Areas of Practice
- Michigan, 2008
- California, 2009
- Illinois, 2012
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan
- U.S. District Court, Eastern District of California, 2010
- U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2010
- U.S. District Court, Central District of California, 2010
- U.S. District court, Central District of Illinois, 2012
- U. S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, 2012
- U.S. Court of Appeals, 8th Circuit, 2012
- U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit, 2012
Wayne State University, J.D., cum laude
- Bronze Key
University of Chicago, B.A.
In the News
- James Feeney, Brittany Schultz, Dawn Williams Lead Successful EffortNovember 1, 2013
Dawn N. Williams is an associate in the Firm’s Chicago office. Her practice focuses upon a wide range of complex consumer financial services litigation involving the defense of lenders and mortgage servicers in consumer and securities class action litigation. In particular, she has substantial experience in defending lenders and mortgage servicers against the rising number of claims brought by consumers pertaining to loan origination and wrongful foreclosure. Ms. Williams has successfully defeated numerous loan origination and wrongful foreclosure actions in the very early stages of litigation, thereby avoiding costly discovery and further litigation expenses.
Most recently, Ms. Williams had the pleasure of assisting a consumer financial services client in defeating a borrower's petition to the California Supreme Court for review of the Ferguson v. Avelo Mortgage, LLC, 195 Cal.App.4th 1618 (2011) opinion. Ferguson is a critical opinion in which the California Court of Appeal affirmed the authority of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.'s and its assignees' standing to initiate foreclosure proceedings.
Ms. Williams served an internship with Judge Robert Cleland, U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan and was a student attorney with the Free Legal Aid Clinic. She is licensed to practice in Illinois, California and Michigan.
- Crittenden v. HomEq Servicing. United States District for Court the Eastern District of California, Case No. CV F 09-0950. Plaintiff filed suit alleging the lender failed to provide Truth in Lending Act (TILA) disclosures. In addition, the Plaintiff also averred that the lender's foreclosure activities allegedly violated the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA). Ms Williams successfully defeated the Plaintiff's claims with a motion to dismiss. The court held that the Plaintiff's TILA claims were time-barred and his FDCPA action was fatally deficient because a lender's act of foreclosing under a deed of trust does not fall within the scope of the FDCPA.
- Ruffo v. Fremont Investment Group, Inc. et al. California Superior Court for the County of El Dorado, Case No. PC20100380. In Ruffo, the Plaintiff brought conspiracy and agency allegations seeking to hold the lender liable for alleged fraud committed by her loan brokers. The Plaintiff also attacked the foreclosure proceedings, claiming foreclosure was wrongful because the assignment deed of trust was not recorded prior to the foreclosure sale. Ms. Williams successfully defeated the Plaintiff's claims on demurrer. The court held that the Plaintiff's conspiracy and agency claims were conclusory and, thus, failed as a matter of law. The court further held that the Plaintiff’s wrongful foreclosure action failed because (1) tender of the indebtedness owed was lacking; and (2) the issue of whether the assignment deed of trust was recorded prior to the foreclosure sale was not relevant because Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 2932.5 does not apply to deeds of trust.
- Single v. Encore Credit Corp. et al. California Superior Court for the County of Amador, Case No. 10-cv-7003. In Single, the Plaintiff challenged a foreclosure sale on the grounds that Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. ("MERS") allegedly did not have standing to initiate foreclosure proceedings. Ms. Williams successfully defeated Plaintiff's claims on demurrer. The court affirmed that the Plaintiff had no standing to contest MERS’ authority as beneficiary because Plaintiff contractually agreed in the deed of trust that MERS may act as beneficiary and, thus, initiate foreclosure proceedings.
- Torres v. Litton Loan Servicing L.P. United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, Case No. 1:10-cv-01709. In Torres, the Plaintiff filed suit claiming foreclosure was wrongful because his loan servicer allegedly promised that his loan would be processed and reviewed for a loan modification. Ms. Williams successfully defeated the Plaintiff's claims with a motion to dismiss. The court held that the Plaintiff's wrongful foreclosure claims failed for lack of merit because the Plaintiff did not identify any actionable misrepresentation. The court emphasized that the Plaintiff's allegations did not confirm that the loan servicer promised that a loan modification would actually be approved or that foreclosure would not occur.
Memberships & Involvement
- Federal Bar Association
- Oakland County Bar Association
- American Bar Association
- Defense Research Institute