# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 6- 32 13

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Lesl ie W il so n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el la nt

v.

W el ls Farg o B an k, N.A.; U.S. Ban k Nat io na l As so ci at io n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an ts - App el le es

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Dis tri ct of M in ne so ta - Mi nn eap ol is

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: Feb ru ary 12 , 20 18 Fil ed : J ul y

17 , 20 18 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re SM ITH, Chi ef J ud ge , MURPHY an d C OLLOTO N, Circ ui t J ud ge s. *

__ __ __ __ __ __
PER CURI AM.

Thi s op in io n is fil ed by Ch ie f Ju dg e Sm it h an d Ju dg e Co ll ot on un de r Eig ht h * Ci rcu it Ru le 47 E.Lesl ie W il so n ap pe al s th e di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t in fav or 1 of W el ls Farg o Ban k, N.A., an d U.S. Ban k, N.A. on he r cl ai m s th at W el ls Farg o vi ol at ed Mi nn es ot a’s du al -tr ack in g st at ut e, Mi nn . S ta t. Ann . § 5 82 .04 3. We affi rm

.

I. Bac kg ro un d Lesl ie W il so n an d he r hu sb an d DeAun dr es W il so n bo ug ht a co nd om in iu m in Mi nn eap ol is
, Mi nn es ot a, in 20 00 an d fin an ced th e pu rch as e wit h a m or tg ag e lo an

. In 20 03 , th e W il so ns refi na nc ed th ei r m or tg ag e lo an an d si gn ed a pr om is so ry no te in th e

am ou nt of $1 98 ,00 0, gi vi ng a m or tg ag e to th e le nd er as se cu rit y fo r th e de bt

. The

m or tg ag e was im m ed ia te ly as si gn ed to W el ls Farg o an d la te r as si gn ed to U.S. Ban k. W el ls Farg o rem ai n e d t h e s erv ic er on th e lo an aft er th e as si gn m en t to U.S. Ban k (h erei na fte r, co ll ect iv el y

refe rred to as “ W el ls Farg o” ).

Th e W il so ns se pa rat ed in 20 04 , an d DeAun dr es m ov ed ou t of th e 2

co nd om in iu m

. D eAu nd res rem ai ne d on th e m or tg ag e, ho wev er, an d co nt in ue d

m ak in g s om e o f th e m or tg ag e p ay m en ts

.

O n M a r c h 18 , 20 14 , W el ls Farg o no ti fie d th e W il so ns th at th ei r lo an was i n de fau lt fo r fai lu re t o mak e p a ym en ts

. On May 5, 20 14 , W el ls Farg o in fo rm ed th e W il so ns th at th e mo r t g ag e wou ld be refe rred fo r fo recl os ur e an d as ke d th em to

co nt act W el ls Farg o fo r as si st an ce. W el ls Farg o al so in cl ud ed “ a su m mar y of th e effo r t s [ it ] ha [d ] m ad e (k no wn as ‘los s m it ig at io n’) to pr ov id e m or tg ag e as si st an ce op ti on s t ha t m ig ht he lp [th e Wils on s] avo id for ecl os ur e.” Ap pe nd ix to Defen da nt ’s Mem or an du m

of Law i n S up po rt o f Mo ti on fo r Su m m ary Ju dg m en t, At ta ch m en t 1 , at 47 , W il so n v. W el ls Far go Ban k, N.A. et al

. , No. 0: 15 -cv -0 17 68 -PAM- TNL (D.

The Hon or ab le Pau l A. Mag nu so n, Uni te d St at es Dis trict Judg e fo r th e Dis tri ct 1 of Mi nn es ot a.
Thro ug ho ut th es e pr oc eed in gs , th e W il so ns ha ve ne ve r di vo rced or l e g a ll y 2

se pa rat ed

. -2

-Mi nn

. Apr

. 1, 20 16 ), ECF No. 23 -1

. W he n th e W il so ns di d no t res po nd to th is le tt er,

W el ls Farg o i ns ti tu te d fo recl os ur e p ro ceed in gs on Ju ne 30 , 20 14

. The sh eri ff’s sale

was sc he du le d fo r Sep te m be r 12 , 20 14 , and th e Wils on s wer e in fo rm ed of t hi s d at e in a le tt er d at ed Ju ly 22, 2 01 4.

On Ju ly 30 , 20 14 , Lesl ie wro te to W el ls Farg o as ki ng fo r lo an as si st an ce. Sh e

su bm it te d a “ Hard sh ip Affi da vi t Fo rm ” an d a “ Dod d- Fran k Cert ifi c a t i o n

. ” App el la nt ’s Ap p. at 35 –3 7. Bo th do cu m en ts are da te d J ul y 30 , 20 14 . Th e Hard sh ip Affi da vi t Fo rm , pr ov id ed by W el ls Farg o, in di cat es , “ I am /We are re qu es ti ng re vi ew of m y /o ur cu rren t fin an ci al si tu at io n to de te rm in e whe th er I/we qu al ify fo r te m po rary

or pe rm an en t m or tg a g e r e l ie f op ti on s.” Id

. at 35 (em ph as is ad de d)

. On Aug us t 4, 20 14 , W el ls Farg o ack no wled ge d th at it ha d “ rece iv ed th e do cu m en ts y ou se nt us to

m ov e fo rward wit h y ou r re qu es t fo r mor tg ag e as si st an ce .” App en di x to Defen da nt ’s Mem or an du m

of Law in Su pp or t o f Mo ti on for Su m m ary Ju dg m en t, At ta ch m en t 2 , at 3, W il so n v. W el ls Far go Ban k, N.A. et al

. , No. 0: 15

- c v
- 0 1 7 6 8

- P AM-TNL (D. Mi nn . Apr. 1 , 20 16 ), ECF No. 2 3- 2 (e m ph as is ad de d)

.

On Aug us t 5, 20 14 , W el ls Farg o wro te to th e W il so ns an d ex pl ai ne d th at W el ls Farg o ne ed ed to rece iv e cert ai n do cu m en ta ti on by Sep te m be r 4, 20 14

. The d o c u men t at io n was req ui red to de te rm in e whe th er th e W il so ns qu al ifi ed fo r a lo a n

m od ifi cat io n. The req ue st ed do cu m en ta ti on in cl ud ed : ( 1 ) a “ Hom eo wne r Fi na nc ia l Ass is ta nc e Fo rm ,” in cl ud in g a “ ‘hard sh ip affi da vi t’ an d ad dit ion al H ar dshi p A ff idav it fo rm s to be co m

pl et ed an d si

gn ed by al l bo rr ow er

s ”; (2 ) a “ Dod d- Fran k Cert ifi cat io n Fo rm ”; (3 ) “ [a] si gn ed an d da te d co py of th e en cl os ed IRS Fo rm 45 06 -T (Req ue st fo r Tran sc rip t of Tax Ret ur n) fo r ea ch bo rro wer ”; an d (4 ) “ [p ]roo f of in co m e in fo rm at io n

. . . to ve rif

y al l in co m e of ea ch bo rr ow er .” Id

. at 7 (e m ph as es ad de d) . W it h re sp ect
to pr oo f of “ [g ]ros s m on th ly in co m e,” W el ls Farg o ex pl ai ne d th at if t he W il so ns

co u l d n ot pr ov id e pa y st ub s, each of th em ha d to su bm it a le tt er on em pl oyer le tt erh ead
, si gn ed an d da te d wit hi n th e la st 30 da y s, sh owi ng y ear- to -d at e in co m e. Id

. W el ls Farg o al so ex pl ai ne d t ha t “ ot he r in co m e” in cl ud ed ch il d- su pp or t pa y m en ts ;

-3

-pr oo f of su ch pa y m en ts co ul d be sh own by a di vo rce de cree or ot he r le ga l ag reem en t

fil ed wit h a co ur t an d by pr ov id in g co pi e s o f b a n k st at em en ts or ot he r do cu m en ts sh owi ng su ch pa y m en ts

. Id . at 8

.

It is un di sp ut ed t h a t Lesl ie un de rs to od th at “ W el ls Farg o ha d a de ad li ne fo r [h er] to su bm it al l [req ue st ed ] do cu m en ta ti on ” an d th at sh e “ ha d to su bm it al l of th e req ui red do cu m en ta ti on to b e c o n s id ered fo r a lo an m od ifi cat io n.” App en di x to Defen da nt ’s Mem or an du m of Law in Su pp or t of Mo ti on fo r Su m mar y J u d g m en t, Att ach m en t 3, at 25 , 26 , W il so n v. W

el ls Far go Ban k, N.A

. et al

. , No. 0:1 5-cv -0 17 68 -PAM- TNL (D. Mi nn

. Apr

. 1, 20 16 ), ECF No. 23 -3 (em ph as es ad de d)

. Sh e al so te st ifi ed th at sh e un de rs to od th at un le ss sh e ha d pr oo f of a d iv or ce or a qu it cl ai m de ed fro m DeAun dr es (wh ic h sh e di d no t ha ve ), DeAun dr es was req ui red
to pa rti ci pa te in th e lo an -m od ifi cat io n pr oc es s be cau se he ha d si gn ed th e pr om is so ry

no te an d m or tg ag e o n t he pro pe rty.

Lesl ie fir st as ke d DeAun dr es to pa rti ci pa te in th e lo an -m od ifi cat io n pr oc es s in Aug us t 20 14

. He de cl in ed to do so

. DeAun dr e s “d i d n ’t wan t to en ta ng le [th ei r] fin an ces .” Id

. at 19

. Thu s, he di d no t si gn th e Hom eo wne r Fi na nc ia l Ass is ta nc e Fo rm

or su bm it an y of th e ot he r in fo rm at io n th at W el ls Farg o req ue st ed to effe ct ua te a

m od ifi cat io n.

On Aug us t 21 , 20 14 , W el ls Farg o wro te to th e W il so ns an d ex pl ai ne d th at th ey st il l need ed to su bm it do cu m en ta ti on to W el ls Farg o for it to be gi n pro ces si ng th ei r req ue st fo r m or tg a ge as si st an ce. W el ls Farg o st at ed th at it ne ed ed th e m is si ng do cu m en ts by Sep te mb e r 5 , 20 14 , th us ad di ng on e da y to th e pr ev io us ly st at ed de ad li ne of S ep te m

be r 4, 2 01 4.

W e l l s F a rg o wro te to th e W il so ns ag ai n on Aug us t 26 , 20 14 , rei te rat in g th at do cu m en ts ne ces sa ry fo r th ei r ap pl ic at io n were st il l m is si ng ; th e le tt er sp eci fic al ly id en ti fie d t he do cu m en ts th at DeAun dr es ne ed ed to su bm it , in cl ud in g (1 ) “ a si gn ed

-4

-an d da te d Hom eo wne r s Fi na nc ia l Ass is ta nc e Fo rm ”; (2 ) “ a si gn ed an d da te d IRS

F o r m 45 06 T”; (3 ) “ a si gn ed an d da te d ha rd sh ip affi da vi t” ; (4 ) do cu m en ta ti on t o

ve rif y in co m e (in cl u d in g pa y st ub s) ; (5 ) “ a si gn ed an d da te d Dod d- Fran k Cert ifi cat io n” ; an d (6 ) p r o f it -an d- lo ss st at em en ts

. App en di x to Defen da nt ’s Mem or an du m

of Law in Su pp or t o f Mo ti on for Su m m ary Ju dg m en t, At ta ch m en t 2 , at 38 –3 9. Well s Fa rg o a sk ed th e Wils on s to su bm it th e d oc um en ts by Sept em be r 2, 20 14

.

W he n Sep te m

be r 2 0 1 4 a r riv ed
, DeAun dr es st il l ha d no t pr ov id ed an y of th e req ui red do cu m en ts

. Acco rd in g to Lesl ie
, “ W el ls Farg o [h ad ] in fo rm ed [h er] th at [DeAu nd res ] ne ed ed to be pa rt of th e ap pl ic at io n pr oc es s.” App en di x to Defen da nt ’s Mem or an du m of

Law in Su pp or t o f Mo ti on for Su m m ary Ju dg m en t, At ta ch m en t 3 , at 27

. The refo re, sh e un de rs to od th at he r “ ap pl ic at io n was in co m pl et e” wit ho ut hi s do cu m en ta ti on

. Id

. On S ep te m be r 3, 20 14 , W el ls Farg o no ti fie d th e W il so ns th at be cau se it ha d no t rece iv ed a co m pl et ed ap pl ic at io n, it was un ab le to of fer th em a lo ss

m it ig at io n o pt io n. Well s Fa rg o p ro ceed ed to ward s s al e o f th e co nd om in um

.

Bu t on Sep te m

be r 4, 20 14 , W el ls Farg o di sc ov ered th at wh i l e i t s A ug us t 26 le tt er to th e W il so ns ga ve th em un ti l Sep te m be r 2 to su bm it th e req ui red in fo rm at io n, it s earl ie r le tt er on Aug us t 21 ha d gi ve n th em un ti l Sep te m be r 5 to su bm it th e do cu m en ts

. As a res ul t, W el ls Farg o rev ie wed th e W il so ns ’ fil e ag ai n on Sep te m be r 5, 20 14

. On th at da te , W el ls Farg o’s C a n c e ll at io n Rev ie w Team fo un d th at th e in fo rm at io n req ue st ed fro m DeAun dr es was st il l m is si ng

. Tha t sa m e d a y, Lesl ie

co nt act ed W el ls Farg o to in fo rm it th at DeAun dr es ha d ag reed to pa rti ci pa te i n t he
pr oc es s an d su bm it th e req ue st ed d o c um en ts

. W el ls Farg o ad vi se d Lesl ie th at it

wou ld no t p os tp on e th e sh eri ff’s sa le sc he du le d fo r Sep te m be r 12 , 20 14 , un le ss th e W il so ns ’ ap pl ic at io n was co m pl et e.

-5

-On Sep te m be r 8, 20 14 , th e W il so ns rece iv ed a le tt er st at in g, “ I’m writ in g to le t
y ou kn ow we rece iv ed th e do cu m en ts y ou se nt us to m ov e fo rward wit h y ou r req ue st fo r m or tg ag e as si st an ce. Tha nk y ou fo r pr ov id in g y ou r in fo rm at io n.” App e l la nt ’s App

. at 26

. The le tt er al so pr ov id ed th at aft er W el ls Farg o “ en su re[s ] th at we ha ve al l th e d oc um en ts we ne ed , we wil l revi ew an d val id at e th os e m at eri al s to de te rm in e if
y ou ’re el ig ib le fo r a lo an m od ifi cat io n.” Id

. Bu t, th e ne xt d a y, a We ll s Farg o rep res en ta ti ve wro te ag ai n to th e W il so ns , st at in g, “ You r ap pl ic at io n ha s be en p e n d i n g fo r a co ns id erab le pe rio d of ti m e an d we ha ve no t y et rece iv ed a co m p l e t e ap pl ic at io n. Bec au se y ou ha ve no t pr ov id ed m e wit h al l th e req ui red do cu m en ta ti on , to co m pl et e th e ap pl ic at io n, we are no t ab le to of fer y ou as si st an ce op ti on s.” Id

. at 28

.

W el ls Farg o rev ie wed th e Wi l s o n s ’ lo an fil e on Sep te m be r 10 , 11 , an d 12 , 20 14 , to de te rm in e whe th er th e W il so ns ha d su bm it te d t h e n e ces sa ry do cu m en ts

. W el ls Farg o rep res en ta t i ve s sp ok e wit h Lesl ie an d to ld he r wha t do cu m en ts were

m is si ng

. Tho ug h W el ls Farg o rece iv ed so m e of th e req ui red do cu m en ts fro m DeAun dr es on Sep te m

be r 10 an d 1 1, 2 01 4, Well s Fa rg o d id no t rece iv e al l of th em by 10 :0 0 a.m

. on Sep te m

be r 12 , 20 14 , th e ti m e o f th e fo recl os ur e sa le

. At tha t tim e, W el ls Farg o was st il l m is si ng pr oo f of DeAun dr es ’s in co m e fro m hi s em pl oyer, pr oo f of ch il d- su pp or t pa y m en ts rece iv ed by Lesl ie
, an d a si gn ed co py of DeAundre s’ s m os t

rece nt bu si ne ss an d p ers on al tax ret ur ns

.

On Sep te m

be r 12 , 20 14 , at 1 0 : 0 0 a

. m., th e sh eri ff’s sa le was he ld
, an d U.S. Ban k pu rch as ed th e pr op ert y

. The sa le was su bjec t to a si x- m on th red em pt io n pe rio d, whi ch e x p ire d on Mar ch 12 , 20 15

. The W il so ns di d no t red eem th e pr op ert y fro m fo recl os ur e.

On Mar ch 11 , 20 15 , th e da y be fo re th e red em pt io n pe rio d ex pi red
, Lesl ie fil ed 3

s u i t i n M in ne so ta st at e co ur t ag ai ns t W el ls Farg o, al le gi ng th at it vi ol at e d

DeAun dr es is no t a p art y to th is cas e. 3

-6

-Mi nn es ot a’s du al -tr ack in g st at ut e, Mi nn

. St at

. Ann

. § 58 2.0 43

. Rel ev an t to th e

pr es en t ap pe al
, Co un t 1 al le ge d th at th e fo recl os ur e w a s i l l eg al be cau se it vi ol at ed

su bd iv is io n 6( c) of § 58 2.0 43

. Co un t 2 al le ge d th at W el ls Farg o di d no t al lo w Lesl ie

a reas on ab le ti m e to su bm it do cu m en ts , as s u b d i vi si on 5( 2) of § 58 2.0 43 req ui res

. W el ls Farg o rem ov ed th e m at te r to fed eral co ur t an d m ov ed for su m m ary jud gm en t

on all cla im s. Th e d is tri ct co ur t g ran te d Well s Fa rg o’s m ot io n. Les li e ap pe al s.

II. Dis cu ss io n Lesl ie arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in gr an ti n g s u m m ary jud gm en t to We l l s Farg o on he r cl ai m s th at W el ls Farg o vi ol at ed Mi nn es ot a’s du al -tr ack in g st at ut e. W e rev ie w de no vo th e di st ric t co ur t’s gr an t of su m m ary jud gm en t. To rg er

so n

v. Ci ty of Roc he st er , 64 3 F.3 d 10 31 , 10 42 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ) (en ba nc ) (ci ta ti on om it te d)

.

A. Min n. S ta t. An n. § 52 3.0 43 , su bd . 6(c )—Du al Tra cki ng Lesl ie ’s pr i mar y a r g um en t is th at W el ls Farg o vi ol at ed Mi nn

. St at

. Ann

. § 5 82 .04 3, s ub d. 6 (c), t he “ du al -tr ack in g” pro vi si on of t he st at ut e, whi ch pro vi de s:

If th e se rv ic er rece iv es a lo ss mit ig at io n ap pl ic at io n aft er th e fo recl os ur e
sa le ha s be en sc he du le d, bu t be fo re m id ni gh t of th e se ve nt h bu si ne ss da y pr io r to th e fo recl os ur e sa le da te , th e se rv ic er m us t ha lt th e fo re cl os ur e
sa le an d eva lu at e th e ap

pl ic at io n

. If req ui red to ha lt th e fo recl os ur e sa le

an d ev al ua te th e ap pl ic at io n, th e se rv ic er m us t no t m ov e fo r an or de r of fo recl os ur e, se ek a fo recl os ur e jud gm en t, or co nd uc t a f o r ecl os ur e
sa le

. . . .
(Em ph as es ad de d.)

Lesl ie co nt en ds th at al l th at was ne ces sa ry to tri gg er W el ls Farg o’s ob li ga ti on to ha lt th e fo recl os ur e sa le was he r su bm is si on of he r Hard sh i p A f fid av it Fo rm on Ju ly 30 , 20 14

. Sh e no te s th at W el ls Farg o ack no wled ge d rece iv i n g he r fo rm on

-7

-Aug us t 4, 20 14 , an d ack no wled ge d rece iv in g req ue st ed do cu m en ta ti on on Sep te m be r 8, 20 1 4

. Bec au se W el ls Farg o ne ve r ha lt ed th e fo recl os ur e sa le aft er rece iv in g he r fo rm an d ack no wled gi ng rece ip t of he r do cu m en ta ti on , Le sl ie m ai nt ai ns th at W el ls Farg o vi ol at ed th e du al -tr ack in g st at u t e

. S h e a rg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t erre d in fin di ng th at th e s t a t ut e req ui res su bm is si on of a “ co m pl et e” lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n be fo re a se rv ic er m us t ha l t th e fo recl os ur e sa le be cau se no su ch
req ui rem en t ex is ts in th e st at ut e.

Sect io n “ 58 2.0 43 (20 16 ) req ui res m or tg ag e se rv ic ers to no ti fy m or tg ag or s o f lo ss m it ig at io n op ti on s be fo re refe rri ng th e m or tg ag e fo r fo recl os ur e.” Li tt er er v. Rus hmo re Lo an Mgmt

. Se rv s., LLC fo r U.S. Ban k Na t’l Ass ’n , 90 5 N.W .2d 62 3, 62 4 (Mi nn

. 20 18 ) (ci ti ng Mi nn

. St at

. Ann

. § 58 2.0 43 , su bd s. 3, 5)

. The st at ut e’s pu rp os e is to “ pr oh ib it [] ‘dua l tra ck in g,’ in whi ch a se rv ic er refe rs a m or tg ag e to an at to rn ey fo r fo recl os ur e whi le si m ul ta ne ou sl y pr oc es si ng a lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n.” Id

. (ci ti ng Mi nn

. St at

. Ann

. § 58 2.0 43 , su bd

. 6)

. The st at ut e pr ov id es “ a cau se of act io n fo r m or tg ag or s to en

joi n or se t as id e a fo recl os ur e sa le ba se d on a vi ol at io n of se ct io n 58 2.0 43 .” Id

. (ci ti ng Mi nn . Sta t. An n. § 58 2.0 43 , su bd . 7(a )).

Sect io n 58 2.0 43 di st in gu is he s be twee n a lo ss m it ig at io n a p p l ic at io n an d a

“ req ue st fo r a lo an m od ifi cat io n or ot he r lo ss m it ig at io n op ti on .” Mi nn

. St at

. Ann .,
su bd

. 5( 2)

. Su bd iv is io n 6( c) of § 58 2.0 43 req ui res a m or tg a g e s e r vi cer to “ ha lt [a] fo recl os ur e sa le ” on ly whe n “ th e se rv ic er rece iv es a lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n aft er th e fo recl os ur e sa le ha s be en sc he du le d.” Onc e a se rv ic er rece iv es a “ lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n,” th e se rv ic er m us t “ ev al ua te th e m or tg ag or fo r al l av ai la b l e lo ss

m it ig at io n op ti on s pr io r to refe rri ng a m or tg ag e lo an to an at to rn ey fo r fo recl os ur e.” Mi nn

. St at

. Ann

. § 58 2.0 43 , su b d

. 5( 3)

. Add it io na ll y , “ aft er rev ie w of th e lo ss

m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n,” th e se rv i c e r mu st “ ti m el y of fer th e m or tg ag or a lo an

m od ifi cat io n if th e m or t g a go r is el ig ib le or , if no t, ti m el y of fer th e m or tg ag or an y ot he r lo ss m it ig at io n op ti on fo r whi ch th e m or tg ag or is el ig ib le .” Id

. § 58 2.0 43 , su bd

. 5( 4)

.

-8

-By co m pa ris on , su bd iv is io n 5( 2) o f § 5 8 2 .04 3 pr ov id es th at a bo rro wer’s

“ re qu es t fo r a lo an m od ifi cat io n or ot he r lo ss m it ig at io n op ti on ” tri gg ers a se rv ic er’s du ty to “ ex erci se reas on ab le di li ge nc e in ob ta in in g do cu m en ts an d in fo rm at io n fro m th e m or tg ag or to co mpl et e a lo ss mit ig at io n ap pl ic at io n , faci li ta te th e su bm is si on an d

rev ie w of lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io ns , an d gi ve th e m or tg ag or a reas on ab le am ou nt of ti m e to pr ov id e th e req ui red d o c u men ts .” (Em ph as es ad de d)

. Thu s, su bd iv is io n 5( 2) req ui res a se rv ic er to ta ke st ep s to h e l p t h e b o r r owe r tu rn a re qu es t fo r a lo an

m od ifi cat io n or ot he r lo ss m it ig at io n op ti on in to a fo rm al lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n, whi le su bd iv is io n 6 se ts ou t a se rv ic er’s ob li ga ti on s on ce th e req ue st ha s be co m e an
ap pl ic at io n

.

Lesl ie ’s su bm is si on of th e Hard sh ip Affi da vi t Fo rm on Ju ly 30 , 20 14 , was a

re qu es t fo r a lo an m od ifi cat io n un de r su bd iv is io n 5( 2) th at di d no t ob li ga te W el ls Farg o to h a l t th e fo recl os ur e sa le

. The fo rm pr ov id es th at th e W il so ns were

“ re qu es ti ng re vi ew

. . . to de te rm in e whe th er [th ey ] qu al if i [ e d ] f o r te m po rary or pe rm an en t m or tg ag e rel ie f op ti on s.” App el la nt ’s App

. at 35 (em ph as is ad de d)

. Lesl ie

ev en ch arac te riz es he r se nd in g of th es e do cu m en ts as a “ lo an m od ifi cat io n re qu es t .” App el la nt ’s Br. at 11 (“ Not wit hs ta nd in g th e rece ip t of th e lo an m od ifi cat io n re qu es t , th e de fen da nt di d no t ha lt th e fo recl os ur e

. . . .” (em ph as is ad de d) ); id

. (“ [O]n Aug us t 4, 20 14 , W el ls Farg o ack no wled ge d rece ip t of th e re qu es t fo r th e lo an m od ifi cat io n to a le tt e r t o th e App el la nt .” (em ph as is ad de d) ). On Aug us t 4, 20 14 , W el ls Farg o ack no wled ge d th at it ha d rece iv ed th e W il s o n s ’ “ re qu es t fo r m or tg ag e as si st an ce.” App en di x to Defen da nt ’s Mem or an du m of Law in Su pp or t of Mot io n for Sum m ary Ju dg m en t, At ta ch m en t 2 , at 3 (em ph as is ad de d)

.

The qu es ti on , th eref

or e, is whe th er t h e do cu m en ta ti on th at Lesl ie su bm it te d aft er J u l y 3 0, 20 14 , to W el ls Farg o is su ffi ci en t to co ns ti tu te a lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n th at ob li ga te d W el ls Farg o to ha lt th e fo recl os ur e pr oc eed in g. Lesl ie ha s fai le d to sh ow th at W el ls Farg o recei ve d al l of th e do cu m en ta ti on it req ue st ed fro m

-9

-DeAun dr es for th e lo ss m it ig at io n a pp li cat io n. Th e rec or d s ho ws t ha t at th e ti m e o f

th e fo recl os ur e sa le
, W el ls Farg o st il l la ck ed pr oo f of DeAun dr es ’s in co m e fro m hi s

em pl oyer, pr oo f of ch il d- su pp or t pa y m en ts rece iv ed by Lesl ie
, an d a si gn ed co py of DeAun dr es ’s m os t re cen t b us in es s an d p ers on al tax ret ur ns

. 4

The Mi nn es ot a st at e co ur ts ha ve no t d e f i n e d “ lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n” in § 58 2.0 43 , su bd

. 6( c). Howev er, in W el ls Far go Ban k, N.A. v. La ns in g , th e Mi nn es ot a Co ur t of App eal s reject ed an ap pe ll an t’s arg um en t th at W el ls Farg o vi ol at ed th e du al

tra ck in g st at ut e, fin di ng “n o ev id en ce in th e reco rd in di cat in g th at ap pe ll an t

co mpl et ed or su bmi tt ed a lo ss -m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n to W el ls Farg o.” No. A14 -0 86 8, 20 15 W L 50 66 55 , at * 3 (M in n. Ct . App . Feb . 9, 2 01 5) (em ph as is ad de d)

. 5

On Sep te m

be r 8, 20 14 , th e W il so ns di d r ecei ve a le tt er fro m W el ls Farg o 4 ad vi si ng th em th at it ha d “ rece iv ed th e do cu m en ts y ou se nt us to m ov e fo rward wit h y ou r req ue st fo r m or tg ag e as si st an ce.” App el la nt ’s App

. at 26

. Bu t th e le tt er al so pr ov id e d t h a t W el ls Farg o ha d to “ en su re th at [it ] ha [d ] al l th e do cu m en ts [it ]

ne ed [ed ]” an d m

us t “ rev ie w an d va li da te th os e m at eri al s to de te rm in e if [th e W il so ns were] el ig ib le fo r a lo an m od ifi cat io n.” Id

. Th e l e t t e r n e ve r st at ed th at th e W il so ns ha d su bm it te d al l ne ces sa ry do cu m en ta ti on

. In fact
, th e ne xt da y , W el ls Farg o wro te ag ai n to th e W il so ns , st at in g, “ You r ap pl ic at io n ha s be en pe nd in g fo r a co ns id erab le pe rio d of ti m e an d we ha ve no t y et rece iv ed a co m pl et e ap pl i c a t i o n. Bec au se y ou ha ve no t pr ov id ed m e wit h al l th e req ui red do cu men ta ti on to co m pl et e th e ap pl ic at io n, we are no t ab le to of fer y ou as si st an ce op ti on s.” Id

. at 28

. Lesl ie ha s no t id en ti fie d an y ev id en ce i n th e reco rd th at sh e di d, in fact
, su bm it al l req ue st ed do cu m en ts

. In La ns in g , th e ap pe ll an t rai se d fo r t h e f i r s t ti m e on ap pe al th e is su e of 5 whe th er W el ls Farg o vi ol at ed § 58 2.0 43 , su bd

. 6. As a res ul t, th e co ur t no te d th at , as
a ge ne ral ru le
, it di d no t “ co ns id er m at te rs no t arg ue d to an d co ns id ered by th e di st ric t

co ur t.” Id

. at *3

. Howev er, th e co ur t de te rm in ed th at ev en if th e ap pe l l a n t ha d pr op erl y rai se d t he is su e, th e “ ap pe ll an t’s cl ai m [was ] no t p ers ua si ve .” Id

.

-1 0-The La ns in g co ur t di d no t fu rth er el ab or at e on wha t co ns ti tu te s a “ co m pl et ed ” l o s s mi t ig at io n ap pl ic at io n, an d we ne ed no t do so in th e pr es en t cas e. In he r de po si ti on , Lesl ie co nf

irmed he r un de rs ta nd in g th at sh e ha d to su bm it al l req ue st ed do cu m en ta ti on to be el ig ib le f or th e lo an m od ifi cat io n an d ha d to do so by th e de ad li ne

. Lesl ie al so un de rs to od th at he r “ a p p l i cat io n was in co m pl et e” wit ho ut DeAun dr es ’s do cu m en ta ti on

. App en di x to Defen da nt ’s Mem or an du m of Law in Su pp or t of Mo ti on fo r Su m m ary Ju dg m en t, Att ach m en t 3, at 27

. Bas ed on th is fact ua l

reco rd
, W el ls Farg o di d no t rece iv e a “ co m pl et e d ” l o s s miti ga ti on ap pl ic at io n th at ob li ga te d W el ls Farg o to ha lt th e fo recl os ur e sa le

. Se e La ns in g , 20 15 W L 50 66 55 , at *3

.

A c c or di ng ly, we ho ld th at th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t err in gr an ti ng su m m ar y jud gm en t o n Les li e’s du al -tr ack in g c la im

.

B. Se ct io n 5 23 .04 3, s ub d. 5 (2 )– Rea so na bl e Amou nt

of Time 6 Lesl ie al so arg ue s th at ge nu in e is su es of m at eri al fact ex is t ov er whe th er W el ls Farg o fai le d to al lo w he r a reas on ab le am o u n t o f ti m e to pr ov id e th e req ui red do cu m en ts

. Sh e no te s th at fo ur da y s be fo re th e fo recl os ur e sa le
, W el ls Farg o ga ve he r

In he r op en in g b r i e f, Lesl ie as se rts th at “ [t]he re were ge nu in e is su es of 6

m at eri al fact whi ch pr ecl ud ed su m m ary jud gm en t wit h res pe ct to co un ts two an d th ree. ” A p pe ll an t’s Br. at 42

. Co un t 3 al le ge d a vi ol at io n of § 58 2.0 43 , su bd

. 5( 5)

. Alt ho ug h Lesl ie m en ti on s Co un t 3, no wh e r e in he r br ie f do es sh e ci te or di sc us s § 58 2.0 43 , su bd

. 5( 5)

. As a res ul t, W el ls Farg o arg ue s in it s br ie f th at Lesl ie waiv ed

an y ch al le ng e to th e di s t r i c t c o ur t’s jud gm en t on he r su bd iv is io n 5( 5) cl ai m

. Se e App el le e’s Br. at 15

. In he r rep ly br ie f, Lesl ie di sa gr ees , arg ui ng th at sh e “ ch al le ng es th e Dis tri ct Co ur t’s ap pl ic at io n of [§ ] 58 2.0 43 in al l as pe ct s

. . . .” App el la nt ’s Rep ly Br. at 28

. Yet, Lesl ie th erea fte r do es no t ci te or di sc us s su bd iv is io n 5 ( 5 )

. B e cau se

“ [t]he su bs ta nc e of [Les li e’s] op en in g br ie f fai ls to pr es en t an y m ean in gf ul arg um en t ab ou t [Co un t 3 an d § 58 2.0 43 , su bd

. 5( 5) ],

. . . we th eref or e co nc lu de th at [Les li e] ha s waiv ed rev ie w of [h er cl ai m ]. ” Akin s v

. Kn ig ht
, 86 3 F.3 d 10 84 , 10 87 n.2 (8 th Ci r. 20 17 ) (p er cu ria m ) (ci ta ti on om it te d)
, cer t. d en ie d , 13 8 S . Ct. 9 92 (20 18 ).

-1 1-a le tt er in di cat in g it ha d rece iv ed he r lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n; th eref or e, it sh ou ld ha ve ha lt ed th e sa le an d gi ve n he r a reas on ab le am ou nt of ti m e to su bm it do cu m en ts

ne ces sa ry to ev al ua te he r req ue st

. Sh e as se rts th at “ reas on ab le ne ss ” is a qu es ti on of fact fo r th e jury, no t th e co ur t. Sh e al so arg ue s th at th e di st ric t co ur t di sr eg ard ed fact s sh owi ng th at W el ls Farg o w a s r e qu es ti ng do cu m en ts th ro ug h th e da te of th e fo recl os ur e sa le

. On th at m or ni ng , sh e arg ue s, W el ls Farg o was req ue st in g ad di ti on al do cu m en ts th at DeAun dr es ha d s ub m it te d.

Su bd iv is io n 5( 2) of § 58 2.0 43 pr ov id es th at aft er a se rv ic er rece iv es “ a req ue st fo r a lo an m od ifi cat io n or ot he r lo ss m it ig at io n op ti on ,” it m us t “ ex erci se reas on ab le di li ge nc e in ob ta in in g do cu m en ts an d in fo rm at io n fro m th e m or tg ag or to co m pl et e a lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n, faci li ta te th e su bm is si on an d rev ie w of lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io ns , an d gi ve th e m or tg ag or a re as o n ab le amo un t of ti me to pr ov id e th e req ui red do cu m en ts .” (Em ph as is ad de d.) Lesl ie arg ue s th at whe th er a se rv ic er gav e

a bo rro wer a “ reas on ab le am ou nt of ti m e” t o p ro vi de do cu m en ts is alwa y s a fact ua l
qu es ti on fo r res ol ut io n by th e fact fin de r. Bu t Mi nn es ot a la w in di cat es th at wha t

co ns ti tu te s a “ re a s on ab le am ou nt of ti m e” is a qu es ti on of la w if th e fact s are

un di sp ut ed

. Cf

. Gerg en v. Co mm’r of Pub

. Sa fe ty , 54 8 N.W .2d 30 7, 3 09 (Mi nn . Ct. App

. 19 96 ) (“ W he th er a dr iv er’s rig ht to co un se l was vi nd ic at ed be co m es a qu es ti on of la w fo r th e ap pe ll at e co ur t if th e fact s are un di sp ut ed .” (ci ta ti on om it te d) ); Pete rs

v. Co mm’r of Pub

. Sa

fe ty , No. C0-9 4- 15 01 , 19 95 W L 59 26 5, at *2 (Mi nn

. Ct

. App

. Feb

. 14 , 19 95 ) (“ W he th er a pe rs on was gi ve n a reas on ab le am ou nt of ti m e to co nt act

co un se l i s a mi x ed qu es ti on of fact an d la w. Onc e th e ‘facts are es ta bl is he d, th ei r si gn ifi can ce b eco m es a qu es ti on of l aw.’” (cit at io ns om it te d) ).

Here, th e un di sp ut ed fact s sh ow t h e f o ll owi ng

. Lesl ie req ue st ed a lo an

m od ifi cat io n on Ju ly 30 , 20 14

. W el ls Farg o ga ve Lesl ie co nf li ct in g da te s as to whe n th os e do cu men t s w e re du e: Sep te m be r 4, Sep te m

be r 5, an d Sep te m

be r 2. On Sep te m be r 3, W el ls Farg o wro te to th e W il so ns an d ex pl ai ne d th at be cau se it ha d no t

-1 2-rece iv ed a co m pl et ed ap pl ic at io n, it was un ab le to of fer th em a lo ss m it ig at io n op ti on

. The fo ll owi ng da y , on Sep te m be r 4, W el ls Farg o di sc ov ered th at whi le it s Aug us t 26 le tt er to th e W il so ns ga ve th em un ti l Sep te m be r 2 to su bm it th e req ui red in fo rm at io n, it s earl ie r le tt er on Aug us t 21 ha d gi ve n th e W il so ns un ti l Sep te m be r 5 to su bm it th e in fo rm at io n. Thu s, W el ls Farg o rev ie wed th e W il so ns ’ lo an fil e ag ai n on Sep te m be r 5. On th at da te , W el ls Farg o’s Can cel la ti on Rev ie w Team fo un d th at th e in fo rm at io n req ue st ed fro m DeAun dr es was st il l m is si ng

. Th a t s a me da y (Sep te m be r 5)
, Lesl ie

co nt act ed W el ls Farg o to in fo rm it th at DeAun dr es ha d ag reed to pr ov id e inf or m at io n. W el ls Farg o to ld he r th at it wou ld no t p o s t p on e th e sh eri ff’s sa le sc he du le d fo r Sep te m be r 12 un le ss th e W il so ns ’ ap pl ic at io n was co m pl et e. Des pi te th e Sep te m be r 5, 20 14 de ad li ne , W el ls Farg o co nt in ue d to rev ie w th e W i l s on s’ fil e an d acce pt do cu m en ts fro m

th em un ti l Se pt em

be r 12 , 20 14

.

Bas ed on th e co nf

li ct in g du e da te s in th e le tt ers th at W el ls Farg o se nt th e W il so ns , W el ls Farg o ga ve th e W il so ns u n t i l S e pt em be r 5, 20 14 —3 2 da y s aft er it ack no wled ge d rece ip t of Le s l i e’s req ue st —t o su bm it th e do cu m en ts ne ces sa ry to

co m pl et e a lo ss m it ig at io n ap pl ic at io n. W il so n ha s in tro du ced no ev id en ce sh owi ng th at 32 da y s was an un reas on ab le am ou nt of ti m e fo r he r t o p r o v i d e th e req ue st ed do cu m en ts , es pe ci al ly co ns id eri ng th at W el ls Farg o rep eat ed ly se nt le tt ers de ta il in g th e req ui red in fo rm at io n it st il l ne ed ed fro m th e W il so ns to co m pl et e th ei r ap pl ic at io n du rin g th is 32 -d ay pe rio d. Mo reo ve r, W el ls Farg o co nt in ue d to rev ie w th e W il so ns ’ fil e an d acce pt do cu m en ts fro m th e W il so ns up to th e da te of th e fo recl os ur e sa le on Sep te m be r 12 , 20 14

.

Acco rd in gl y , we ho l d th at th e di st ric t co ur t di d no t err in gr an ti ng su m m ary jud gm en t o n Les li e’s cl ai m un de r § 5 82 .04 3, s ub d. 5 (2 ).

III. Co nc lu si on Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm

th e jud gm en t o f th e d is tri ct co ur t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-1 3-