UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case No.: 20-CV-60633 SMITH

NOTICE OF MOTION OF PROPOSED AMICI CURIAE ATTORNEYS GENERAL OF 

ALASKA, ARIZONA, CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, CONNECTICUT, DELAWARE, 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, FLORIDA, HAWAII, IDAHO, ILLINOIS, INDIANA, 

IOWA, MAINE, MARYLAND, MASSACHUSETTS, MICHIGAN, MINNESOTA, 

NEBRASKA, NEVADA, NEW HAMPSHIRE, NEW MEXICO, NEW YORK, NORTH 

CAROLINA, OHIO, OKLAHOMA, OREGON, PENNSYLVANIA, RHODE ISLAND, 

VERMONT, VIRGINIA, WASHINGTON, AND WEST VIRGINIA FOR LEAVE TO 

FILE AN AMICUS BRIEF IN RESPONSE TO THE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY 

APPROVAL OF THE SETTLEMENT AND CERTIFICATION OF THE SETTLEMENT 

CLASS

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7 and Local Rule 7.1, the Attorneys General of Alaska, Arizona, 

California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, 

Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New 

Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, 

Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia (“Attorneys General”) 

respectfully move for leave to file the accompanying “Brief of Amici Curiae in Opposition to 

VINCENT J. MORRIS, STEVEN SIMMONS, 

YOLANDA UPTON, and MICHAEL LUZZI, on 

behalf of themselves and all others similarly 

situated, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

PHH MORTGAGE CORPORATION d/b/a PHH 

MORTGAGE SERVICES, on its own behalf and as 

successor by merger to OCWEN LOAN 

SERVICING, LLC, a New Jersey Corporation, and 

OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, LLC, a Florida 

Limited Liability Company, 

Defendants.

_________________________________

Case 0:20-cv-60633-RS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/29/2021 Page 1 of 5
Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement and Certification of the Settlement 

Class” (appended hereto as Exhibit B) and the accompany Declaration of Sarah Petrie (appended 

hereto as Exhibit C). Plaintiffs and Intervenors do not oppose the filing of this brief. While 

Defendants do not affirmatively consent to the Attorneys General’s motion, Defendants do not 

oppose if certain conditions are met (see Exhibit D for these conditions). 

On or around December 11, 2021, the Attorneys General of Minnesota and New York filed 

a letter with the Court stating our intent to file the instant motion (ECF Doc. 98) which the Court 

acknowledged and provided us until January 29, 2021 to file the motion (Docket Entry 111). 

WHEREFORE, Amici Curiae request that their Motion for Leave to file the accompanying

amicus brief be granted.

MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE 

BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE

When considering a motion for leave to file an amicus brief, courts evaluate whether it “will 

aid in the determination of the motions at issue.” James Square Nursing Homes, Inc. v. Wing, 897 

F. Supp. 682, 683 & n.2 (N.D.N.Y. 1995) aff’d, 84 F.3d 591 (2nd Cir. 1996). “Although there is no 

precise rule in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governing the submissions of briefs by amici 

curiae, it is accepted that it is within the Court’s inherent authority to allow such filings.” Lathrop 

v. Unidentified, Wretched & Abandoned Vehicle, 817 F. Supp. 953, 961 n. 10 (M.D. Fla. 1993).

District courts have discretion “to determine the fact, extent, and manner of participation by 

the amicus.” News & Sun-Sentinel Co. v. Cox, 700 F. Supp. 30, 31 (S.D. Fla. 1988). Amici curiae

should be permitted to participate in litigation where such participation benefits the court, including 

by providing “unique information or perspective that can help the court beyond help that lawyers 

for parties are able to provide.” Ryan v. Commodity Futures Trading Comm’n, 125 F.3d 1062, 1063 

(7th Cir. 1997).

Case 0:20-cv-60633-RS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/29/2021 Page 2 of 5
A significant portion of the class members - 76% - are residents of the States that join this 

amicus brief. As part of their law enforcement responsibilities, the Attorneys General investigate 

and bring enforcement actions on behalf of the citizens of their respective states. The Attorneys 

General therefore have relevant and unique experience in responding to violations of consumer law 

and requesting appropriate remedies. Additionally, under the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1715, the Attorneys General perform a unique role by addressing the fairness of a proposed

settlement in class action cases.

The Attorneys General respectfully request the Court grant their motion for leave to file the 

attached amicus brief to address concerns about the proposed class action settlement. The parties’ 

motion for preliminary approval of the settlement seeks an unwritten, mass amendment to over 

650,000 mortgage contracts to charge the very fees which are alleged in this case to be illegal, 

excessive, and unnecessary. The amicus brief demonstrates that the proposed settlement is not fair, 

reasonable, or adequate. 

The amicus brief from the Attorneys General provides information about the impacts to 

states which would result from the proposed settlement to help the court evaluate its 

appropriateness. Accordingly, the Attorneys General respectfully request that the Court grant this 

motion for leave to file their amicus brief.

MEET AND CONFER CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO S.D. FLA. L.R. 7.1(A)(3)

I, Mawerdi A. Hamid, HEREBY CERTIFY that I conferred with all parties or nonparties 

who may be affected by the relief sought in the motion in a good faith effort to resolve the issues 

raised in the motion or have made reasonable efforts to do so. Specifically, I participated in a 

video conference with counsel for Plaintiffs and Defendants on January 22, 2021 at which time I 

advised that the Attorneys General would file this motion and an accompanying amicus brief by 

Case 0:20-cv-60633-RS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/29/2021 Page 3 of 5
January 29, 2021. During the video conference, Plaintiffs’ counsel stated that Plaintiffs did not 

object to this filing by the Attorneys General. On January 25, 2021, Intervenors’ counsel stated in 

an email that they did not object to this filing by the Attorneys General. On January 26, 2021, 

Defendants’ counsel indicated that while Defendants do not affirmatively consent to the 

Attorneys General’s motion, Defendants would not oppose it if certain conditions are met (see 

Exhibit D for these conditions).

Dated: January 29, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

KEITH ELLISON

Attorney General

State of Minnesota

/s/ Mawerdi A. Hamid

MAWERDI A. HAMID

Assistant Attorney General

Atty. Reg. No. 0393130

(admitted in the S.D.Fl via pro hac vice, ECF Doc. 

107)

445 Minnesota Street, Suite 1400

St. Paul, Minnesota 55101-2131

(651) 757-1452 (Voice)

(651) 297-8265 (Fax)

mawerdi.hamid@ag.state.mn.us

Submitted by:

ASHLEY B. MOODY

ATTORNEY GENERAL

s/ Christopher Sutter ______________ 

Christopher Sutter (Fla. Bar No. 422215) 

(Special Bar Number A5502502 )

Assistant Attorney General

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

110 Southeast Sixth Street, 10th Floor

Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301

Telephone: (954) 712-4600

Facsimile: (954) 527-3702

Case 0:20-cv-60633-RS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/29/2021 Page 4 of 5
Christopher.Sutter@myfloridalegal.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on January 29, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing with

CM/ECF, which will send notification to all counsel of record. 

Adam M. Moskowitz (Fla. Bar No. 984280) Timothy A. Andreu (Fla. Bar No. 443778)

adam@moskowitz-law.com Tandreu@bradley.com

Howard M. Bushman (Fla. Bar No. 364230) Diana N. Evans (Fla. Bar No. 98945)

howard@moskowitz-law.com Dnevans@bradley.com

Joseph M. Kaye (Fla. Bar No. 117520) Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

joseph@moskowitz-law.com 100 North Tampa Street, Suite 2200

Barbara C. Lewis (Fla. Bar No. 118114) Tampa, FL 33602

barbara@moskowitz-law.com P: (813) 559-5500

THE MOSKOWITZ LAW FIRM, PLLC F: (813) 229-5946

2 Alhambra Plaza Attorneys for PHH Mortgage Corporation

Suite 601

Coral Gables, FL 33134

Telephone: (305) 740-1423

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class

/s/ Christopher Sutter 

Assistant Attorney General

Fla. Bar 0422215

Case 0:20-cv-60633-RS Document 118 Entered on FLSD Docket 01/29/2021 Page 5 of 5