Barberan v. Nationpoint

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding a plaintiff’s allegation that, inter alia, a defendant fraudulently altered mortgage documents was sufficient for Plaintiff to state a claim to quiet title
• finding that a plaintiff’s assertion of legal title and “adequate [description of] the Property, including its address,” were sufficient to state the first element of a claim to quiet title
• finding that no valid § 1681s-2(b) claim existed when the plaintiff had not alleged any facts showing that the credit reporting agency had notified the furnisher of information about the dispute
• finding same, even where plaintiff’s authenticity objections were “less than genuine” and of “questionable viability”
• declining to consider note and mortgage in light of the plaintiffs’ objections to the authenticity of the documents
• declining to consider documents because plaintiffs disputed their authenticity even when the plaintiffs’ objections were “of questionable viability” and “less than genuine”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).