Christy is married with a young daughter. She enjoys reading, talking about books, international travel, and other people’s cooking.
Listed in Charlotte Business Journal, "Women in Business Achievement," 2012 Listed in North Carolina Super Lawyers, "Rising Star," Civil Litigation, 2015-2016 Listed in North Carolina Lawyers Weekly,"Leaders in the Law," 2017 Ditech Financial, LLC Memorandum of Understanding with the United States Trustee Program and associated remediation projects (2019) Lead attorney on Ditech’s negotiation of a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the United States Trustee Program memorializing approximately $35 million in remediation to more than 20,000 homeowners for (1) unnoticed loan modifications for borrowers in bankruptcy resulting in overpayments and improperly capitalized unnoticed fees and costs, (2) failure to run annual escrow analyses for borrowers in bankruptcy, and (3) failure to waive unnoticed tax and insurance advances following bankruptcy discharge. Designed and counseled Ditech in implementing the remediation required under the MOU as part of this settlement. Represent lending institutions and mortgage servicing companies nationwide Regularly represent lending institutions and mortgage servicing companies nationwide against claims related to mortgage origination and servicing, loss mitigation, bankruptcy compliance, lien priority, title insurance disputes, and REO matters. United States v. Bank of America, et al. (2012) - National Mortgage Settlement Represented Ally Financial, Inc., Residential Capital, LLC, and GMAC Mortgage in the largest national joint state/federal government settlement in history. The case began with a “robo-signing” investigation and then broadened into examination of the mortgage industry. The case involved 49 state attorney generals, 48 state banking departments, the Department of Justice, the Department of Treasury, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, and the Federal Trade Commission. Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corporation v. GMAC Mortgage Corporation,United States District Court for the Middle District of Fla., Case No. 5:05-cv-260 Aggressively represented GMAC Mortgage in a commercial dispute against Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corporation related to a series of purchase and sale agreements governing thousands of residential mortgages loans. Taylor Bean asserted claims for breach of contract against GMACM, and GMACM asserted claims against Taylor Bean for breach of contract, offset/recoupment, declaratory judgment, indemnification, fraudulent inducement and attorneys’ fees. After three years of litigation and shortly before trial, the case ended in a mutually agreeable settlement. Following the settlement, subsequently represented GMAC in further repurchase demands with Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Corp., which were resolved without further litigation. Kee v. Fannie Mae (Utah District Court, 2011) A borrower, an aggressive serial filer, filed a quiet title and wrongful foreclosure action against the investor following his 2008 foreclosure. The foreclosure itself followed on the heels of multiple suits by the borrower against his prior lenders and servicers for a variety of claims related to the origination of his loan and a PMI dispute. The borrower has been deemed an abusive filer by the Utah Federal Court in prior litigation, and Bradley filed a motion to dismiss all of his claims based on res judicata and failure to state a claim under Utah law. The court granted that motion in its entirety and that ruling was upheld on appeal by the 10th Circuit. Pamela Michaels v. Homecomings Financial, LLC, et al.,CV-2007-900160 (Ala. 2009) Plaintiff borrower filed suit against defendant lender for breach of contract, fraud, fraudulent inducement, fraudulent suppression and negligence, alleging, among other things, that the defendant lender orally misrepresented the terms of her $1 million mortgage loan. The case/defense presented a difficult and unique application of the statute of frauds. Bradley obtained summary judgment in favor of defendant lender wherein all claims of the plaintiff against the defendant lender were dismissed with prejudice. Plaintiff subsequently appealed, but after extensive briefing, the court denied the plaintiff’s appeal and affirmed the trial court’s judgment.
