U.S. Bank National Association v. Parker
- Nelson Roman
- 7:19-cv-07595
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In U.S. Bank National Association v. Parker, Judge Roman denied the request to seal trust-agreement pages in the foreclosure case.
The ruling directly affected U.S. Bank National Association's request to keep portions of the RMAC Trust, Series 2016-CTT agreement from public filing; the opinion does not state any additional effect on Ernesto Parker or Nancy A. Parker.
What happened
U.S. Bank National Association v. Parker is a federal mortgage-foreclosure case involving U.S. Bank National Association, acting as trustee, and Ernesto Parker and Nancy A. Parker. The plaintiff planned to seek a default judgment and asked to submit a trust agreement to show its authority and federal jurisdiction.
The plaintiff said the trust agreement contained privileged, proprietary, and sensitive financial information. It asked to file the pages containing that information under seal, meaning they would not be publicly available.
The court denied the sealing application. Judge Nelson Stephen Roman signed the order on January 22, 2020.
The detailed version
- U.S. Bank National Association v. Parker · No. 7:19-cv-07595
- Nelson Roman
- Jan. 22, 2020
Background
The plaintiff, U.S. Bank National Association, acting solely as trustee for the RMAC Trust, Series 2016-CTT, described the matter as a diversity-jurisdiction residential mortgage-foreclosure action against Ernesto Parker and Nancy A. Parker. In a letter, the plaintiff said it intended to file a motion for default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b)(2).
The plaintiff said it planned to submit the trust agreement to establish that U.S. Bank—not the trust itself—was the real party in the controversy and had authority to control the trust assets and sue on behalf of the trust. The plaintiff also said that parts of the trust agreement contained privileged, proprietary, and sensitive financial information.
Request and Ruling
The plaintiff asked permission to file the pages containing that information under seal. The court denied the application. The opinion does not provide further explanation for the denial or address the intended default-judgment motion.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.