Cassese v. Washington Mutual, Inc.

Welcome to the Cassese v. Washington Mutual, Inc. Website.

Beginning in October 2011, appeals were filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit (the “Second Circuit”) challenging the District Court for the Eastern District of New York's (the “District Court”) approval of the Settlement Agreement and award of attorneys’ fees. Following briefing, the Second Circuit heard argument on the appeals on November 9, 2012. On November 20, 2012, the Second Circuit entered a Summary Order and Judgment affirming the District Court's Final Order and Judgment approving the Settlement Agreement and award of attorneys’ fees. A copy of that Summary Order and Judgment is posted here. If no further appeals are filed, the Parties and Settlement Administrator will begin the process of distributing the settlement proceeds to Claiming Class Members (those who filed timely and valid claims).

Following the Second Circuit Court of Appeals having affirmed the judgment approving the settlement, one objector has made a request called a petition for certiorari to take a further appeal to the United States Supreme Court. We do not yet know yet whether the Supreme Court will permit the appeal. If and when the Supreme Court denies the request to appeal, or affirms the decisions from the lower courts approving the Settlement, the settlement will be final.

In this class action (the “Litigation”), Plaintiffs Denise Cassese, George Scott Rush, Richard Schroer and William Bloom (the “Named Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all others similarly situated (collectively, “Plaintiffs”), brought this action in the District Court against Defendants Washington Mutual, Inc. (“WMI”), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), in its capacity as receiver for Washington Mutual Bank (“WMB”), such entity having incorporated former defendants Washington Mutual Bank, FA and Washington Mutual Home Loans, Inc. Plaintiffs contend in the Litigation that WMI is directly and indirectly liable for the acts of its former subsidiary, WMB, and other former WMI subsidiaries, for charging fees prior to satisfaction and settlement of Named Plaintiffs’ and Class Members’ home loans, mortgage loans, co-op loans, home equity loans or home equity lines of credit. These charges allegedly included various fees (also referred to by Plaintiffs as “penalties” and “finance charges”), including, but not limited to, fees that are often but not always listed on payoff statements or elsewhere as i) Fax Fees; ii) Payoff Statement Fees; iii) Recording Fees; and iv) “UCC-3 Fees” in connection with requests for payoff statements or payoff amounts or the prepayment, repayment, discharge, satisfaction or settlement of loans secured by a residence (collectively, the “Disputed Fees”). It is not alleged that borrowers were necessarily required by Defendants to pay each of the Disputed Fees.

The parties entered into a proposed settlement agreement on February 15, 2011 (the “Agreement” or the “Settlement”), which the District Court preliminarily approved on March 10, 2011. The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware approved the proposed settlement agreement on May 2, 2011. A Final Fairness Hearing was held on September 15, 2011.

WMI vigorously denied Plaintiffs’ allegations, believed them to be without merit, and asserted numerous defenses to Plaintiffs’ claims. WMI believed that it had complied fully with all laws, and had provided all necessary information, relating to the payoff of residential mortgage loans, cooperative loans, home equity loans or home equity lines of credit, and had not breached any contract in connection with such payoffs. WMI denied any liability, and agreed to this Settlement to avoid the burdens, costs and uncertainties inherent in litigation.

The District Court granted final approval of the Settlement on September 21, 2011. Defendant FDIC, as receiver for WMB, which was closed by federal banking regulators on September 25, 2008, has not settled with Plaintiffs and continues to dispute their claims. Plaintiffs and Class Counsel believe the Settlement to be fair and reasonable for all Class Members. Class Members that paid any Disputed Fee to WMB, or any of its “Washington Mutual” branded subsidiaries, between January 1, 1998 and September 25, 2008 (the “Class Period”), and who did not request to be timely excluded from the Class, were entitled to submit a claim to be eligible to receive a payment as described herein.

This site provides the following information: