Bank of America v. Alexis Lopez
Jan 28, 2015OUTCOME: Client saves his home.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES __________________________________ BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Petitioner, v. ALEXIS LOPEZ, Respondent. _____________________________________ RESPONS ... E TO PETITIONER’S MOTION TO DISMISS PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI ______________________________________ Respondent, Alexis Lopez, hereby files this response to Bank of America, N.A.’s Motion to Dismiss its Petition for Writ of Certiorari. 1. On December 2, 2014, Bank of America filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on the issue of stripping off a wholly unsecured junior mortgage lien in Chapter 7 bankruptcy. 2. On January 28, 2015, the Office of the Clerk of the Supreme Court informed Mr. Lopez (Debtor below) by letter that: “[t]he Court has directed this office to request that a response be filed in this case. Forty printed copies of your response, together with proof of service thereof, should be filed on or before February 27, 2015.” In accordance with this Court’s request, Mr. Lopez filed his timely response. 3. Mr. Lopez argued in his response brief that because the subject lien at issue in Bank of America’s petition for writ of certiorari was subsequently stripped off in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding prior to this appeal, some or all of Bank of America’s issues set forth in their petition for writ of certiorari were moot. 4. Bank of America now seeks dismissal of its petition for writ of certiorari, asking that the parties bear their own costs and fees. Bank of America unaccountably alleges in its motion that Mr. Lopez, “could have avoided all fees and costs in this Court associated with preparing a brief in opposition by seeking dismissal by consent…”, despite the fact that Bank of America never sought dismissal by consent until after Mr. Lopez’ response had already been filed in this Court. 5. In fact, throughout this appeal process, Bank of America was aware of Mr. Lopez’s Chapter 13 bankruptcy (filed February 18, 2014) and Bank of America fully participated in the Chapter 13 proceedings, filing a response on August 29, 2014 to Mr. Lopez’s motion to strip off the Bank of America lien. 6. Nevertheless, Bank of America went forward with an appeal to the Eleventh Circuit (denied on September 3, 2014), and with the subsequent filing of this petition for writ of certiorari on December 2, 2014. 7. Mr. Lopez submits therefore that where Bank of America was fully aware of the Chapter 13 bankruptcy proceeding and the strip off of the Bank of America lien, and did participate in the Chapter 13 proceedings, the petition for writ of certiorari was frivolously filed. Mr. Lopez, a debtor in bankruptcy, should not be forced to bear the burden of those attorney’s fees and costs associated with filing a response to Bank of America’s petition. Bank of America has refused to reimburse any of Mr. Lopez’s attorney’s fees and costs incurred in this case. 8. Mr. Lopez would therefore ask that attorney’s fees in the amount of $52,150.00 (as set forth in the attached timesheets and affidavits) and single costs in the amount of $847.95, or double costs in the amount of $1695.90, be awarded