The Illinois Appellate Court, First District, recently held that a homeowner was barred from challenging a foreclosure where the deed to the property had vested to a third party.
Posts published by “Ryan Grotz”
Ryan Grotz practices in Maurice Wutscher's Commercial Litigation, Consumer Credit Litigation, and Appellate groups. He has substantial experience in all phases of commercial litigation, including motion practice, written discovery, depositions, mediations, and bench and jury trials. Ryan received his Juris Doctor from the Chicago-Kent College of Law, where he was an associate editor on the Access to Justice Student Editorial Board. He was awarded his Bachelor of Business Administration degree from the University of Iowa. Ryan is licensed to practice law in Illinois and the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. For more information, see https://mauricewutscher.com/attorneys/ryan-grotz/
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that, under the federal Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) statute of limitations provisions, a quiet title action brought by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae is a "contract" claim with a six-year statute of limitations, and not a "tort" claim subject to a three-year statute of limitations.
The Court of Appeals of California, First District, recently held that the Federal Trade Commission's "Holder Rule" limitation on recovery applies to attorney fees, such that a plaintiff’s total recovery on a Holder Rule claim — including attorney fees — cannot exceed the amount paid by the plaintiff under the contract.
The Appellate Court of Illinois, Second District, recently held that jurisdictional defects in service of process that did not affirmatively appear on the face of the foreclosure court record protected the rights of an innocent third-party foreclosure against the claims of the borrower.
Joining similar rulings by the Eighth and Tenth Circuits, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit recently held that each violation of the FDCPA gives rise to a separate claim governed by its own statute of limitations period.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a conditional offer from a lender was not a valid tender to satisfy the superpriority portion of an HOA lien.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit recently held that wages withheld as a voluntary 401(k) contribution prior to filing bankruptcy were not considered "disposable income" under a Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that a reduction of a jury's punitive damages award from $5.8 million to only $500,000 was appropriate where the jury's award was grossly excessive and in violation of the due process clause.
Agreeing with similar rulings in the First, Ninth, and Tenth Circuits, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that the Fair Credit Reporting Act does not require consumer reporting agencies to determine the legal validity of disputed debts.
The Court of Appeal for the State of California, Fourth Appellate District, recently held that a trial court improperly denied a consumer’s motion to compel an answer to the consumer's special interrogatory, as the interrogatory was relevant to create a reasonable inference which would have defeated a lender’s motion for summary judgment.
The Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, recently held as a matter of law that banks owe no duty to depositors to monitor other depositors’ accounts for fraud.
In an action by a lender and its affiliate to recover insurance proceeds for defense costs of a federal qui tam action and indemnification for the resulting settlement, the New York Court of Appeals recently held that an arbitration panel can reconsider an initial determination, or “partial final award,” so long as the determination or award does not resolve all of the issues submitted for arbitration.