Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published in “Banking”

7th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of Putative Class Action Alleging Excessive NSF Fees

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed a trial court's ruling that a credit union’s fee practices did not breach its contract with a customer. In so ruling, the Seventh Circuit held that the credit union did not make any promises not to use the "available balance" method to assess nonsufficient fund (NSF) fees or not to charge multiple fees when a transaction is presented to it multiple times. 

Calif. App. Court (1st Dist) Holds Late Fee Was ‘Unlawful Penalty’ Under Calif. Law, Vacates Arbitration Award in Lender’s Favor

The California Court of Appeal for the First Appellate District recently reversed a trial court's decision to affirm an arbitration award that upheld the validity of a late payment fee assessed to borrowers in the event of a borrower's default.

11th Cir. Holds Florida’s ‘Standard Search Logic’ Exception Did Not Save Incorrect Debtor Name in UCC-1s

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that a bank did not perfect its security interest in a business debtor’s assets because the two UCC-1 Financing Statements filed with the Florida Secured Transaction Registry that failed to correctly name the debtor were “seriously misleading” under Florida Statute Section 679.5061(2), as the Registry does not implement a “standard search logic” necessary to trigger the safe harbor exception set forth in Florida Statute Section 679.5061(3).

2nd Cir. Holds NY’s Interest-on-Escrow Law Preempted as to National Banks

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that: (1) New York’s interest-on-escrow law is preempted by the National Bank Act of 1864 under the “ordinary legal principles of pre-emption,” Barnett Bank of Marion Cnty., N.A. v. Nelson, and (2) the amendments to the NBA in the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act did not change this analysis.

11th Cir. Holds 1-Year Period for Disputing Wire Transfers Cannot Be Modified by Contract  

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that, consistent with rulings as to an identical New York law, the one-year period to make a demand for a refund of a fraudulent wire transfer under Florida Statutes § 670.202 may be not modified by contract.

3rd Cir. Holds Penn Regulator’s Actions Against Out-of-State Lender Did Not Violate Commerce Clause

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently reversed a trial court's ruling that the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities violated the Commerce Clause by issuing and attempting to enforce a subpoena to an out-of-state vehicle title lender regarding the out-of-state lender's interactions with Pennsylvania residents.