Otis Phillips sues U.S. Bank for refusing to work with him to modify his mortgage to avoid foreclosure - as they were required to on all their mortgages when they took HAMP money from the government. They then asked for a dismissal of the case, because they claim that they 'can't be sued."
The judge denied their request for dismissal with a deliciously snarky ruling. Here are some highlights:
"Sometimes, only the courts of law stand to protect the taxpayer. Somewhere, someone has to stand up. Well, sometimes is now, and the place is the Great State of Georgia."
"A cynical judge might think that, if the guidelines clearly prevented Mr. Phillips from getting his modification, then U.S. Bank would have trotted out that fact in mathematic equations, pie charts, and bar graphs, all on 8 by 10 glossy photo paper, with circles and arrows and paragraphs on the back explaining each winning number. (with apologies to Arlo Guthrie, Alice's Restaurant). U.S. Bank's silence on this issue might heighten the suspicions of such a cynical jurist. I, on the other hand, am sure nothing of that sort could be true. Maybe U.S. Bank no longer has any of the $20 billion dollars
left, and so their lack of written explanation might be attributed so some kind of ink reduction program to save money. I'm sure that there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for why U.S. Bank will not print out the ONE page of figures to show Mr. Phillip's financials compared to the HAMP guidelines to clear this all up."
"Clearly, U.S. Bank cannot take the money, contract with our government to provide a service to the taxpayer, violate that agreement, then say no one on earth can sue them for it. That is not the law in Georgia."
http://www.scribd.com/doc/72722629/Us-Bank-Opinion
Edited for typos.