In Re: Wells Fargo Bank N.A. and Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas, f/k/a Bankers Trust Company, as Trustee for RASC 2001-KS3 Trust, applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 612486.
BEFORE: PETTIGREW,
HIGGINBOTRAM AND CRAIN,
JJ.
WRIT GRANTED. The plaintiff's pro se petition is too vague and ambiguous to determine if a cause of action has been asserted. Accordingly, the trial court's July 21, 2015 judgment is reversed insofar as it overruled relators' dilatory exception raising the objections of ambiguity and vagueness of the petition, and judgment is hereby rendered sustaining the exception. Further, the July 21, 2015 judgment is vacated insofar as it overruled relators' peremptory exception raising the objection of no cause of action. See Haskins v. Clary, 346 So.2d 193, 195 (La. 1977); Jeff Mercer, L.L.C. v. State, Dept. of Transp. and Development, 2014-1751 (La. App. 1st Cir. 6/5/15), 174 So.3d 1180, 1184, writ denied, 2015-1624 (La. 10/30/15), ___ So.3d ___.
This matter is remanded with instructions that the trial court allow the plaintiff the opportunity to amend her pleadings in order to attempt to remove the ambiguity and vagueness therein. See La. Code Civ. P. art. 933(B). According to the writ application, in July, 2007, J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, N. A. (Chase Bank) filed a foreclosure proceeding against the plaintiff due to her failure to make payments under a mortgage loan. Chase Bank assigned its rights to Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (Deutsche Bank), and Wells Fargo Bank, N. A. began servicing the loan on Deutsche Bank's behalf. Deutsche Bank then proceeded with the foreclosure, and on October 1, 2014, the plaintiff's mortgaged property was sold to Deutsche Bank at a public auction conducted by the East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff. The plaintiff should amend her petition to assert what, if anything, the defendants did or did not do relative to these, or any other events, that have allegedly caused her harm, and describe, if she can, any harm suffered. Failing this, the plaintiff's petition should be dismissed. If the plaintiff amends her petition to remove the ambiguity and vagueness, the trial court must then address the exception of no cause of action.
TMH
WJC
JTP
COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT /s/_________
DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT
FOR THE COURT