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.

Illinois App. Court (1st Dist) Rejects Borrowers’ Allegations of Fraudulent Reverse Mortgage Scheme

In an action by a group of borrowers who alleged a fraudulent reverse mortgage scheme, the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District, recently affirmed the trial court’s judgment against the borrowers, and held that neither the discovery rule nor the continuing violation rule tolled the five-year statute of limitations for the borrowers’ declaratory judgment claims, making them untimely.

Calif. App. Court (2nd Dist) Holds Bank Owed Duty of Care to Deposit Customer as to Blocked Account

The California Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, recently reversed a trial court's ruling, and held that a defendant bank owed the plaintiff law firm a duty of care based on the special relationship the bank had with the law firm as an intended beneficiary of a probate court’s blocked account order.

7th Cir. Rejects County’s Allegations That Lenders Engaged in ‘Integrated Equity-Stripping Scheme’

In an action by Cook County, Illinois against various lenders for alleged increased expenses supposedly arising from heightened default rates, in which the County asserted that the lenders engaged in an “integrated equity-stripping scheme," the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed a summary judgment ruling in favor of the defendant banks.

9th Cir. Holds TCPA ‘Prerecorded Voice’ Did Not Apply to Text Messages

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a trial court’s dismissal of a putative class action brought under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act. In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that the text messages at issue did not use “prerecorded voices” under the TCPA because they did not include audible components.

Illinois Supreme Court Rules Separate Claims Accrue Under BIPA for Each Alleged Violation

The Illinois Supreme Court, after receiving a certified question from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, recently held that a separate claim accrues under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act each time a private entity improperly scans or transmits an individual’s biometric identifier or information.

9th Cir. Vacates Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant for CAFA ‘Amount in Controversy’ Deficiencies

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that it could sua sponte question a defendant’s assertions of jurisdiction under the federal Class Action Fairness Act, and that the record did not sufficiently demonstrate that CAFA’s amount-in-controversy requirement was met here because the requisite $5 million amount was not evident from the face of the complaint nor the defendant’s notice of removal and supporting declaration.

7th Circ. Sets Standard for FCRA ‘Incomplete or Inaccurate Furnishing’ Claims

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed a summary judgment ruling in favor of a mortgage loan servicer and held that no reasonable jury could find that the servicer provided patently incorrect or materially misleading information sufficient to support a claim under Section 1681s-2(b) of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act.

6th Cir. Confirms Bank Entitled to Restitution When Payment Made by ‘Mistake’ and Not ‘For Value’

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that, because a bank teller paid checks on an account that had insufficient funds by “mistake” and did not take those checks “for value” by issuing replacement “teller’s checks,” the bank was entitled to restitution for the amount of the checks under the Tennessee Commercial Code.