Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published by “Maurice Wutscher LLP”

The attorneys of Maurice Wutscher are seasoned business lawyers with substantial experience in business law, financial services litigation and regulatory compliance. They represent consumer and commercial financial services companies, including depository and non-depository mortgage lenders and servicers, as well as mortgage loan investors, financial asset buyers and sellers, loss mitigation companies, third-party debt collectors, and other financial services providers. They have defended scores of putative class actions, have substantial experience in federal appellate court litigation and bring substantial trial and complex bankruptcy experience. They are leaders and influencers in their highly specialized area of law. They serve in leadership positions in industry associations and regularly publish and speak before national audiences.

3rd Cir. Holds TCPA ‘Called Party’ Includes Regular User and Roommate of Subscriber

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently vacated an order of dismissal based on lack of statutory standing under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act, holding that a regular user of a phone line and occupant of the residence of the subscriber has standing to bring an action under the TCPA. In so ruling, the Court held that a caller may invoke the consent of the “called party” as a defense even if the plaintiff is someone other than the “called party.” The Court also held that, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(g)(2), it was error for…

Florida Bankruptcy Court Holds Debtor Who ‘Surrenders’ Property in BK Cannot Impede Foreclosure

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida recently held that, at a minimum, “surrender” under Bankruptcy Code §§ 521 and 1325 means a debtor cannot take an overt act that impedes a secured creditor from foreclosing its interest in secured property. In so holding, the Court found that actively contesting a post-bankruptcy foreclosure case is inconsistent with a “surrender” of the property. A copy of the opinion is available at:  Link to Opinion. The Court addressed two separate bankruptcy cases.  The first was a Chapter 7 bankruptcy case, in which the mortgagee instituted a foreclosure action five…

Illinois Appellate Court Holds Borrower Waived Challenge to Trial Court’s Jurisdiction

The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, recently affirmed dismissal of the last of several post-judgment challenges to a default foreclosure judgment, holding that the borrower failed to present a sufficient record on appeal, failed to present sufficient evidence to vacate the default judgment, and also waived any objection to the jurisdiction of the trial court. A copy of the opinion is available here: Link to Opinion. In November 2011, a bank filed a complaint for foreclosure against the borrower for defaulting on his mortgage.  The borrower was served in December 2011, but never answered.  The bank filed a motion for…

11th Cir. Confirms No TILA Right to Cancel as to Loan Secured by Fixtures on Borrower’s Home

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the entry of summary judgment against homeowners who sued under the federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA) for an alleged failure to disclose certain financing terms in connection with a water treatment system, holding that because the credit agreement did not create a security interest in the home and the system was not a fixture, the relevant TILA provisions were not violated because both depend on a security interest in the residence. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. The plaintiff homeowners signed an agreement…

9th Cir. Reverses Dismissal of ‘Unlicensed Foreclosure Trustee’ Putative Class Action

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently reversed the dismissal of a class action that was removed to federal court under the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA).  In so ruling, the Court held that the case fit the narrow “local controversy exception” to CAFA’s grant of federal court jurisdiction. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. The trial court found it had jurisdiction over a class removed from state court under CAFA.  Then, the trial court dismissed the suit for failure to state a claim.  However, the Appellate Court focused its analysis…

5th Cir. Rejects Borrower’s Challenges to MERS, Pooling and Servicing Agreement, Other Claims

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit recently held that an assignment of a mortgage deed of trust (“DOT”) from Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (“MERS”) to an assignee (“Assignee”) was valid under Texas law, because MERS was specifically named as a beneficiary in the DOT and was vested with the power to exercise the rights set forth in the DOT.  Therefore, the Court held, MERS was a valid beneficiary under the Texas Property Code and contract law, and the assignment from MERS to Assignee was valid. The Fifth Circuit further held that the Borrowers lacked standing to challenge…

Fla. App. Ct. (3rd DCA) Applies ‘After Acquired Title’ Doctrine to Save Mortgage Loan

The Third District Court of Appeal of the State of Florida recently affirmed the entry of summary judgment in favor of a mortgagee and against the purchaser at a condominium association assessment foreclosure sale based on the after-acquired title doctrine. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. In July 2007, the borrowers obtained a mortgage loan secured by a condominium unit at a luxury building in Miami Beach. Although the mortgage contained the usual covenant that the borrowers owned legal title to and had the right to mortgage the property, the property was in fact owned…

8th Cir. Holds TILA’s ‘$35 Tolerance’ Right to Cancel in Foreclosures Must Be Exercised After Foreclosure Initiated

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently rejected an attempt to rescind a mortgage loan and recover damages under the federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA), affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of the mortgagee because the borrowers only tried to cancel their mortgage loan before foreclosure proceedings were initiated, and not thereafter. Therefore, the Court held, the borrowers did not qualify for TILA’s expanded right to rescind in foreclosure arising under 15 U.S.C. § 1635(i)(2). A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. On September 28, 2009, the borrowers…

Illinois Supreme Court Holds Trustee of Land Trust Has TILA Right to Rescind

The Supreme Court of Illinois recently held that the trustee of a land trust involved in a reverse mortgage loan transaction is entitled to receive disclosures, including notice of the right to rescind, under the federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA), 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq. The Court also held that, because the disclosures were not provided to the land trust trustee, the three-day right to rescind was extended to three years after the transaction and the trustee timely exercised that right. In addition, the Court held the trustee’s claim for statutory damages was not time barred. A copy…

7th Cir. Rejects Heightened or Stringent ‘Ascertainability’ Requirement for Class Certification

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently refused to impose a heightened “ascertainability” requirement at class certification. More specifically, the Court held that plaintiffs do not have to prove at the class certification stage that there is a “reliable and administratively feasible” way to identify class members under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3), and affirmed the district court’s certification of a class of consumers who purchased a dietary supplement falsely advertised as scientifically tested and proven to relieve joint pain. A copy of the opinion is available at:  Link to Opinion. The putative class plaintiff sued…

Illinois Court Holds New Mortgagee May Be Substituted After Foreclosure Sale, Indicates Borrower’s Counsel May Be Sanctioned

The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, recently held that a failure to file a motion to substitute plaintiff in a pending foreclosure proceeding prior to the judicial sale did not invalidate the sale. Also, considering the absence of any meaningful argument advanced on appeal, the Court further ordered counsel for defendant to show cause why he should not be sanctioned. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. The mortgagee filed a foreclosure action, and a judgment of foreclosure was ultimately entered. Thereafter, the mortgagee transferred servicing to a new mortgagee. The new mortgagee appeared at the…

Mass. Federal Court Imposes FCRA Preemption on State Law Claims

The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently held that the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) preempts Massachusetts state law claims for violations of the Massachusetts Credit Reporting Act, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93, § 54A, and the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A. The decision also held that the mere furnishing of information following a bankruptcy discharge, without more, is not actionable. A copy of the opinion is available at: Link to Opinion. The decision adds to a growing split among federal courts on both issues. Credit Reporting a Loan Modification and…