District Court, S.D. Texas, 2026

Ursula N. Williams v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC, and LoanCare, LLC

Ursula N. Williams v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC, and LoanCare, LLC
District Court, S.D. Texas · Decided January 8, 2026
Ursula N. Williams v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC, and LoanCare, LLC

Trial Court Opinion

January 09, 2026 Nathan Ochsner, Clerk UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION URSULA N. WILLIAMS, § CIVIL ACTION NUMBER Plaintiff, § 4:20-cv-01900 § § versus § JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE § § LAKEVIEW LOAN § SERVICING, LLC, and § LOANCARE, LLC, § Defendants. § ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION Plaintiff Ursula N. Williams filed a class action complaint against Defendants Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC, and LoanCare, LLC, regarding mortgage loan fees.

Dkt 1.

Pending is a Memorandum and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Christina A. Bryan, recommending that two pending motions by Plaintiffs be granted, being (i) unopposed motion for final approval of class settlement and entry of final order and judgment, and (ii) motion for attorney fees, litigation expenses, and service award. See Dkt 178; see also Dkts 172 & 175 (motions).

The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see also United States v Wilson, 864 F2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir 1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other portions to which there’s no objection if satisfied that no clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v PPG Industries Inc, 434 F3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b) advisory committee note (1983).

The parties jointly waived the fourteen-day objection period and stated no objection to the recommendation.

Dkt 179. No clear error otherwise appears upon review and consideration of the Memorandum and Recommendation, the record, and the applicable law.

The Memorandum and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and Order of this Court. Dkt 178.

The order and final judgment as proposed by the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED and FINAL JUDGMENT is hereby ENTERED on that basis.

This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

This is a FINAL JUDGMENT.

SO ORDERED.

Signed on _January 08, 2026, at Houston, Texas.

Z.

Honorable Charles Eskridge United States District Judge

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.