Preview:

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND, NORTHERN DIVISION * DAVID MILLER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. * * * CIVIL NO.: S-02-569

PACIFIC SHORE FUNDING, et al.,* Defendants. * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter comes before the Court on a motion for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, filed by the plaintiffs, David and Rosalie Miller ("the Millers"). In

their opposition to the motion, the defendants, Pacific Shore Funding ("Pacific") and GMAC-Residential Funding Corp. ("Residential"), tendered evidence suggesting that the Millers lack standing to bring or pursue this cause of action. Because

standing undergirds subject-matter jurisdiction, see Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Env't, 523 U.S. 83, 102 (1998), the Court ordered the Millers to show cause why the Court should not dismiss this suit, without prejudice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(h)(3). The Millers have responded. As the

issue has been adequately briefed, no oral hearing is necessary. Local Rule 105.6 (D. Md.). BACKGROUND The relevant facts are few and undisputed. The Millers, and

one other plaintiff, Chima Gilbert-Iheme ("Mr. Gilbert-Iheme"), filed this putative class action in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City on January 16, 2002. The three-count complaint

against Pacific, Residential, and others alleged that Pacific routinely charged and collected excessive or unauthorized fees in conjunction with loans secured by junior mortgages on the plaintiffs' residences. The fees allegedly violated provisions

of the Maryland Secondary Mortgage Loan Law ("SMLL"), Md. Code Ann., Com. Law II

Download David Miller v. Pacific Shore Funding et. al..pdf

Maryland Law