Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published by “Daniel Miller”

Daniel Miller is an associate in the Chicago office of Maurice Wutscher LLP, practicing in the firm’s Consumer Credit Litigation and Commercial Litigation groups. Daniel has substantial experience as a litigation attorney representing clients in both individual and class action cases involving the FDCPA, TCPA, FCRA, TILA, RESPA, Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, and various other federal and state statutes. He also has experience in representing corporate clients in commercial transactions and executive compensation agreements. Daniel earned his Juris Doctor from the University of Illinois College of Law, and his Bachelor of Arts in History from Durham University in the United Kingdom. He is admitted to practice law in Illinois and the U.S. District Courts for the Northern District of Illinois and the Southern District of Illinois.

7th Cir. Holds FDCPA ‘Debt Validation Notice’ and ‘Caller Identification’ Issues Not Enough for Standing

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently reversed and remanded a trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff alleging violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act with instructions to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.

8th Cir. Affirms Denial of Class Cert in UDAP Case

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed a trial court's denial of class certification, concluding that (1) the plaintiffs' nationwide class action complaint alleged violations of the Minnesota Consumer Fraud Act, and thus rebuttal evidence was permitted; (2) the defendant company had evidence challenging the extent to which each plaintiff allegedly relied on the alleged omissions; and (3) individualized findings on reliance were therefore required, which would likely lead to multiple mini-trials within the class action.

7th Cir. Holds TCPA Plaintiff Sufficiently Alleged ‘Agency’ Relationship for Complaint to Survive Dismissal

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently reversed the dismissal of a plaintiff’s complaint alleging supposed violations of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Illinois Automatic Telephone Dialing Act, concluding that the plaintiff alleged enough of an agency relationship between the defendants and the entities that placed the subject calls for the complaint to move forward.

2nd Cir. Holds De-Acceleration of Mortgage Loan Does Not Require Voluntary Discontinuance of Foreclosure Action

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently vacated a trial court's grant of summary judgment to the plaintiff in an action to quiet title for a property subject to a mortgage. While the appeal was pending for this matter, an intervening ruling in the New York Court of Appeals undermined the reasoning of the trial court. Therefore, the Second Circuit vacated the trial court’s judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Illinois App. Court (1st Dist) Upholds Order Appointing Receiver in Mixed Use Foreclosure Action

The Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, recently affirmed a trial court’s order appointing a receiver as to a mixed-use property in foreclosure, because the foreclosing mortgagee established a reasonable probability that it would prevail in a final hearing and the defendant mortgagors failed to show good cause as to why a receiver should not be appointed.

Calif. App. Court (4th Dist) Holds Prior Unlawful Detainer Judgment Did Not Bar Borrowers’ Current Claims

The California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, recently held that a trial court erred in ruling that several borrowers' claims were precluded by a prior unlawful detainer judgment entered against them following the foreclosure sale of their home.

Calif. App. Court (5th Dist) Reverses Quiet Title Judgment Against Foreclosing Mortgagee

The California Court of Appeals for the Fifth Appellate District recently reversed a trial court's ruling under the California Code of Civil Procedure section 473 to set aside a default and a judgment quieting title against a mortgagee that had foreclosed and acquired title to the subject property.