Kimberly Wood v. Bank of America N.A. et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia grants Kimberly Wood’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis but denies her emergency motion for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction. The court concludes that the requested relief against Capital One Auto Finance concerns claims unrelated to the underlying foreclosure action and that Wood has not shown a likelihood of success on the merits or actual and imminent irreparable harm.

Holdings

1. A plaintiff may not obtain a preliminary injunction based on new claims unrelated to the complaint or against an entity that is not a party to the action. Wood therefore could not obtain relief against Capital One Auto Finance based on the vehicle-repossession allegations.
2. Wood failed to establish entitlement to a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction because she did not show a likelihood of success on the merits or a likelihood of irreparable harm.
3. Wood failed to show a likelihood of success on her due-process and other constitutional claims because she did not allege government involvement, and private entities are generally not subject to constitutional claims absent state action.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Wood could obtain a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction against Capital One Auto Finance when Capital One was not a party and the proposed injunction concerned claims unrelated to the underlying action.
2. Whether Wood demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits and a likelihood of irreparable harm sufficient to support preliminary injunctive relief.

Disposition

other