Lightfoot v. Cendant Mortgage Corp.
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 18, 2017 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Decided
- January 18, 2017
- Term
- October Term 2016
- Vote
- 8–0
- Majority author
- Justice Sotomayor
- Issue area
- Judicial Power
- Disposition
- Reversed
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Liberal
Opinion excerpt
(Slip Opinion) OCTOBER TERM, 2016 1 Syllabus NOTE: Where it is feasible, a syllabus (headnote) will be released, as is being done in connection with this case, at the time the opinion is issued. The syllabus constitutes no part of the opinion of the Court but has been prepared by the Reporter of Decisions for the convenience of the reader. See United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co., 200 U.S. 321 , 337. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Syllabus LIGHTFOOT ET AL. v. CENDANT MORTGAGE CORP., DBA PHH MORTGAGE, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT No. 14–1055. Argued November 8, 2016—Decided January 18, 2017 The Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae) is a federally chartered corporation that participates in the secondary mortgage market. By statute, Fannie Mae has the power “to sue and to be sued, and to complain and to defend, in any court of competent juris- diction, State or Federal.” 12 U.S. C . §1723a(a). When petitioners Beverly Ann Hollis-Arrington and her daughter Crystal Lightfoot filed suit in state court alleging deficiencies in the refinancing, fore- closure, and sale of their home, Fannie Mae removed the case to fed- eral court, relying on its sue-and-be-sued clause as the basis for ju- risdiction. The District Court denied a motion to remand the case to state court and later entered judgment against…
Excerpt of a 36,660-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.