United States District Court, D. Connecticut
RULING ON DEFENDANT COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS,
INC.'S MOTION TO DISMISS
CHARLES S. HAIGHT, JR. SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
se Plaintiff Sophia Savvidis (“Plaintiff” or
“Savvidis”) brings this action, under 42 U.S.C.
§ 1983, seeking damages and injunctive relief from
Richard McQuaid, the Town Clerk of the City of Norwalk
(“Defendant McQuaid” or “McQuaid”)
and Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. (“Defendant CHL”
or “CHL”). Doc. 1 (“Compl.â).
alleges that Defendant McQuaid violated the Takings Clause of
the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution by
“recording and maintaining false, misleading, and
fraudulent records” from third parties in connection
with Plaintiff's property located at 106B Comstock Hill
Avenue, in Norwalk, Connecticut (the “Property”).
Compl. at 1-2 ¶ 1. She also claims that CHL failed to
prevent such fraud. Id. at 2 ¶ 5.
moved to dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint. Doc. 17
(“Mot. to Dismiss”); Doc. 17-1 (“Def.'s
Mem.”). Plaintiff has not filed any
opposition. This Ruling resolves CHL's motion.
facts herein are taken from Plaintiff's Complaint and
CHL's Brief. On April 14, 2003, non-parties Athina
Savvidis and Anastasios Savvidis executed a note
(“Note”) in favor of Americas Wholesale Lender
(“AWL”) in exchange for a loan in the principal
amount of $550, 000.00 (the “Loan”). Doc. 17-2
(“Exhibit A”). As security for the Note, on April
14, 2003, non-parties Athina Savvidis and Anastasios Savvidis
granted a mortgage on the Property to AWL and its successors
and assigns (the “Mortgage”). Doc. 17-3
(“Exhibit B”). On April 25, 2003, AWL assigned
the Mortgage to the Bank of New York as Trustee
(“BONY”). Doc. 17-4 (“Exhibit C”).
December 19, 2005, Athina Savvidis executed a quitclaim deed
which purported to deed the Property to Athina Savvidis,
Anastasios Savvidis, and Plaintiff collectively. Doc. 17-6
(“Exhibit E”). According to CHL-and Plaintiff
does not appear to dispute this-Plaintiff did not hold any
ownership or other interest in the Property until the date of
the quitclaim deed. Def.'s Mem. at 7.
thereafter, Athina and Anastasios Savvidis defaulted on their
loan repayment obligations and failed to cure the default.
Id. As a result, on September 26, 2006, BONY, as
mortgagee of record, commenced a foreclosure action against
them in the Superior Court for the Judicial District of
Stamford, captioned Bank Of New York as trustee for the
Certificateholders v. Savvidis et al.,
FST-CV06-6000164-S (Conn. Super. Ct. 2006). Id. BONY
also listed Plaintiff as a Defendant in that lawsuit.
March 26, 2007, the Superior Court defaulted all defendants
for failing to plead. Id. On that same date, the
trial court granted BONY's motion for judgment of
foreclosure by sale and set a sale date of June 2, 2007.
Id. No defendant appealed that judgment.
Id. Nonetheless, the sale did not occur.
Id. at 7-8. Rather, it appears that for almost
thirteen years, the Parties have engaged, and continue to
engage, in various motion practice in state court in
connection with the foreclosure of the Property. Id.
filed the instant lawsuit on July 23, 2019. Plaintiff alleges
that Defendant McQuaid has been “recording and
maintaining false, misleading, and fraudulent records”
from third parties in connection with Plaintiff's
Property. Compl. at 2 ¶ 1. According to Plaintiff,
McQuaid's actions are hindering her from financing and
selling her property. Id. at 2 ¶ 2.
to Plaintiff, furthermore, sometime after CHL offered her
family a loan in April 2003, the title to the loan was
transferred, though that transfer “failed ab
initio”-that is, from the beginning. Id.
at 2 ¶ 3. Thereafter, false claimants to the loan
“emerged” but allegedly lacked proof of the debt.
Id. at 2 ¶ 4. Therefore, the false claimants
made false statements under oath in an attempt to transfer
the loan to third parties. Id. According to
Plaintiff, CHL failed to prevent or stop the fraudulent
activity. Id. at 2 ¶ 5. Meanwhile, according to
Plaintiff, unknown parties have now recorded their own deed
to Plaintiff's property. Id. at 3 ¶ 7.
seeks damages from Defendants for the harm done to her and an
injunction directing McQuaid to remove the fraudulent records
from the City's rolls. Id. at 3 ¶¶
before this Court is CHL's Motion to Dismiss. Defendant
makes a number of arguments: (1) that the court lacks
personal jurisdiction over CHL; (2) that the Court lacks
subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the
Rooker-Feldman doctrine, or, in the alternative,
that the Court should decline to exercise jurisdiction over
this matter in accordance with the Colorado River
and Younger abstention doctrines; (3) that res
judicata bars Plaintiff's claims; (4) that
Plaintiff's claims are time-barred as a matter of law;
and (5) that Plaintiff's claims fail as a matter of law.
For the reasons stated below, the Court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction over Plaintiff's claims under the
Rooker-Feldman doctrine; and, therefore,
Plaintiff's Complaint must be dismissed.