // May 23, 2009 at 1:36 am
[...] property land owners do the right thing. And code enforcement might be a better strategy than trying to sue those 21 loan servicers. You can read the PD coverage of Judge Pianka’s decision [...]
Leave a Comment