FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION v. FORTRESS LAW GROUP LLC

United states of america Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff – countertop Defendant – Appellee, v. LANIER LAW, LLC, a Florida liability that is limited, d.b.a. Redstone Law Group, d.b.a. Regulations Offices Of Michael W. Lanier, LIBERTY & TRUST LAW SET OF FLORIDA, LLC, a Florida restricted obligation business, Defendants – countertop Claimants, MICHAEL W. LANIER, independently so that as an owner, officer, supervisor, and/or agent for the above-mentioned entities, Defendant – countertop Claimant – Appellant, FORTRESS LAW GROUP, LLC, a Florida restricted obligation business, et al., Defendants.

This instance calls for us to take into account perhaps the region court precisely granted summary judgment to your Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on its claims that defendant Michael Lanier violated a few federal statutes and laws associated with the purchase of home loan help relief services. Lanier contends that the region court must not have awarded summary judgment for a couple of reasons, including that the region court improperly admitted proof against him, overlooked disputes of product reality, making factual findings in the FTC’s benefit. We conclude that none of those arguments has merit and affirm the region court.

Factual Background

Through Lanier Law, LLC, their law practice, Michael Lanier, legal counsel located in Jacksonville, Florida, offered mortgage help relief services to individuals at risk of losing their homes to foreclosure. 1 Lanier along with his affiliates promised homeowners that in return for an upfront charge, he would negotiate cheaper month-to-month home loan repayments, reduced rates of interest, and paid off major balances with the person.

Lanier Law shared work place with Rogelio Robles and Edward Rennick, two of Lanier’s co-defendants, whom operated various other entities Pinnacle that is including Legal, Fortress Legal Services, together with Department of Loss Mitigation and Forensics (“DOLMF”) (collectively, the “staffing agencies”). These entities offered staffing, recommendations, along with other solutions to Lanier Law.

In 2012, the Florida Bar filed a problem against Lanier linked to their foreclosure relief solutions. Lanier ultimately joined a conditional accountable plea, admitting he was suspended briefly from the practice of law that he had improperly solicited clients and failed to supervise non-lawyers, and.

Ahead of Lanier’s suspension system, he same day payday loans Oneonta became a part of three newly created entities when you look at the District of Columbia: Fortress Law Group, LLP; Redstone Law Group, LLP; and Surety Law Group, LLP (collectively, the “D.C. firms”), which, like Lanier Law, supplied consumers with mortgage support solutions. 2 These entities purported become law offices situated in the District of Columbia, nevertheless they had been in fact office[s that are“virtual” for Lanier’s operations in Florida. Rennick Dep. at 33 (Doc. 271). 3 Although Lanier “transferred” their foreclosure protection cases to your D.C. companies, any mail provided for D.C. ended up being forwarded straight away to Jacksonville, Florida, where Lanier Law operated. Lanier Dep. at 37 (Doc. 269). The Pinnacle and DOLMF employees that has formerly worked with Lanier Law consumers proceeded to focus with respect to the D.C. companies. And also to gather re payments, the D.C. organizations utilized the vendor processing portal that Lanier had employed for Lanier Law.

Making sure that Lanier Law as well as the D.C. companies could attract customers nationwide, they related to “of counsel” attorneys across the nation. The “of counsel” lawyers had been paid a month-to-month retainer of around $300 every month; the task they performed ended up being generally speaking restricted to reviewing retainer agreements for customer contact information also to ensure the agreements had been finalized and dated.

Together, Lanier Law therefore the D.C. organizations operated an amount company recruiting customers to buy mortgage support relief solutions (“MARS”). The staffing agencies solicited customers through the world wide web, letters, and leaflets providing home loan help. The adverts promoted the “of counsel” community, noting that the law practice “has working arrangements with skilled and competent attorneys and law offices in several other states.” 2013 Flyer at 56 (Doc. 246-5). One flyer, entitled the “Economic Stimulus Mortgage Notification” (the “Flyer”), which appeared as if a federal government document, informed customers that their house was indeed “selected for a program that is special the national Insured Institutions,” that will “bring your property re re payments present at under you borrowed from or your major balance down.” 2012 Flyer at 66 (Doc. 246-1). Other leaflets identified the transmitter as DOLMF, that was owned by Robles. Lanier denies any part in “drafting, giving, approving, or us[ing]” the Flyer. Lanier Aff. at 9 (Doc. 253).

Customers whom taken care of immediately the ads had been described Lanier Law or even the D.C. businesses. Throughout the enrollment procedure, situation supervisors told clients that the company would get loan customizations with considerably reduced re re re payments and interest levels. The representatives guaranteed consumers that the companies had success that is extremely high in bringing down payments—over 90 %. When new business enrolled, Lanier Law plus the D.C. businesses delivered them comparable documents. The customers had been necessary to spend advance charges greater than $2,000, often payable in installments. Some customers had been told to prevent their mortgage repayments also to pay Lanier Law or the D.C. organizations alternatively.

After the consumers began making re re re payments, Lanier Law additionally the D.C. organizations stopped interacting that work was being done on their loan modifications with them or transferred them to various case managers who assured them. Some consumers discovered from their lenders that Lanier Law while the D.C. businesses had never tried to get hold of lenders. All the customers reported that the companies neglected to get any changes with the person. Other people stated that though some improvements had been acquired, these people were not quite as guaranteed and often needed higher payments than customers had compensated formerly.