Opinion ID: 4115263
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Wrongful Attempted Foreclosure

Text: The amended complaint did not include a count for wrongful attempted foreclosure, but the Thomases attempted to assert such a claim in their response to U.S. Bank’s and the Rubin law firm’s motions to dismiss. The Thomases’ response to the motions to dismiss argued that U.S. Bank did not have an enforceable security interest in the property and thus was “without authority to foreclose property.” The Thomases did attach to their amended complaint a July 2013 assignment instrument between Bank of America, N.A. and Nationstar, which purports to assign the security deed to Nationstar. U.S. Bank contends that, because U.S. Bank was the holder of the security deed in July 2013, Bank of America, N.A. had no interest in the security deed and that this assignment is a nullity. We need not decide this issue on appeal for several reasons. 9 Case: 15-14427 Date Filed: 01/12/2017 Page: 10 of 16 First, we affirm the dismissal of this wrongful attempted foreclosure claim because it was not in the amended complaint and was only raised in the Thomases’ response to the defendants’ motions to dismiss. Second, although the Thomases admit that U.S. Bank was a holder of the security deed, the Thomases do not allege how Bank of America, N.A. obtained any ownership of the security deed to assign it to Nationstar. 4 There is also no allegation in the amended complaint, or documentary evidence for that matter, that U.S. Bank assigned the security deed to Bank of America, N.A. Third, as an independent and alternative reason, because the property was never foreclosed, the Thomases do not assert a claim for “wrongful foreclosure,” but only for “wrongful attempted foreclosure.” To prevail on a claim for wrongful attempted foreclosure under Georgia law, the plaintiff must prove “a knowing and intentional publication of untrue and derogatory information concerning the debtor’s financial condition, and that damages were sustained as a direct result of this publication.” Bates, 768 F.3d at 1134 (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Aetna Fin. Co. v. Culpepper, 320 S.E. 2d 228, 232 (Ga. Ct. App. 1984)). The amended complaint includes no allegations indicating that U.S. Bank or the Rubin law firm published any false or derogatory information concerning the 4 The Thomases submit, in their amended complaint, that they are not “challenging any assignments.” 10 Case: 15-14427 Date Filed: 01/12/2017 Page: 11 of 16 Thomases’ financial condition. Accordingly, the Thomases failed to state a plausible claim for wrongful attempted foreclosure.