Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-almd-1_05-cv-00747/USCOURTS-almd-1_05-cv-00747-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act

---

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE

MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA, SOUTHERN DIVISION

ARTHUR EARL CLARK and wife, )

BARBARA E. CLARK, )

)

Plaintiffs, )

) CIVIL ACTION NO.

v. ) 1:05cv747-MHT

) (WO)

AMSOUTH MORTGAGE COMPANY, )

INC., a corporation, )

DOVENMUEHLE MORTGAGE, )

INC., a corporation, and )

GEOTRAC INFORMATION SYSTEM )

SPECIALISTS, an entity, )

)

Defendants. )

JUDGMENT

In accordance with the memorandum opinion entered this

date, it is the ORDER, JUDGMENT, and DECREE of the court

as follows:

(1) Defendants AmSouth Mortgage Company, Inc.,

Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc., and Geotrac Information System

Specialists’s motions for summary judgment (doc. nos. 28,

32, and 65) are granted as to plaintiffs Arthur Earl Clark

and Barbara E. Clark’s federal claims, and judgment is

Case 1:05-cv-00747-MHT-WC Document 88 Filed 01/03/07 Page 1 of 3
2

entered in favor of defendants AmSouth Mortgage Company,

Inc., Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc., and Geotrac Information

System Specialists, and against the Clark plaintiffs on

all their federal claims.

(2) Defendants AmSouth Mortgage Company, Inc. and

Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc.’s motions for summary judgment

(doc. nos. 32 and 65) are granted as to the Clark

plaintiffs’ state-law claims, and judgment is entered in

favor of defendants AmSouth Mortgage Company, Inc. and

Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc. and against the Clark

plaintiffs on all their state-law claims.

(3) Defendant Geotrac Information System Specialists’s

motion for summary judgment (doc. no. 28) is granted as to

the Clark plaintiffs’ state-law claims for conversion and

unjust-enrichment, and judgment is entered in favor of

defendant Geotrac Information System Specialists and

against the Clark plaintiffs on their state-law claims for

conversion and unjust-enrichment.

(4) Defendant Geotrac Information System Specialists’s

motion for summary judgment (doc. no. 28) is denied as to

Case 1:05-cv-00747-MHT-WC Document 88 Filed 01/03/07 Page 2 of 3
the Clark plaintiffs’ state-law claims for breach of

contract, negligence, breach of duty to third-party

beneficiary, and fraud, and the Clark plaintiffs’ statelaw claims against defendant Geotrac Information System

Specialists for breach of contract, negligence, breach of

duty to third-party beneficiary, and fraud are remanded to

the Circuit Court of Houston County, Alabama. The clerk

of the court is DIRECTED to take appropriate steps to

effect the remand.

It is further ORDERED that costs are taxed against the

Clark plaintiffs, for which execution may issue. 

The clerk of the court is DIRECTED to enter this

document on the civil docket as a final judgment pursuant

to Rule 58 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

DONE this the 3rd day of January, 2007.

_____________________________ /s/ Myron H. Thompson

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-00747-MHT-WC Document 88 Filed 01/03/07 Page 3 of 3