Williams v. Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
URSULA N. WILLIAMS,
Plaintiff,
versus
LAKEVIEW LOAN
SERVICING, LLC, and
LOANCARE, LLC,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION NUMBER
4:20-cv-01900
JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE
ORDER ADOPTING
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Ursula N. Williams filed a class action
complaint against Defendants Lakeview Loan Servicing,
LLC, and LoanCare, LLC, regarding mortgage loan fees.
Dkt 1.
Pending is a Memorandum and Recommendation by
Magistrate Judge Christina A. Bryan, recommending that
two pending motions by Plaintiffs be granted, being
(i) unopposed motion for final approval of class settlement
and entry of final order and judgment, and (ii) motion for
attorney fees, litigation expenses, and service award. See
Dkt 178; see also Dkts 172 & 175 (motions).
The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of
a magistrate judge to which a party has specifically
objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see
also United States v Wilson, 864 F2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir
1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other
portions to which there’s no objection if satisfied that no
clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v
PPG Industries Inc, 434 F3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing
Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F3d
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
January 09, 2026
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:20-cv-01900 Document 180 Filed 01/08/26 in TXSD Page 1 of 2

2
1415, 1430 (5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b)
advisory committee note (1983).
The parties jointly waived the fourteen-day objection
period and stated no objection to the recommendation.
Dkt 179. No clear error otherwise appears upon review and
consideration of the Memorandum and Recommendation,
the record, and the applicable law.
The Memorandum and Recommendation of the
Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and
Order of this Court. Dkt 178.
The order and final judgment as proposed by the
Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED and FINAL JUDGMENT is
hereby ENTERED on that basis.
This action is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
This is a FINAL JUDGMENT.
SO ORDERED.
Signed on _______________, at Houston, Texas.
___________________________
Honorable Charles Eskridge
United States District Judge
January 08, 2026
Case 4:20-cv-01900 Document 180 Filed 01/08/26 in TXSD Page 2 of 2