Matthews v. Litton Loan Servicing, Lp
Matthews v. Litton Loan Servicing, Lp
901 So. 2d 678; 2004 Ala. LEXIS 250; 2004 WL 2202069
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Matthews v. Litton Loan Servicing, Lp
Opinion of the Court
AFFIRMED. NO OPINION.
See Rule 53(a)(1) and (a)(2)(E), Ala. R.App. P.
Concurring in Part
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
I concur in the no-opinion affirmance insofar as it applies to the plaintiffs claims against the defendants Litton Loan Servicing, L.P., Chase Manhattan Bank, and Credit-Based Asset Servicing and Securi-tization, L.L.C. for their alleged wantonness, gross negligence, and fraud. I respectfully dissent insofar as the no-opinion affirmance applies to the plaintiffs contract claim against the defendants Litton, Chase, and C-BASS and the plaintiffs conversion claim against all defendants.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.