Clerk of Court For the Court Consumer Solutions, Llc v. Theodore R. Thompson
Also decided on this docket: La., April 20, 2021
Clerk of Court For the Court Consumer Solutions, Llc v. Theodore R. Thompson, No. 2020-C-01359 (La. Feb. 9, 2021).
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Boohaker 168 So. 3d 421
Opinion text
The Supreme Court of the State of Louisiana
Clerk of Court
For the Court
CONSUMER SOLUTIONS, LLC
VS.
THEODORE R. THOMPSON
No.2020-C-01359
_ _ _ _ _ _
IN RE: GMAT Title Trust 2014 -1 - Applicant Other; U.S. Bank National
Association, as Legal Title Trustee - Applicant Other; Applying For Writ Of
Certiorari, Parish of St. Mary, 16th Judicial District Court Number(s) 124496, 1st
Circuit Court of Appeal, Number(s) 2019 CA 0214;
_ _ _ _ _ _
February 09, 2021
Writ application granted. See per curiam.
JDH
JLW
SJC
WJC
JBM
PDG
Genovese, J., would deny.
Sup
reme Court of Louisiana
February 09, 2021
02/09/2021 "See News Release 006 for any Concurrences and/or Dissents.”
1
SUPREME COURT OF LOUISIANA
No. 2020-C-1359
CONSUMER SOLUTIONS, LLC
V.
THEODORE R. THOMPSON
ON SUPERVISORY WRIT TO THE 16TH JUDICIAL
DISTRICT COURT FOR THE PARISH OF ST. MARY
PER CURIAM
Writ granted. In a suit on a promissory note, the payee who produces the note
sued upon makes out a prima facie case of its claim to enforce the note. JP Morgan
Chase Bank, N.A. v. Boohaker , 14-0594 (La. App. 1 Cir. 11/20/14), 168 So.3d
421. At the trial of this matter, the applicant produced the original note, and
therefore successfully made a prima facie case of its right to enforcement. The mere
fact that Consumer Solutions, LLC may not have had physical possession of the note
when the suit was filed does not, in and of itself, defeat applicant’s claim to the right
to enforce. See LSA-R.S. 10:3-301.
Moreover, the evidence establishes that the note at issue herein was originally
executed by Thompson and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC (Ocwen). In an attached
allonge, Ocwen indorsed the note to Funding America Mortgage Warehouse Trust.
In a second attached allonge, Funding America Mortgage Warehouse Trust indorsed
the note in blank, thereby making the note payable to bearer, pursuant to LS A-R.S.
10:3-109(c) and LSA -R.S. 10:3-205(b). No evidence was offered indicating any
further indorsements to the note. The evidence further included an assignment of
the note, executed by Funding America Mortgage Warehouse Trust in 2006, in favor
of Consumer Solutions, LLC, as well as assignments wherein Consumer Solutions,
LLC assigned the note to GRA Legal Title Trust II 2013 -1, U.S. Bank, National
Association, As Legal Title Trustee, which then assigned the note to the applicant.
02/09/21
2
As such, the applicant not only produced the original note, endorsed in blank, but
the applicant produced assignments establishing transference of the note from the
original maker to itself. The TC therefore legally erred in finding that the applicant
failed to establish its right to enforce the note at issue, and dismissing the suit with
prejudice.
The opinion of the Court of Appeal refers to “numerous affirmative defenses”
raised by the respondent. Due to its determination that the applicant had no right of
action, the Court of Appeal failed to conduct any discussion or analysis of
respondent’s defenses, and it does not appear that any rulings were rendered thereon.
As such, the writ is granted and this matter is remanded to the Court of Appeal for
the purpose of clarifying that the applicant has a right of action to assert the claims
herein, and for consideration of any affirmative defenses raised by the respondent.
WRIT GRANTED; REVERSED and REMANDED.
02/09/21