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 https://badcreditloans4all.com/payday-loans-wv/pineville/ liability that is limited, d.b.a. Redstone Law Group, d.b.a. Regulations Offices Of Michael W. Lanier, LIBERTY & TRUST LAW BAND OF FLORIDA, LLC, a Florida liability that is limited, Defendants – countertop Claimants, MICHAEL W. LANIER, separately so when an owner, officer, supervisor, and/or agent associated with the above-mentioned entities, Defendant – countertop Claimant – Appellant, FORTRESS LAW GROUP, LLC, a Florida limited obligation business, et al., Defendants.

This instance calls for us to take into account whether or not the district court precisely awarded summary judgment to your Federal Trade Commission (FTC) on its claims that defendant Michael Lanier violated a few statutes that are federal laws associated with the purchase of home loan assistance relief solutions. Lanier contends that the region court must not have given 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 among these arguments has merit and affirm the district court.

Factual Background

Through Lanier Law, LLC, their law practice, Michael Lanier, a lawyer located in Jacksonville, Florida, offered mortgage help relief solutions to individuals in danger of losing their homes to foreclosure. 1 Lanier along with his affiliates promised homeowners that in return for an upfront charge, he’d negotiate less expensive month-to-month mortgage repayments, reduced interest levels, and paid off major balances for the kids.

Lanier Law shared office space with Rogelio Robles and Edward Rennick, two of Lanier’s co-defendants, whom operated some other entities including Pinnacle Legal Services, Fortress Legal Services, together with Department of Loss Mitigation and Forensics (“DOLMF”) (collectively, the “staffing agencies”). These entities supplied staffing, referrals, as well as other solutions to Lanier Law.

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

Just before Lanier’s suspension system, he became associated with three newly produced 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, provided consumers with home loan help solutions. 2 These entities purported to be law offices situated in the District of Columbia, however 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. businesses, any mail delivered to D.C. had been forwarded instantly to Jacksonville, Florida, where Lanier Law operated. Lanier Dep. at 37 (Doc. 269). The Pinnacle and DOLMF employees that has formerly caused Lanier Law consumers proceeded be effective with respect to the D.C. businesses. And also to collect re payments, the D.C. organizations utilized the vendor processing portal that Lanier had utilized for Lanier Law.

To ensure that Lanier Law additionally the D.C. organizations could attract customers nationwide, they connected with “of counsel” attorneys across the nation. The “of counsel” lawyers had been compensated a monthly retainer of around $300 every month; the job they performed had been generally speaking restricted to reviewing retainer agreements for customer contact information and to verify the agreements had been signed and dated.

Together, Lanier Law as well as the D.C. businesses operated a amount company consumers that are recruiting buy home loan support relief solutions (“MARS”). The staffing agencies solicited consumers through the world wide web, letters, and leaflets mortgage assistance that is offering. The adverts promoted the “of counsel” community, noting that the law practice “has working arrangements with skilled and competent solicitors 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 looked like a federal federal government document, informed customers that their house was in fact “selected for a program that is special the national Insured Institutions,” that will “bring your home re 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 has been owned by Robles. Lanier denies any right 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 the D.C. firms. Through the enrollment procedure, instance supervisors told clients that the company would get loan improvements with considerably reduced re payments and interest levels. The representatives guaranteed customers that the companies had exceedingly high success prices in bringing down re re payments—over 90 %. When new customers enrolled, Lanier Law additionally the D.C. organizations delivered them paperwork that is similar. The customers had been needed to spend advance costs in excess of $2,000, often payable in installments. Some customers had been told to avoid their home loan repayments also to pay Lanier Law or perhaps the D.C. businesses alternatively.

After the customers started making re payments, Lanier Law together with D.C. companies stopped interacting together with them or transferred them to different instance supervisors who guaranteed them that work had been done on the loan improvements. Some consumers discovered from their lenders that Lanier Law and also the D.C. companies had never tried to make contact with lenders. All the customers complained that the companies neglected to get any alterations with the person. Other people stated that however some alterations had been acquired, these people were much less guaranteed and often needed higher payments than customers had compensated formerly.