Case: 12-12079 Date Filed: 01/29/2013 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 12-12079
Non-Argument Calendar
________________________
D.C. Docket No. 1:10-cv-00886-CC
NATHANIEL GARNER,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus
WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, INC.,
llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll Defendant-Appellee.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia
________________________
(January 29, 2013)
Before MARCUS, PRYOR and KRAVITCH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
Case: 12-12079 Date Filed: 01/29/2013 Page: 2 of 3
Nathaniel Garner appeals pro se the dismissal without prejudice of his
amended complaint against Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(b)(1). Garner complained about a wrongful foreclosure, the breach of a duty to
act in good faith, and fraud by Wells Fargo. We affirm.
Garner lacked standing to complain about the foreclosure by Wells Fargo.
To establish standing, a plaintiff must satisfy three requirements: an injury in fact,
causation, and redressability. Friends of the Earth, Inc. v. Laidlaw Envtl. Servs.
(TOC), Inc., 528 U.S. 167, 180–81, 120 S. Ct. 693, 704 (2000). Marsha Meade
executed a warranty deed transferring to Garner a condominium unit in Atlanta,
Georgia, “subject to[] . . . [a] SECURITY DEED FROM MARSHA W. MEADE
TO SECRSOURCE MORTGAGE, LLC . . . IN THE SUM OF $246,881.00 . . .
WHICH WAS TRANSFERRED TO WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE.”
Under Georgia law, which the parties agree applies, Wells Fargo had “full power
and authority to foreclose or enforce the evidences of debt” that Meade owed on
the condominium unit. Ga. Code Ann. § 44-14-531; see Universal Chain
Theatrical Enters. v. Oldknow, 168 S.E. 239, 240 (Ga. 1933). Meade was the sole
mortgagor on the property and the only person who might have been injured
because of the alleged misconduct by Wells Fargo. Garner did not assume,
guarantee, or become obligated to pay the mortgage when he purchased the
property. And Garner was not entitled to act on Meade’s behalf in the absence of
2
Case: 12-12079 Date Filed: 01/29/2013 Page: 3 of 3
evidence that some obstacle prevented her from protecting her own interests. See
Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490, 499, 95 S. Ct. 2197, 2205 (1975). Garner, “who is
neither the . . . mortgagor nor [a] priv[y], nor in any way personally liable on the . .
. mortgage debt, has no standing to complain of defects in the foreclosure of the . .
. mortgage.” United States v. Palmer, 578 F.2d 144, 146 (5th Cir. 1978).
We AFFIRM the dismissal of Garner’s amended complaint.
3