Procedural Background

Procedural Background

District Court Procedures

The FTC filed a grievance against Lanier, Robles, Rennick, Lanier Law, as well as the D.C. companies, alleging which they had sold and marketed home loan support relief solutions in breach of part 5(a) for the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 4 the home loan Assistance Relief solutions Rule (legislation O) (MARS Rule), 5 in addition to Telemarketing product Sales Rule (TSR). 6 particularly, the FTC alleged the defendants had misrepresented their capability to have home loan adjustments, charged consumers advance charges, did not add necessary disclosures in their communications, initiated phone calls in breach associated with TSR, and neglected to spend the mandatory fees to get into the nationwide Do-Not-Call list.

The FTC relocated for summary judgment, while the region court granted the motion. The court determined that the defendants violated part 5 regarding the FTCA by simply making product misrepresentations that caused consumer that is substantial and also by breaking the MARS Rule together with TSR. The region court determined that the defendants violated the MARS Rule once they demanded and received costs with their solutions ahead of doing any work; misrepresented the probability of acquiring that loan modification, particularly with regards to reductions in monthly obligations, interest levels, and major balances; and did not make appropriate disclosures. Finally, the court determined that Lanier had been individually accountable for the functions associated with entities that are corporate. 7 The region court determined that their authority and control of the defendants and his understanding of their practices put him “squarely during the center with this enterprise that is deceptive” making him individually accountable for the misconduct. Purchase at 72-74 (Doc. 281).

On August 12, 2016, the region court joined a permanent injunction against Lanier and their co-defendants. The region court additionally joined judgment and only the FTC when you look at the level of $13,586,713. This will be Lanier’s appeal. 8

Appellate Procedures

On October 10, 2016, Lanier filed a prompt notice of appeal, by which he described himself in addition to entities comprising Lanier Law once the “Lanier Defendants”:

Defendant, Lanier Law, et al., hereinafter the “Lanier Defendants,” hereby appeals to the united states of america Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit from the judgment that is final of District Court dated August 12, 2016 in addition to purchase of July 7, 2016 ․

Notice of Appeal (Doc. 303). Following the appeal ended up being docketed, Lanier attempted to enter a look with respect to himself and Lanier Law in this Court, nevertheless the Clerk returned the shape unfiled because Lanier’s application for admission into the Eleventh Circuit club was indeed rejected.

As a result, on 29, 2016, Lanier filed an amended notice of appeal in the district court november:

Defendant, Michael W. Lanier, Esq, separately, ․ hereby appeals towards the united states of america Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit ․ Lanier is admitted to apply prior to the Federal District Court, but had been rejected admission to apply within the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals also as pro vice that is hac here.

Am. Notice of Appeal (Doc. 309). In a page into the Court, Lanier explained that his amended appeal was designed to “reflect” which he would “represent himself, pro se, and that none associated with the corporate (Lanier) defendants would join him within no credit check payday loans Lake Jackson TX the appeal.” Lanier Law ended up being then dismissed through the appeal.

Even though the appeal had been pending, this Court asked the events to handle whether Lanier’s 29, 2016, amended notice of appeal was timely to appeal from the district court’s final judgment on behalf of Lanier personally november. After briefing by both events, the Court determined it was perhaps perhaps maybe not, but reserved the concern of whether Lanier’s 10, 2016 notice on behalf of “Lanier Law, et al.” perfected his appeal in his personal capacity october.