FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E A LS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT OCT 6, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H] I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 08- 10888 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ D . C. D o c k e tN o . 0 6 - 0 0 0 3 8 - CV - O RL- 2 2 K RS J A M E S J . A R M S T R O N G , N A N C Y L . A R M S T R O N G , P la in tif f s - A p p e lla n ts , v ersu s C O L O N I A L B A N K , N .A ., D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe M i ddl e D i s tr i c tof F l or i da

_________________________ ( O c t ob e r 6, 2008) B efo re T JO F L A T , H U L L an d P R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M: T h is c a s e is a c la s s a c tio n . T h e A r m s tr o n g s , p r o c e e d in g p r o s e , b r o u g h t it in2

the B re vard C ou nty, F l ori da C i rc ui tC ou rt , cl ai m i ng thatC ol on i al B ank’ s overdra ft char ges w er e usuri ou s, i n v i ol at i on of F l a. S t at . § 6 87 . 03 , and, m oreover, c ons t i tut e d f

e l ony l oa n s ha r ki ng, i n vi ol a t i on of F l a . S t a t . § 687. 071. T he ba nk re m ov ed the ca se t o the di stri ctcourton the grou nd thatthe N at i on al B ank A ct pr ovi de d the e xc l us i ve r e m e dy f orus ur y a c t i ons a ga i ns tna t i ona l ba nks . R e c or d, V o l 1 atT ab 1 . O n ce i n th e d i stri ctco u rt , th e A rm stro n g s fi l ed an am en d ed cl ass ac t i on com pl ai nt , w hi ch cont ai ned t he sa m e s t at e l aw cl ai m s a s thei r i ni t i al com pl ai nt ; the am ended com pl ai ntal so as se rt ed thatthe ov er draf tchar ges exce eded the m axi m um i nt er es tal l ow abl e und erthe N at i on al B ank A ct . Id. atT ab 1 0 . C ol on i al B ank m ov ed the di stri ctcourtt o d i sm i ss the com pl ai ntfor f ai l ure t o s t a t e a c l a i m f

orr e l i e f , a nd the c our tgr a nt e d the m ot i on. I d. a tT a b 26. T he A r m s tr ongs appe a l e d, a nd w e a f f i r m e d. A r m s tr ong v. C ol oni a l B a nk, N . A . , 219 F e d. A ppx 974 ( T a bl e ) C . A . 11 ( F l a . ) . T he ba nk the r e a f t e rr e ne w e d the m ot i on f or s a n c tio n s th a t it h a d f

ile d w ith th e d is tr ic t c o u r t p r io rto th e A r m s tr o n g s ’ ap p e a l, s e e ki ng a n a w a r d of

a tt or ne y ’ s f

e e s unde rF l a . S t a t . § 57. 105. T he A r m s tr ongs op po se d the m ot i on , ar gu i ng thata f eder al courtcoul d n oti m po se att orney’ s f ee s pur s ua ntt o § 57. 105. T he c our tr e f e r r e d the m ot i on t o a m a gi s tr a t e j udge , w ho, r e l y i ng i n di c t a i n B a nk A t l a nt i c v. B l y the E a s tm a n P a i ne W e bbe r , I nc . , 955 F . 2d3

14 67 , 14 78 n. 11 (11 C i r. 19 92 ), concl ud ed thatfe es coul d b e a w ar ded u nd er§ th 5 7 .1 0 5 b u t th a t s h e h a d in s u f f ic ie n t e v id e n c e b e f

o r e h e rto d e te r m in e a r e a s o n a b le f e e . T he j udge the r e f

or e i s s ue d a r e por tr e c om m e ndi ng tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tgr a nt the bank ’ s m ot i on and aff ord t he bank l ea ve t o ref i l e i t s m ot i on w i th the evi dence ne c e s s a r y t o s uppor tthe f e e s i tw a s c l a i m i ng. T he di s tr i c tc our ta dopt e d the r e por ta nd r e c om m e nda t i on ove rthe A rm strong s’ obj ec t i on , and t he m agi stra t e j ud ge subsequent l y r ec om m ended a fee a w a r d of $13, 975. 50. T he A r m s tr ongs di d notobj e c tt o the r e c om m e nda t i on, a nd th e d is tr ic t c o u r t a c c o r d in g ly a d o p te d it a n d a w a r d e d th e b a n k f e e s in th a t a m o u n t. T h e A m s tr o n g s n o w ap p e a l. T h e A r m s tr o n g s a r g u e th a t § 5 7 .1 0 5 d o e s n o t ap p ly in th is c a s e b e c a u s e ru le of de c i s i on the di s tr i c tc our tappl i e d i n de c i di ng the c a s e w a s a f e de r a l l a w , the N a tio n a l B a n k A c t. W e m ig h t b e p e r s u a d e d if th e A r m s tr o n g s h a d b r o u g h t th is ca se un der the N at i on al B ank A cti n the di stri ctcourt , bu tthey di d n ot . T hey s ued the bank un der s t at e l aw , and aft erthe bank re m ov ed the ca se t o d i stri ctcourt , they c ont i nue d t o r e l y on s t a t e l a w w he n the y a m e nde d the i rc om pl a i nt . T rue , the a m e nde d c om pl a i nta l s o c i t e d the N a t i ona l B a nk A c ta s a ba s i s f orr e c ove r y , but s tu c k w ith th e irs ta te la w a lle g a tio n s to th e b itte re n d . T he A r m s tr ongs di d notobj e c tt o the m a gi s tr a t e j udge ’ s de t e r m i na t i on a nd4

reco m m en d at i o n o f th e am o u n to f att o rn ey’ s fees t o b e aw ard ed t o th e b an k , so the y m a y notnow c ha l l e nge the a w a r d the di s tr i c tc our tm a de – a bs e ntpl a i n e r r or o ra c la im o f

m a n if e s t in ju s tic e , n e ith e ro f

w h ic h a r e p r e s e n t. AF F I R ME D.