Samuel Mickens v. Mercantile Bank Mortg. Co.

NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION
File Name: 17a0530n.06
No. 16-2674
FILED
Sep 14, 2017
DEBORAH S. HUNT, Clerk
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
SAMUEL MICKENS, )
)
Plaintiff-Appellant, )
)
v. ) ON APPEAL FROM THE
) UNITED STATES DISTRICT
MERCANTILE BANK MORTGAGE COMPANY, ) COURT FOR THE WESTERN
LLC, a Michigan Limited Liability Company, et al., ) DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
)
Defendant-Appellee. )
)
BEFORE: NORRIS, SUHRHEINRICH, and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM. Plaintiff-Appellant Samuel Mickens challenges the district court’s
ruling that his Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) claims for discriminatory lending practices
against Defendants Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, LLC and its parent, Mercantile Bank
Corporation (collectively Mercantile) are time-barred under 15 U.S.C. § 1691e(f). The district
court held that the two-year limitations period ran from Mercantile’s last alleged culpable act in
2007, making Mickens’ 2015 filing untimely. The district court also held that Mickens was not
entitled equitable tolling on the facts alleged.
On appeal, Mickens argues that the district court erred by rejecting the discovery rule and
failing to apply equitable tolling, and that as a practical matter this improperly converted
§ 1691e(f) into a statute of repose. We review the motion to dismiss for failure-to-state-a-claim
ruling de novo and, having duly considered the parties’ arguments below and on appeal, we find
No. 16-2674, Mickens v. Mercantile Bank Mortg. Co., LLC
that the district court properly disposed of each of his arguments in its well-reasoned opinion
dated October 27, 2016. We therefore AFFIRM the judgment of the district court based on the
analysis set forth in its opinion.
-2-