United states of america Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff – countertop Defendant – Appellee, v. LANIER LAW, LLC, a Florida liability that is limited, d.b.a. Redstone Law Group, d.b.a. What the law states Offices Of Michael W. Lanier, LIBERTY & TRUST LAW SELECTION OF FLORIDA, LLC payday loans near me Lawrence Kansas, a Florida restricted obligation business, Defendants – countertop Claimants, MICHAEL W. LANIER, independently and also as an owner, officer, supervisor, and/or agent associated with above-mentioned entities, Defendant – countertop Claimant – Appellant, FORTRESS LAW GROUP, LLC, a Florida restricted obligation business, et al., Defendants.
This instance requires us to take into account perhaps the region court precisely awarded summary judgment to your Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on its claims that defendant Michael Lanier violated several statutes that are federal laws associated with the purchase of home loan support relief services. Lanier contends that the region court must not have awarded summary judgment for many reasons, including that the region court improperly admitted proof against him, overlooked disputes of material reality, making factual findings in the FTC’s benefit. We conclude that none of the arguments has merit and affirm the region court.
Factual Background
Through Lanier Law, LLC, his law practice, Michael Lanier, legal counsel located in Jacksonville, Florida, offered mortgage help relief services to individuals vulnerable to losing their homes to foreclosure. 1 Lanier and their affiliates promised homeowners that in return for an upfront charge, he’d negotiate cheaper month-to-month home loan repayments, reduced rates of interest, and paid off major balances with the person.
Lanier Law shared work place with Rogelio Robles and Edward Rennick, two of Lanier’s co-defendants, whom operated some other entities Pinnacle that is including Legal, Fortress Legal Services, therefore the Department of Loss Mitigation and Forensics (“DOLMF”) (collectively, the “staffing agencies”). These entities offered staffing, recommendations, as well as other solutions to Lanier Law.
In 2012, the Florida Bar filed a problem against Lanier regarding their foreclosure relief services. Lanier ultimately joined a conditional responsible plea, admitting which he had improperly solicited customers and didn’t supervise non-lawyers, and then he ended up being suspended quickly through the training of law.
Ahead of Lanier’s suspension, he became a part of three newly produced entities when you look at the District of Columbia: Fortress Law Group, LLP; Redstone Law Group, LLP; and Surety Law Group, LLP (collectively, the “D.C. firms”), which, like Lanier Law, supplied customers with home loan support solutions. 2 These entities purported become law offices located in the District of Columbia, however they had been in fact “virtual office[s]” for Lanier’s operations in Florida. Rennick Dep. at 33 (Doc. 271). 3 Although Lanier “transferred” their foreclosure protection cases into the D.C. companies, any mail delivered to D.C. ended up being forwarded straight away to Jacksonville, Florida, where Lanier Law operated. Lanier Dep. at 37 (Doc. 269). The Pinnacle and DOLMF employees who’d formerly caused Lanier Law customers continued be effective on behalf of the D.C. organizations. Also to collect re re payments, the D.C. businesses utilized the vendor processing portal that Lanier had utilized for Lanier Law.
To make certain that Lanier Law together with D.C. organizations could attract customers nationwide, they related to “of counsel” attorneys across the united states. The “of counsel” lawyers had been compensated a month-to-month retainer of around $300 each month; the task they performed ended up being generally speaking restricted to reviewing retainer agreements for customer email address also to make certain the agreements had been finalized and dated.
Together, Lanier Law as well as the D.C. businesses operated an amount business consumers that are recruiting buy mortgage assistance relief solutions (“MARS”). The staffing agencies solicited customers through the online world, letters, and leaflets providing mortgage help. The adverts promoted the “of counsel” community, noting that the law practice “has working arrangements with skilled and competent solicitors and lawyers in a lot of other states.” 2013 Flyer at 56 (Doc. 246-5). One flyer, entitled the “Economic Stimulus Mortgage Notification” (the “Flyer”), which appeared as if a federal government document, informed customers that their home was indeed “selected for a unique system by the national Insured Institutions,” that will “bring your home re re payments present for under you borrowed from or your major balance down.” 2012 Flyer at 66 (Doc. 246-1). Other leaflets identified the transmitter as DOLMF, that has been owned by Robles. Lanier denies any right part in “drafting, giving, approving, or us[ing]” the Flyer. Lanier Aff. at 9 (Doc. 253).
Customers whom taken care of immediately the ads had been known Lanier Law or the D.C. businesses. Throughout the enrollment procedure, instance supervisors told clients that the company would obtain loan changes with somewhat reduced re re re payments and rates of interest. The representatives guaranteed consumers that the businesses had success that is extremely high in bringing down re payments—over 90 per cent. As soon as new customers enrolled, Lanier Law together with D.C. organizations delivered them comparable documents. The customers had been expected to spend advance charges greater than $2,000, sometimes payable in installments. Some customers had been told to cease their home loan repayments and also to pay Lanier Law or perhaps the D.C. businesses alternatively.
When the customers started making payments, Lanier Law together with D.C. businesses stopped interacting with them or transferred them to different instance supervisors whom guaranteed them that really work had been done on the loan alterations. Some consumers discovered from their lenders that Lanier Law together with D.C. organizations had never tried to get hold of the loan providers. Almost all of the customers complained that the companies did not get any changes for the kids. Other people stated that though some improvements were acquired, these people were never as guaranteed and often needed higher payments than customers had compensated previously.
