Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts published by “Jeffrey Karek”

8th Cir. Holds No Repurchase Required for Foreclosed Loans

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that the purchaser of residential mortgage loans could not require the seller of the loans to repurchase purportedly defective loans under their agreement after the loans had gone through foreclosure.  However, the seller was required to repurchase the defective loans that had not gone through foreclosure. Accordingly, the Eighth Circuit affirmed the ruling of the trial court granting summary judgment in part to the seller and in part to the purchaser. A copy of the opinion in CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Equity Bank, N.A. is available at:  Link to Opinion. Over the course…

Calif. App. Court (1st Dist) Refuses to Enforce Predispute Jury Waiver Despite Forum Selection Clause

The Court of Appeal of the State of California, First Appellate District, recently held that a forum selection clause in favor of a New York forum was unenforceable where the clause included a predispute jury trial waiver, which is unenforceable under California law but which would have been enforceable under New York law. Accordingly, the Appellate Court reversed the order of dismissal entered by the trial court. A copy of the opinion in Handoush v. Lease Finance Group, LLC is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff storeowner filed a lawsuit against the defendant company alleging that the defendant supposedly defrauded…

7th Cir. Confirms Charging Unconscionably High Prices Alone Not Sufficient for UDAP Claim

The U.S Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that charging too much for goods or services, standing alone, is insufficient to assert a claim under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (“ICFA”). Accordingly, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of a putative class action filed by condominium owners related to fees charged by a property management company and its vendor to provide various documents required to be provided to prospective purchasers of condominium units. A copy of the opinion in Horist v. Sudler and Company is available at:  Link to Opinion. The…

Illinois App. Court (1st Dist) Holds Equitable Owner Not Necessary Party in Mortgage Foreclosure

The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, recently held that an entity with only a purported equitable interest in a property was only a permissive party to a foreclosure and not a necessary party, and therefore the plaintiff mortgagee was not required to serve the entity with process.  Thus, the allegedly defective service did not provide a basis to vacate the judgments entered against it. Additionally, the Court held that because lack of proper service was not apparent from the face of the record, the foreclosure sale buyer’s interest in the property was protected. Accordingly, the First District affirmed the ruling…

DC Cir. Upholds Denial of Class Cert Due to Individualized Inquiries for Injury and Causation

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently held that a trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying class certification on the ground that common issues did not predominate where individual determinations of injury and causation would be required for at least 2,2017 of the 16,065 putative class members. Accordingly, the D.C. Circuit affirmed the trial court’s denial of class certification. A copy of the opinion in In re Rail Freight Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiffs were customers of the four largest freight railroads in the United States (collectively,…

11th Cir. Holds Single Alleged TCPA Violation Not Enough for Standing, Disagrees with 9th Cir.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that the receipt of one unwanted text message in alleged violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act was not enough to allege a concrete harm that meets the injury-in-fact requirement of Article III. In so ruling, the Eleventh Circuit noted that it was not persuaded by the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Van Patten v. Vertical Fitness Group, LLC, 847 F.3d 1037 (9th Cir. 2017), which held that the receipt of two unsolicited text messages constituted an injury in fact.  Accordingly, the Eleventh Circuit reversed the ruling of the…

5th Cir. Holds Refinance Mortgagee Not Entitled to Contractual Subrogation When DOT Invalid

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that a refinance lender is not entitled to contractual subrogation where it does not have a valid deed of trust. Additionally, the Fifth Circuit certified the question of law to the Supreme Court of Texas regarding whether a lender is entitled to equitable subrogation where it failed to correct a curable constitutional defect in the loan documents under § 50 of the Texas Constitution. A copy of the opinion in Zepeda v. Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. is available at:  Link to Opinion. In 2007, a borrower took out a…

9th Cir. Holds Violation of Facial Recognition Law Sufficient for Standing, Upholds Class Cert.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that class plaintiffs alleged a concrete and particularized harm sufficient to confer Article III standing where the defendant company’s alleged collection, use, and storage of the plaintiffs’ biometric information was the substantive harm targeted by the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), which statute protects the plaintiffs’ concrete privacy interests. The Ninth Circuit further held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in certifying the class. Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court orders certifying the class, and denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss. A copy…

9th Cir. Holds No FCRA Violation by CRA When Dispute Did Not Come ‘Directly’ From Consumer

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that where a company sent dispute letters to a credit reporting agency on behalf of a consumer, but the consumer did not identify the items to be disputed, review the letters, or otherwise play any role in preparing the letters, the letters did not come “directly” from the consumer, and the CRA was not required to conduct a reinvestigation under section 1681i of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). As a result, the Ninth Circuit held that the CRA did not violate section 1681i, and also did not act…

SCOTUS Adopts ‘Objectively Reasonable’ Standard for Violations of Bankruptcy Discharge Orders

In determining the legal standard for holding a creditor in civil contempt for attempting to collect a debt in violation of a bankruptcy discharge order, the Supreme Court of the United States adopted an “objectively reasonable” standard, and held that a court may hold a creditor in civil contempt if there is “no fair ground of doubt” as to whether the order barred the creditor’s conduct. Accordingly, the Supreme Court reversed the Ninth Circuit’s ruling, which had applied a subjective standard for civil contempt. A copy of the opinion in Taggart v. Lorenzen is available at:  Link to Opinion. The…

DC Cir. Holds FACTA ‘Faulty Credit Card Receipt’ Claim Enough for Spokeo Standing

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held that where a company provided a consumer with a receipt that displayed her entire 16-digit credit card number and credit card expiration date in violation of the federal Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (FACTA), the consumer alleged a concrete injury in fact sufficient for standing under Spokeo, notwithstanding the fact that the consumer noticed the violation immediately and kept the receipt in a safe location. Accordingly, the D.C. Circuit reversed the judgment of the trial court granting the defendant company’s motion to dismiss, and remanded…

1st Cir. Holds Fannie Mae Not Liable for Unauthorized Acts of Its Agents

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit, on an issue of first impression at the federal appellate level, recently held that the Merrill doctrine – which prevents federal government instrumentalities from being bound by the unauthorized acts of their agents – applies to Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”). Accordingly, the First Circuit affirmed the trial court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of Fannie Mae. A copy of the opinion in Faiella v. Federal National Mortgage Association is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff borrower took out a loan secured by a mortgage on his home.  The lender…