Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-alnd-2_14-cv-00970/USCOURTS-alnd-2_14-cv-00970-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 890
Nature of Suit: Other Statutory Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition for Removal

---

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JAMES A. YOCUM, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 2:14-cv-00970-SGC

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This matter is before the court on Plaintiff’s second amended complaint, filed on October 

11, 2016. (Doc. 51). For the reasons that follow, the undersigned recommends all claims and 

parties be struck except those permitted by the memorandum opinion and order entered on 

August 3, 2016. (Doc. 39). 

Plaintiff James Yocum filed a first amended complaint in this action on May 29, 2014. 

(Doc. 5). That complaint stated claims against Nationstar Mortgage, LLC (“Nationstar”), and 

Renasant Bank (“Renasant”) under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, 12 U.S.C. §§ 

2601 et seq. (“RESPA”), the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1601 et seq. (“TILA”), and the 

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 et seq. (“FDCPA”). (Id.). Mr. Yocum 

also sought a declaratory judgment that he has a right to undisturbed possession of the subject 

property, and he asserted a state law claim to quiet title against Nationstar and Renasant. (Id.). 

On January 15, 2016, the undersigned entered a report recommending all claims be 

dismissed without prejudice and that Plaintiff be permitted to file a final complaint “which 

adequately addresse[d] the deficiencies” in his complaint. (Doc. 33). After objections were 

received, the district judge to whom the report and recommendation was assigned entered a 

memorandum opinion and order. (Doc. 39). The district judge’s order adopted the findings and 

FILED

 2016 Dec-14 PM 02:52

U.S. DISTRICT COURT

N.D. OF ALABAMA

Case 2:14-cv-00970-MHH Document 64 Filed 12/14/16 Page 1 of 3
2

recommendations in the report, with the exception that Mr. Yocum’s quiet title action was found 

to state a claim upon which relief could be granted against Renasant Bank. (Id. at 5-6). The 

court dismissed without prejudice the remaining claims in Mr. Yocum’s complaint stating, “Mr. 

Yocum may replead those claims in accordance with the guidance provided in the magistrate 

judge’s report and recommendation and this memorandum opinion and order.” (Id. at 12)

(emphasis added). 

On October 11, 2016, Plaintiff, through counsel, filed a second amended complaint (the 

“SAC”). (Doc. 51). In the SAC, he added several parties and claims contrary to the report and 

recommendation (Doc. 33) as directed in the district judge’s memorandum opinion and order

(Doc. 39). Specifically, Plaintiff added defendants Bank of America, N.A.; Sirote & Permutt, 

PC; Ginny Rutledge; and Andy Saag. He also added various claims, including claims under 

sections of the FDCPA which had not been raised in the first amended complaint (while the first 

amended complaint stated only claims under § 1692g(b), the SAC added claims under §§ 

1692e(10) and 1692e(13)). As discussed during a hearing held with the parties, the undersigned 

views the SAC as going well beyond the scope permitted by the memorandum opinion and order. 

Therefore, it is RECOMMENDED that all parties and claims not included in the first 

amended complaint be STRICKEN and that the case be permitted to proceed only as to the 

parties named and claims asserted in the first amended complaint as repleaded in the second 

amended complaint.

Notice of Right to Object

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Rule 72(b)(2), FED. R. CIV. P., any party may 

file specific written objections to this report and recommendation within fourteen (14) days from 

the date it is filed in the office of the Clerk. Failure to file written objections to the proposed 

Case 2:14-cv-00970-MHH Document 64 Filed 12/14/16 Page 2 of 3
3

findings and recommendations contained in this report and recommendation within fourteen (14) 

days from the date it is filed shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking the factual findings on 

appeal, except for plain error. Written objections shall specifically identify the portions of the 

proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for 

objection. A copy of the objections must be served upon all other parties to the action. 

DONE this 14th day of December, 2016.

 ______________________________

STACI G. CORNELIUS

U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 2:14-cv-00970-MHH Document 64 Filed 12/14/16 Page 3 of 3