Admissions

  • Illinois
  • U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois (and its trial bar)
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Third, Sixth, Seventh, Ninth and Eleventh Circuits
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • Special admission: Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, Washington, and the U.S. Virgin Islands

Education

Wesleyan University (B.A., with honors, 1990)

University of Illinois College of Law (J.D., cum laude, 1994)

Profile

Stephen Meinertzhagen focuses his practice at Burke, Warren, MacKay & Serritella on representing clients in class, mass, multi-district litigation (MDL), and individual actions brought throughout the country. Mr. Meinertzhagen has defended companies against numerous claims brought under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), the Home Ownership Equity Protection Act (HOEPA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Fair Housing Act (FHA), and related state law consumer fraud, privacy, and contract claims. Mr. Meinertzhagen has represented financial institutions in lawsuits that include challenges to escrow administration, charges for default fees and costs, lender-placed insurance, lien releases, anti-deficiencies, reconveyance of deeds or mortgages, yield spread premiums, and many other servicing, origination, and payoff practices. He also has represented a broad range of other companies in consumer or securities class actions, including companies in the retail, biotech, insurance, and cable industries. He has substantial appellate experience in both state and federal courts. In addition to the litigation aspect of his practice, Mr. Meinertzhagen frequently counsels mortgage-banking clients on compliance with federal and state laws.

Experience

Below are examples of decisions in cases Mr. Meinertzhagen has handled on behalf of financial institution defendants:

  • McGee, et al v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA, 520 Fed.Appx. 829 (11th Cir. 2013) (affirming dismissal of mass action against loan originator in connection with alleged misrepresentations in the loan application process of borrowers in a condominium development)
  • Coleman v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, 2011 WL 2688998 (3rd Cir. July 12, 2011) (affirming 2009 WL 3806417) (D.N.J. Nov. 10, 2009) (affirming dismissal of class action consumer fraud and related claims against lender for allegedly excessive foreclosure attorneys' fees, costs and post-judgment interest)
  • Gordon, et al v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, et al, 2013 WL 436445 (M.D. Fla. Feb. 5, 2013) (denying plaintiffs' motion for certification of national classes of borrowers with lender-placed flood insurance who alleged unauthorized payments of commissions to a loan servicer's affiliate and that the loan servicer required the borrowers to maintain excessive insurance coverage amounts)
  • Tucker, et al. v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, et al., 2011 WL 280962 (D. Nev. Jan. 25, 2011) (dismissing class action against lender, servicers, and trustees for alleged failure to comply with HAMP loan modification guidelines)
  • Quezada v. Loan Center of California, et al., 2009 WL 5113506 (E.D. Cal. Dec. 18, 2009) (denying class certification of alleged common law and state consumer fraud claims brought against former loan assignee relating to option ARM loan disclosures)
  • Gillespie v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, 2009 WL 4061428 (N.D. Ind. Nov. 20, 2009) (dismissing class action claims under the FDCPA against loan servicer)
  • Biggins, et al., v. Wells Fargo & Company, et al., 2009 WL 2246199 (N.D. Cal. July 27, 2009) (dismissing class action claims against lender that purchased failed institution’s loans from FDIC on basis that lender did not assume alleged liabilities under purchase and assumption agreement)
  • Webb, et al. v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation, 2008 WL 2230696 (S.D. Ohio May 28, 2008) (granting summary judgment against putative class plaintiffs on RESPA and related state law claims for allegedly improper application of funds and escrow administration and charging excessive force-placed hazard insurance premiums)
  • Barrows v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation, et al., 465 F.Supp2d 347 (D. N.J. 2006) (dismissing class action consumer fraud claims against lender based on lack of standing)
  • Chow v. AEGIS Mortgage Corporation, et al., 2005 WL 1750392 (N.D. Ill July 6, 2005) (trial judgment in favor of lender on TILA and consumer fraud claims)
  • Fitts v. Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation, 2006 WL 34322296 (N.J. Super. A.D. Nov. 30, 2006) (affirming dismissal of state consumer fraud class action against lender alleging excessive foreclosure and bankruptcy attorneys’ fees and costs)
  • In re Intercorp International, Ltd., 309 B.R. 686 (Bankr. S.D. N.Y. 2004) (sanctioning debtor, its principal, attorney, and attorney’s firm for filing bad faith bankruptcy petition to avoid imposition of foreclosure judgment following trial contested on basis that loan servicer lacked standing to foreclose and that California’s “security first” rule had been violated)
  • Louis Fink Realty Trust v. Harrison, et al., 2003 WL 22595555 (S.D. N.Y. Nov. 7, 2003) (dismissing class action against lender, affiliated entities, and officers for claims arising under RESPA, FDCPA, Bank Holding Company Act, and Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act)
  • Stein v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, 279 F.Supp.2d 286 (S.D. N.Y. Aug. 27, 2003) (dismissing TILA class action arising out of interest rate calculation for home equity lines of credit)
  • Ploog v. HomeSide Lending, Inc., 2001 WL 1155288 (N.D. Ill. Sept 28, 2001) (denying class certification in a RESPA class action)

Professional/Community

Mortgage Bankers Association , member

Pressroom

330 North Wabash Avenue, Suite 2100
Chicago, Illinois 60611-3607
T: 312.840.7000
F: 312.840.7900