Searching over 5,500,000 cases.

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Logan v. Waters

United States District Court, W.D. Arkansas, Fort Smith Division

December 4, 2019

SGT. CHRIS WATERS (Arkansas State Police); SHELLPOINT/CONTRYWIDE/BANK OF AMERICA (Trustee/Home Loan Serv/Banking and Loans); SENIOR CORPORAL MICHAEL SPRINGER (Supervisor/Investigating Officer); JOYCE BRADLEY BABIN/NATASHA GRAF (Chapter 13 Standing/Case Worker Trustee); CHIEF JUDGE BEN T. BARRY (United States Bankruptcy Court); JOHN MICHAEL RAINWATER/BRIAN LIGHT (Lawyers/Attorney); ALLISON HOUSTON (State Prosecutor's Office/Fort Smith Prosecutor's Office); JUDGE FITZHUGH (Judge District Court of Greenwood); NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE; MR. COOPER MORTHAGE (Mr. Cooper Mortgage Company); DANA BYRUM (District IV manager for Stat[e] of Arkansas); NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE CORP.; FARM CREDIT SERVICES OF WESTERN ARKANSAS (Andrea Leding Regional Vice President) and LATISHA MEADOWS (DHS Administrative Review Officer) DEFENDANTS



         Plaintiff proceeds in this matter pro se. Currently before the Court are Motions to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim by Defendant Barry (ECF No. 21), Defendants Waters, Springer, Houston, Fitzhugh, Meadows, and Byrum (“State Defendants”) (ECF No.'s 25, 63), and Nationstar Mortgage (“Nationstar”) (ECF No. 44).

         I. BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff filed her Complaint on September 1, 2019. (ECF No. 1). Her sparse allegations appear to reference the condemnation of an unidentified parcel of real property. (Id. at 5-6). The entirety of her claim is as follows:

“I Purchase the property in 2003 with my spouse, in 2004 I Started a Daycare to able to profit and make a Different, 2005-2006 Started Working on the building on the road to the daycare, got my daycare Address Register at 4513 Park Road next to my house, I send $500 to Bank of America in 2008 also I Survey the one Acre for the daycare Started my Garden and Rabbits farm to allowed the kids to eat healthy and allowed to to learn about the animal, they health, etc I pay about $75, 000 within 10 years with all my work and Investment I have spend roughtlyabout $98, 000
Due to lack of accountability of Shellpoint, attorney Countrywide, Bank of America, Brian Light, the judge and Court not listening to me know Fema Condemn the house till I fix it up know I have more than a sick spouse to think about his health but to put a roof over his head[.]”

(Id. at 5) (errors in original). Plaintiff's Complaint is silent as to whether she proceeds against Defendants in their official or individual capacity. Plaintiff seeks monetary damages in the amount of $250, 000. (Id. at 6).

         Defendant Barry filed his Motion to Dismiss on October 15, 2019. (ECF No. 21). The State Defendants filed their Motion to Dismiss on October 17, 2019. (ECF No. 25). They then filed a Motion to Correct a scrivener's error on October November 6, 2019. (ECF No. 32). A corrected copy of the Motion was attached. (ECF No. 32-1). Nationstar filed its Motion to Dismiss on November 13, 2019. (ECF No. 44).

         Plaintiff filed her Response to Defendant Barry and the State Defendants on October 23, 2019. (ECF No. 28). Plaintiff filed a Response to the Nationstar motion on November 25, 2019. (ECF No. 50).


         Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a) requires only that a complaint present “a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief.” Fed.R.Civ.P. 8(a)(2). “In order to meet this standard, and survive a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), ‘a complaint must contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face.'” Braden v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 588 F.3d 585, 594 (8th Cir. 2009) (quoting Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (internal quotations omitted)). “A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft, 556 U.S. at 678. A pro se plaintiff's complaint is liberally construed, but it must still allege sufficient facts to support the plaintiff's claims. See Stone v. Harry, 364 F.3d 912, 914 (8th Cir. 2004). Merely listing a defendant in a case caption is insufficient to support a claim against the defendant. Krych v. Hass, 83 Fed.Appx. 854, 855 (8th Cir. 2003) (citing Potter v. Clark, 497 F.2d 1206, 1207 (7th Cir. 1974) (per curiam) (noting that court properly dismissed pro se complaint that was silent as to defendant except for his name appearing in caption)).

         III. ANALYSIS

         Defendant Barry argues the claims against him should be dismissed because: (1) he is entitled to absolute judicial immunity as the Chief United States Bankruptcy Judge for the Western District of Arkansas; (2) Plaintiff states no factual allegations against him in her Complaint; and, (3) Plaintiff failed to perfect service upon him as required by law.[1] (ECF No. 21 at 1-2).

         The State Defendants argue the claims against them should be dismissed because: (1) Plaintiff failed to perfect service of process upon them; (2) Plaintiff failed to identify any facts which would entitle her to relief from the State Defendants; (3) Judge Fitzhugh is entitled to absolute judicial immunity; (3) Judge Meadows is entitled to absolute judicial immunity; (4) Defendant Houston is entitled to prosecutorial immunity; (5) each State Defendant is entitled to sovereign immunity; and, (6) Plaintiff's Complaint fails to specifically allege any ...

Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.