 |
| Shane Lanham, 20/20 Valuations Inc, Shani Mott, Nathan Connolly, real estate appraiser, appraisal, discrimination, maryland, 209 Churchwardens, Baltimore, Maryland 21212, lawsuit, complaint, defamation, Mary Cummins |
UPDATE 09/27/2024 From Desiree Mehbod via LinkedIn. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/desiree-mehbod-2676566b_vacap-supports-shane-lanhams-legal-fight-activity-7239249005879128064-kfAJ?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
"The latest update from Shane Lanham's defamation case reveals that the discovery phase has concluded, with the plaintiffs retaining an "urban sociologist & race scholar", Junia Howell, as their expert witness, rather than an appraisal professional. This move suggests an attempt to shift the focus away from the specific appraisal in question & towards a broader analysis of Shane's historical valuation methods. To combat this strategy, Shane has retained the services of an expert from the American Enterprise Institute, who has experience in addressing the flaws in studies claiming appraisal bias. However, these additional legal expenses have increased the financial burden on Shane, underscoring the critical importance of the appraisal community rallying behind him & contributing to his GoFundMe campaign. As Shane emphasizes, this case is not just about him, but about protecting the integrity & reputation of the entire appraisal profession, making it a fight that concerns us all. The VIRGINIA COALITION OF APPRAISER PROFESSIONALS INC (VaCAP) has stepped up to support Shane, contributing $1,000 to his GoFundMe campaign & challenging other appraisal organizations to match their donation. This demonstrates VaCAP's steadfast commitment to defending Shane & upholding the integrity of the appraisal industry as a whole."
Junia Howell is a fraud. She promotes the same false idea as Andre Perry. She also promotes falsehoods about redlining and other issues. She knows nothing about appraisals. Glad Shane hired an AEI person. I wrote about her here. If I had money, I'd donate to Shane. Sadly I don't.
https://mary--cummins.blogspot.com/2023/01/appraisal-subcommittee-hearing-on.html
09/13/2024 Jeremy Bagott just wrote a good piece about this case.He'll post the link soon to mail chimp on his Twitter. I'll try to remember to come back here and update it. In the meantime here is his main Twitter link. https://x.com/jbagott
06/11/2024 Appraiser Shane Lanham is raising money for his legal fees for his counter suit. https://www.gofundme.com/f/raise-funds-for-trial? He stated recently that the second higher appraisal doesn't include a comp on a busy road like the subject. All the comps used have remodeled kitchen, baths unlike the subject. That easily explains the difference in value. It's as I predicted below.
03282024 Link to another article about case.
https://appraisersblogs.com/loandepot-appraisal-discrimination-settlement/
03272024 One Plaintiff Dr Mott passed away early March. There has been a settlement by the AMC. Lawyer Peter Christensen has the story. I agree with Peter that most Plaintiffs truly believe they have been discriminated against. They've probably been discriminated against based on their race in the past so they believe any discrepancy must be race discrimination.
There is a confidential financial component to the settlement but publicly the AMC "loanDepot.com agreed to an extensive revamping of: (a) its reconsideration of value practices; (b) fair housing/non-discrimination training requirements; (c) statistical tracking of appraisal outcomes; and (d) contractual requirements for AMCs and appraisers." I personally feel this won't change anything in the real world. As AEI research has shown there is no discrimination or racial bias in real estate appraisals. It's a math formula. Based on my research the appraiser was correct and Plaintiffs in this case were wrong, see below for evidence.
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7178159528901816320/
As far as I know the appraiser has not settled.
UPDATE: Shane Lanham real estate appraiser with 20/20 Valuations Inc just sued homeowners Shani Mott and Nathan Connolly for defamation for their alleged false public claims about him. This is a countersuit to their United States District Court case 1:22-cv-02048-SAGU.S. District Court, District of Maryland (Baltimore).
Shani Mott and Nathan Connolly sued Shane Lanham for racial discrimination based upon his real estate appraisal valuation of their home. They stated he intentionally appraised their home for less than market based on, due to their race, color because he is allegedly a "white racist." Below is the court information.
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 1:22-cv-02048-SAG Connolly et al v. Lanham et al, Assigned to: Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher, Cause: 42:405 Fair Housing Act, Date Filed: 08/15/2022, Nature of Suit: 443 Civil Rights: Accomodations.
I read the original case last year but was too busy with other things to fully research it and write an article. I did do some research at that time. Based on my research the Plaintiffs over paid for their home when they originally bought it. It is not fully remodeled or upgraded. It's on a very busy highway. It's smaller with fewer beds, bath than MLS listings.
It was on the market a while starting at $536K 04/2016 then $529K 06/2016 then $499 07/2016 then $479 10/2016 then sold $450 03/2017 a year later. 10% drop in list price. Sold 6% less than final list price. Just because you pay less than list doesn't mean it's a good price. You can still be paying over market value. It took a long time to sell because of condition, size, bed/bath count and location on a very busy road. These people intentionally bought almost the cheapest house in the neighborhood because it had major issues. Now they want it to be worth as much as the best home in the entire neighborhood. There is a more valuable neighborhood near the subject property neighborhood. The homeowners wanted the appraiser to only use fully remodeled larger sales in that more expensive neighborhood that are not on busy streets like subject. Those comps aren't similar to subject. They are superior. I agree with every argument made by appraiser Shane Lanham in his answer and counter claim.
The busy street is a negative. Most people would NEVER buy a home on a busy multi-lane double lined highway. The issue is noise pollution, air pollution, safety because of cars and security. The subject also has fewer bedrooms, bathrooms than the higher sales. The original appraisal was seven months before the second appraisal. The market appreciated between the time of the first and second appraisal.
We have not seen the second appraisal. Based on what I'm seeing it came in way too high. Maybe the appraiser was pressured by the lender, AMC or homeowners. Maybe he feared a complaint or lawsuit. Considering that the false narrative of the "racist white appraiser" has been amplified by the media I could understand that. I still would never come in at any value other than market value. That second appraiser's misleading value is the reason for the original frivolous, meritless lawsuit.
Shane Lanham has been severely damaged. Look at the false online reviews against his business. I've read some articles and the comments are hateful. I bet he got death threats. I'm sure he's stressed to the max. I'm positive he lost business. His reputation has been destroyed.
In these instances of alleged racism in appraisals you can't prove the results were the result of racism. You must prove that to win a lawsuit against an individual appraiser. It could be error, malpractice or totally explainable by facts like in this case and the other cases I've investigated. There is no evidence except the homeowner not liking the value. It's just someone's emotion. It feels that way to them in light of the current tension between some whites and some blacks, Latinos. Police brutality against blacks, Latinos like George Floyd, Tyre Nichols is flaming the tension. The misleading, misinterpreted paper by Andre Perry makes it worse. Politicians, some nonprofits, media promoting the false narrative of the racist appraiser to get votes, money for their department, donations for their nonprofit and ad revenue. It's also the existence of the very real income gap. I'm sure some really feel the appraiser was racist because of their past experience with some whites, racism and what's happening in the media. Some are on the defensive. Still, one needs to separate emotion from facts.
An example comes to mind. A black woman on LinkedIn said a white man told her to smile. She flew into a rage saying it was racist. She said the white man treated her like a black minstrel player that he wanted to entertain him. Ask any woman of any color and they will all tell you that guys have told them to smile. Happened to me and I have white skin. The real reason has nothing to do with race. Here's an article about it. I separated my emotion from fact and realized that I wasn't targeted because of my race, color, hair color, what I was wearing... It was because I was a female and the person telling me to smile was a guy.
I just did some robot appraisals. Mind you all of these are too high because robots don't know it's inferior condition, size and location on a busy street. AVMs will appraise these homes higher than market value for this reason. Knowing that all of the AVMs came in much lower than the second appraisal. That shows the second appraisal is the issue. Did their buddy do the second appraisal? Something is very wrong there. The only time an appraiser should come in higher than robots is when the subject is vastly superior in quality, upgrades, condition, view, specific location or some other factor. This property should come in lower than robots for that reason.
First appraisal was on 06/14/21 for $472K
Second was on 01/18/22 for $750K
Below are robot values which are too high because they don't know subject is on busy street, smaller and in inferior condition to most other homes recently sold. The AVMs are also using comps from subject area and other surrounding neighborhoods. They should only use comps in the same neighborhood with same busy street location and condition. The names of the sites have links to their guesstimates of value. Notice the large range in values. CoreLogic is the lowest. They are generally the most accurate as they use sales in same area. CoreLogis is high because AVMs can't see condition, location on busy road or the real smaller size.
June 2021 6/21
Collateral Analytics $564K
CoreLogic $542K
Quantarium $576K
January 2022 1/22 $571 $591 $610
01/23 $765
01/23 $669
6/21 $620
1/22 $605
01/23 range $602-750
6/21 $559K
1/22 $587K
01/23 $627K
Original lawsuit by Plaintiffs.
https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/refinance-complaint-loandepot.pdf
Shane Lantham's lawsuit for defamation, counterclaims and answer to above lawsuit.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1gvlDz22T4zUfhnNPW8KqFDeZbhSK_CRJ/view?usp=sharing
Good articles about this lawsuit. Turns out Nathan Connolley teaches racism, capitalism and politics. He wrote a book "A World More Concrete: Real Estate and the Remaking of Jim Crow South Florida." Mott teaches African studies. Looks like this lawsuit was to promote themselves.
https://www.workingre.com/appraiser-counter-sues-black-plaintiffs-who-alleged-discrimination/
This article posted the first appraisal and motion to dismiss. Because the homeowner mentioned and included parts of the appraisal in the lawsuit the appraiser may share it in a lawsuit. Normally these are confidential and can't be shared with anyone except the client.
Another good article on the case.
https://appraisersblogs.com/appraiser-countersuing-black-homeowners-4-defamation
Docket to date is below
Date Filed
#
Docket Text
08/15/2022
1
COMPLAINT
against 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham, Loandepot.com, LLC ( Filing fee $ 402receipt number AMDDC-10102080.), filed by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott. (Attachments: #
1
CivilCover Sheet, #
2
Summons, #
3
Summons, #
4
Summons)(Relman, John) (Entered: 08/15/2022)
08/15/2022
2
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Soohyun Choi
(Filing fee $100, receipt number AMDDC-10102238.) by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott(Relman, John) (Entered: 08/15/2022)
08/15/2022
3
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Gabriel Diaz
(Filing fee $100, receipt number AMDDC-10102268.) by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott(Relman, John) (Entered: 08/15/2022)
08/15/2022
Jury Trial Demand by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott(jb5s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/15/2022)
08/15/2022
4
Summons Issued 21 days as to 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham, Loandepot.com, LLC.(jb5s,Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/15/2022)
08/15/2022
5
NOTICE of Case Assignment. This case has been assigned to Magistrate Judge Beth P. Gesner. NathanConnolly, Shani Mott or counsel for Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott are required to review and complywith the Magistrate Judge Pilot Project Procedures which can be downloaded
here
. Pursuant toStanding Order 2019-07, which can be downloaded
here
, counsel has 14 days from the date of thisnotice to file their consent, or decline to consent to proceed before a U.S. Magistrate Judge which canbe downloaded
here
. To file your consent, go to
Civil > Other Filings > Other Documents > 25 PctMag - Consent to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge
. To file your declination, go to
Civil > OtherFilings > Other Documents > 25 Pct Mag - Decline to Proceed Before a Magistrate Judge
. Failure tofile a consent or declination will result in issuance of an Order to Show Cause. Please review the casemanagement order that has been issued in this case. Magistrate Election Form due by 8/29/2022. (jb5s,Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/15/2022)
08/15/2022
6
Case Management Order. Signed by Magistrate Judge Beth P. Gesner on 8/15/2022. (jb5s, DeputyClerk) (Entered: 08/15/2022)
08/19/2022
7
PAPERLESS ORDER granting
2
Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Soohyun Choi.Directing attorney Soohyun Choi to register for pro hac vice filing in the District of Maryland throughPACER at https://pacer.uscourts.gov/ if attorney has not already done so. The
Pro Hac Vice
optionmust be selected when registering. Signed by Clerk on 8/19/2022. (mh4s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered:08/19/2022)
08/19/2022
8
PAPERLESS ORDER granting
3
Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Gabriel Diaz. Directingattorney Gabriel Diaz to register for pro hac vice filing in the District of Maryland through PACER athttps://pacer.uscourts.gov/ if attorney has not already done so. The
Pro Hac Vice
option must beselected when registering. Signed by Clerk on 8/19/2022. (mh4s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/19/2022)
08/26/2022
Case Reassigned to Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher. Magistrate Judge Beth P. Gesner no longer assignedto the case. (jf3s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 08/26/2022)
09/01/2022
10
SUMMONS Returned Executed by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott. All Defendants.(Relman, John)(Entered: 09/01/2022)
09/07/2022
11
NOTICE of Appearance by Mark Patrick Johnson on behalf of 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham(Johnson, Mark) (Entered: 09/07/2022)
09/07/2022
12
NOTICE of Appearance by Gregg Edward Viola on behalf of 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham(Viola, Gregg) (Entered: 09/07/2022)
09/07/2022
13
NOTICE of Appearance by David Edward Mills on behalf of Loandepot.com, LLC (Mills, David)(Entered: 09/07/2022)
09/07/2022
14
NOTICE of Appearance by Katherine L Halliday on behalf of Loandepot.com, LLC (Halliday,Katherine) (Entered: 09/07/2022)
09/07/2022
15
Joint MOTION for Extension of Time
to Respond to Complaint and to Set a Briefing Schedule forDefendants' Motions to Dismiss
by Loandepot.com, LLC (Attachments: #
1
Text of Proposed Order)(Halliday, Katherine) (Entered: 09/07/2022)
09/07/2022
16
ORDER granting
15
Joint Motion to Extend Time to Respond to Complaint and to Set a BriefingSchedule for Defendants' Motions to Dismiss. Signed by Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher on 9/7/2022.(kk5s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered: 09/07/2022)
09/07/2022
17
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Michelle L. Rogers
(Filing fee $100, receipt number AMDDC-10141478.) by Loandepot.com, LLC(Halliday, Katherine) (Entered: 09/07/2022)
09/07/2022
18
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for Jorge Sarmiento
(Filing fee $100, receipt number AMDDC-10141493.) by Loandepot.com, LLC(Halliday, Katherine) (Entered: 09/07/2022)
09/08/2022
19
PAPERLESS ORDER granting
17
Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Michelle L. Rogers.Directing attorney Michelle L. Rogers to register for pro hac vice filing in the District of Marylandthrough PACER at https://pacer.uscourts.gov/ if attorney has not already done so. The
Pro Hac Vice
option must be selected when registering. Signed by Clerk on 9/8/2022. (mh4s, Deputy Clerk)(Entered: 09/08/2022)
09/08/2022
20
PAPERLESS ORDER granting
18
Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of Jorge Sarmiento.Directing attorney Jorge Sarmiento to register for pro hac vice filing in the District of Marylandthrough PACER at https://pacer.uscourts.gov/ if attorney has not already done so. The
Pro Hac Vice
option must be selected when registering. Signed by Clerk on 9/8/2022. (mh4s, Deputy Clerk)(Entered: 09/08/2022)
10/12/2022
21
Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer
to Respond to Complaint
by 20/20 Valuations,LLC, Shane Lanham (Attachments: #
1
Text of Proposed Order Order)(Johnson, Mark) (Entered:10/12/2022)
10/13/2022
22
PAPERLESS ORDER granting
21
Motion for Extension of Time to Answer. Answer due 11/14/2022.Signed by Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher on 10/13/2022. (vals, Chambers) (Entered: 10/13/2022)
10/27/2022
23
MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney
by Loandepot.com, LLC (Attachments: #
1
Text of ProposedOrder)(Halliday, Katherine) (Entered: 10/27/2022)
10/27/2022
24
PAPERLESS ORDER granting
23
Motion to Withdraw as Attorney. Attorney Katherine L Hallidayterminated. Signed by Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher on 10/27/2022. (kb3s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered:10/27/2022)
10/28/2022
25
AMENDED COMPLAINT against 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham, Loandepot.com, LLC,filed by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott.(Relman, John) (Entered: 10/28/2022)
10/31/2022
26
NOTICE by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott re
25
Amended Complaint
Amended Complaint Redline
(Relman, John) (Entered: 10/31/2022)
11/07/2022
27
Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to
25
Amended Complaint
and forBriefing Schedule for Motion to Dismiss
by 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham (Attachments: #
1
Text of Proposed Order Order)(Johnson, Mark) (Entered: 11/07/2022)
11/08/2022
28
ORDER granting
27
Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to
25
AmendedComplaint and for Briefing Schedule for Motion to Dismiss
and for Briefing Schedule for Motion toDismiss
. Signed by Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher on 11/8/2022. (kb3s, Deputy Clerk) (Entered:11/08/2022)
12/05/2022
29
MOTION to Appear Pro Hac Vice for David DePriest
(Filing fee $100, receipt number AMDDC-10304019.) by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott(Relman, John) (Entered: 12/05/2022)
12/05/2022
30
PAPERLESS ORDER granting
29
Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice on behalf of David DePriest.Directing attorney David DePriest to register for pro hac vice filing in the District of Marylandthrough PACER at https://pacer.uscourts.gov/ if attorney has not already done so. The
Pro Hac Vice
option must be selected when registering. Signed by Clerk on 12/5/2022. (mh4s, Deputy Clerk)(Entered: 12/05/2022)
12/12/2022
31
MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
by 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham(Attachments: #
1
Memorandum in Support Memo of Law, #
2
Exhibit 1, #
3
Exhibit 2, #
4
Exhibit 3,#
5
Exhibit 4, #
6
Exhibit 5, #
7
Exhibit 6, #
8
Exhibit 7, #
9
Exhibit 8, #
10
Text of Proposed OrderOrder)(Johnson, Mark) (Entered: 12/12/2022)
12/12/2022
32
MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
by Loandepot.com, LLC (Attachments: #
1
Memorandum in Support, #
2
Exhibit A, #
3
Exhibit B, #
4
Exhibit C, #
5
Text of Proposed Order)
(Mills, David) (Entered: 12/12/2022)
12/13/2022
33
NOTICE by Loandepot.com, LLC re
32
MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
Replacement Exhibit A to Motion to Dismiss
(Mills, David) (Entered: 12/13/2022)
12/29/2022
34
Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply as to
28
Order on Motion for Extensionof Time to File Response/Reply,
by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott (Attachments: #
1
Text of ProposedOrder)(Relman, John) (Entered: 12/29/2022)
12/29/2022
35
PAPERLESS ORDER granting
34
Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply re
32
MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
,
31
MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State aClaim
. Signed by Judge Stephanie A. Gallagher on 12/29/2022. (vals, Chambers) (Entered:12/29/2022)
01/24/2023
36
ANSWER to
25
Amended Complaint
, COUNTERCLAIM against All Plaintiffs by 20/20 Valuations,LLC, Shane Lanham.(Johnson, Mark) (Entered: 01/24/2023)
01/24/2023
37
Local Rule 103.3 Disclosure Statement by 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham identifying OtherAffiliate General Star National Insurance Company for 20/20 Valuations, LLC, 20/20 Valuations,LLC, Shane Lanham, Shane Lanham.(Johnson, Mark) (Entered: 01/24/2023)
01/26/2023
38
NOTICE of Appearance by David S Wachen on behalf of 20/20 Valuations, LLC, Shane Lanham(Wachen, David) (Entered: 01/26/2023)
01/30/2023
39
Joint MOTION to Amend/Correct 35 Order on Motion for Extension of Time to File Response/Reply,
by Nathan Connolly, Shani Mott (Attachments: #
1
Text of Proposed Order)(Relman, John) (Entered:01/30/2023)
Mary Cummins of Cummins Real Estate is a certified residential licensed appraiser in Los Angeles, California. Mary Cummins is licensed by the California Bureau of Real Estate appraisers and has over 35 years of experience.
- Mary Cummins LinkedIn
- Mary Cummins Meet up
- Cummins Real Estate on Facebook
- Mary Cummins Real Estate blog
- Cummins Real Estate on Google maps
- Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates
- Mary Cummins biography resume short
- Mary Cummins Real Estate Services
- Animal Advocates fan page at Facebook.com
- Mary Cummins
- Mary Cummins Animal Advocates on Flickr photos
- Mary Cummins Animal Advocates on Twitter.com
- Mary Cummins on MySpace.com
- Mary Cummins on YouTube.com videos
- Mary Cummins of Animal Advocates on Classmates
- Mary Cummins on VK
No comments:
Post a Comment