Press "Enter" to skip to content

NY Court of Appeals (State Supreme Court) Clarifies State Law on Mortgage Loan Acceleration and Foreclosure Statute of Limitation

The New York Court of Appeals, the state’s highest court, recently held that (1) a notice of default sent before a foreclosure did not accelerate the mortgage debt for statute of limitation purposes; and (2) in most circumstances, a lender decelerates mortgage debt when it voluntarily dismisses a foreclosure complaint.

Fla. Supreme Court Holds Consumers May Recover Attorney’s Fees in ‘Account Stated’ and ‘Foreclosure Standing’ Cases

The Florida Supreme Court recently resolved a split in Florida law on the issue of attorney’s fees in favor of consumers, holding that debtors who prevail when a creditor sues under an account stated cause of action instead of for breach of the underlying credit card agreement are entitled to recover attorney’s fees under the so-called “reciprocity provision” of subsection 57.105(7), Florida Statutes.

Illinois App. Court (2nd Dist) Holds Borrower’s Second Attempt to Vacate Foreclosure Judgment Untimely

The Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District, recently affirmed a trial court order dismissing a borrower's attempt to vacate a default foreclosure judgment as untimely because the borrower's first attempt to undo the foreclosure, which was withdrawn without prejudice, did not toll the time to file the petition within 60 days from the borrower's first appearance in the case.

7th Cir. Requires Evidentiary Hearing for Factual Disputes as to Standing

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently vacated a trial court’s judgment of dismissal and remanded with instructions to hold an evidentiary hearing limited to the issue of whether the trial court had subject-matter jurisdiction over a plaintiff’s claim that a dunning letter violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because it did not clearly state that interest would accrue on the debt.

7th Cir. Holds Plaintiff’s Annoyance, Infuriation, Aggravation, Indignation Not Enough for Standing to Sue

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that a debt collection letter that references a legal remedy that could be pursued but is ultimately not pursued is not itself a sufficient basis to confer Article III standing.

7th Cir. Holds FDCPA Consumer’s Confusion and Hiring Attorney Not Enough for Article III Standing

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently vacated judgment in favor of a debt collector against putative class action claims raised by a consumer that its collection letter violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by threatening action that could not legally be taken and amounting to a false representation.

A Close Call in This Debt Buyer Licensing Decision – Jan. 25 Webinar to Explain Tough Licensing Issues for Debt Buyers

On Jan. 19, a federal court in Pennsylvania dismissed a complaint against a debt buyer which alleged violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act stemming from an alleged failure to be licensed under the Pennsylvania Consumer Discount Company Act.