5th Cir.

White v. Fifth Third Bank, National Association

April 27, 2026 ·25-40647 ·Per Curiam · By Maria Santos

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court ruling dismissing a pro se plaintiff's foreclosure-related claims. The court held that non-diverse defendants were improperly joined and that the plaintiff failed to establish viable legal theories against the diverse defendants.

Background

Plaintiff Zachary-Wayne White, proceeding pro se, sued multiple entities connected to the foreclosure of his home, including Fifth Third Bank and Fannie Mae. Defendants removed the case to federal court, arguing that non-diverse defendants were improperly joined. The district court dismissed the suit, finding improper joinder and granting summary judgment against the remaining defendants.

The court’s reasoning

The court affirmed the district court’s finding that the non-diverse defendants were improperly joined because they could not be proper defendants for the claims asserted, such as quiet title. Regarding the summary judgment, the court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that the bank lacked authority to foreclose because it held the deed but not the note, noting this theory is not viable under Texas law. The court also found the plaintiff’s other arguments regarding the silver surety bond and due process violations to be meritless, as the record contained sufficient evidence of the note’s existence.

What it means going forward

The ruling reinforces that pro se litigants must present viable legal theories against diverse defendants to maintain federal jurisdiction and that the split-the-note theory is not a valid defense in Texas foreclosure cases.