holding that a bank and attorney who filed a foreclosure action were not acting under color of state law for purposes of § 1983
Summary of this case from Talley v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co.No. 89-3072.
May 23, 1989.
D.Del., Roth, J., 703 F.Supp. 1122.
AFFIRMED.
holding that a bank and attorney who filed a foreclosure action were not acting under color of state law for purposes of § 1983
Summary of this case from Talley v. Deutsche Bank Trust Co.holding that bank and attorney who filed foreclosure action against real property did not engage in state action for purposes of § 1983
Summary of this case from Nanya-Nashut v. Centex Home Equity Corp.holding Bank and attorney who filed foreclosure action against real property did not engage in state action for purposes of Section 1983
Summary of this case from Nanya-Nashut, ex rel Hand v. Bankoneaffirming district court's holding that a private bank, even if found to be a state actor, “would still be entitled to assert a defense of qualified immunity”
Summary of this case from Duhon v. Healthcare Professionals' Found. of La.Full title:Shipley v. First Federal Sav. Bank and Loan Ass'n of Delaware
Court:United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit
Date published: May 23, 1989
Defendant points to three district court cases supporting this contention. See Nanya-Nashut ex rel. Hand v.…
Troutt v. Peoples National BankNumerous courts, including the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, have held that banks are private actors which…