Press "Enter" to skip to content

Colorado Legislation Would Create Earnings Exemption for Medical Debt

Colorado House Bill 19-1089, introduced on Jan. 14, would amend the Colorado Revised Statutes dealing with property and earnings exemptions by adding a new definition for “medical debt,” which would mean “any obligation or alleged obligation of a person to pay money arising out of the provision of health care services as defined in section 10-16-102(33).” Under the legislation, “the earnings of an individual whose family income does not exceed four hundred percent of the current federal poverty guidelines, adjusted for family size, are not subject to garnishment or levy under execution of attachment if the writ is the result of…

9th Cir. Holds Debtor Who Successfully Challenges Automatic Stay Fee Award Also Entitled to Appellate Fees

In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that a debtor who successfully challenges — as opposed to a debtor who defends — an award of attorney’s fees and costs for violations of the automatic stay under § 362(k) of the Bankruptcy Code is entitled to an award of appellate fees and costs. In so ruling, the Court reversed the trial court’s order denying the debtor’s motion for appellate attorney’s fees and costs, and remanded the matter to the trial court with instructions to remand to the bankruptcy court to calculate…

11th Cir. Rejects FDCPA Claim That Debt Collector Misidentified the Creditor

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a consumer’s complaint alleging that a collection letter violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692, et seq., by failing to meaningfully convey the name of his creditor, as required. In so ruling, the Eleventh Circuit concluded that dismissal was appropriate because the consumer did not claim that the collector misidentified his creditor, and the ‘least sophisticated consumer’ who had been a patient at a hospital would surely understand the hospital to be the creditor when its name was listed next to the…

Ohio Supreme Court Holds Mortgagee May Use Parole Evidence to Show Intent of Mortgagor

The Supreme Court of Ohio recently held that a mortgagee may enforce a mortgage against a mortgagor who signed, initialed, and acknowledged the mortgage even though the body of the mortgage agreement does not identify the mortgagor by name. In so ruling, the Supreme Court of Ohio allowed a mortgagee to use parole evidence to determine the mortgage signatory’s intent where there is an ambiguity. A copy of the decision in Bank of New York Mellon v. Rhiel is available at:  Link to Opinion. A bank issued a mortgage loan to husband and wife borrowers.  Only the husband executed the note. Both…

9th Cir. Holds ‘Unlawful Information Collection and Sharing’ Class Action Improperly Removed Under CAFA

In a 2-1 decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a putative class action against state entities and a private contractor for allegedly collecting and sharing personal data without authorization was essentially a local controversy and was therefore correctly remanded to state court under an exception in the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the ruling of the trial court remanding the matter to state court. A copy of the opinion in Kendrick v. Conduent State and Local Sols. is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiffs sought to maintain an action in…

New York Passes Law Addressing Collection of Decedents’ Debts

On Dec. 28, 2018, New York Senate Bill 3491 was signed into law and will become effective March 29, 2019.  The legislation, in its final form, simply prohibits “principal creditors” and debt collection agencies from: (a) making  any  representation that a person is required to pay the debt of a family member in a way that contravenes the FDCPA; and (b) making any misrepresentation about the family member’s obligation to pay such debts. A “principal creditor” is defined under current law as “any person, firm, corporation or organization to whom a consumer claim is owed, due or asserted to be…

8th Cir. Holds Property Damage Insurer Improperly Withheld ‘Labor Depreciation’ from Claim Payments

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed a trial court’s order certifying a class of Arkansas homeowners against an insurer that improperly withheld amounts for labor depreciation when paying covered property damage claims under their insurance policies. A copy of the opinion in Stuart v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company is available at:  Link to Opinion. A putative class of Arkansas homeowners (“insureds”) sued their insurer alleging that between Nov. 21, 2008 and Dec. 6, 2013 the insurer improperly withheld labor depreciation costs when paying insureds for covered property damage under their insurance policies. The insureds…

7th Cir. Upholds Denial of Class Certification in TCPA Cases Due to Individualized Issues of Consent

On a consolidated appeal for purposes of disposition, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently affirmed the trial courts’ rulings denying class certification to lead plaintiffs who received faxed advertisements that allegedly did not comply with the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and the Federal Communication Commission’s Solicited Fax Rule. In so doing, the Seventh Circuit, relying upon the D.C. Circuit’s 2017 decision in Bais Yaakov of Spring Valley v. FCC regarding the validity of the FCC’s 2006 Solicited Fax Rule, concluded that class treatment was not a superior mechanism for cases involving unsolicited faxes, as the question of…

11th Cir. Rejects Argument That Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Discharged Mortgage Loan

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that a mortgage loan with a post-plan maturity date was not discharged in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy because the plan did not “provide for” the debt and modify the repayment terms of the mortgage. The Eleventh Circuit also held that the debt was not discharged because discharge would violate 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(2)’s anti-modification provision for mortgages secured by the debtor’s principal residence. A copy of the opinion in Mildred M. Dukes v. Suncoast Credit Union is available at:  Link to Opinion. The debtor had two mortgage loans on her…

Fla. App. Court (3rd DCA) Holds Monthly Text Messages with Link to Terms of Service Sufficient to Compel Arbitration

The District Court of Appeal for the Third District of Florida recently reversed a trial court’s order denying a defendant’s motion to compel arbitration, holding that monthly text messages with a hyperlink to the defendant’s terms of service provided the consumer with sufficient notice that disputes regarding his relationship with the defendant were subject to arbitration. A copy of the opinion in MetroPCS Communications, et al. v. Jorge Porter is available at:  Link to Opinion. A consumer filed a putative class action lawsuit against his cellular telephone provider alleging that it improperly charged the consumer and other customers sales tax on the…

Wisc. Supreme Court Holds Fire Spreading Across Multiple Properties Was Single ‘Occurrence’ Under CGL Policy

Reversing the rulings of the trial court and intermediate appellate court, the Supreme Court of Wisconsin recently concluded that a fire which spread across several properties was a single ‘occurrence’ for purposes of the commercial general liability policy, and not a new ‘occurrence’ each time the fire crossed a property line. By determining that the fire was a single ‘occurrence’ under the policy, the policy’s reduced per-occurrence limit for property damage “due to fire, arising from logging or lumbering operations” under its incorporated endorsement, rather than its higher aggregate limit, applied. A copy of the opinion in Ecura Insurance v. Lyme…

 9th Cir. Holds State Contract Law SOL Applies to TILA Rescission Claims Following Timely Cancellation

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently held that Washington’s six-year statute of limitations governing contracts instead of the Truth in Lending Act’s one-year statute of limitations applies to claims to enforce rescission under TILA, after a notice of right to cancel was timely submitted. The Ninth Circuit also held that the trial court should have given the borrowers leave to amend the complaint because the borrower’s rescission claim under TILA was not time barred, and amending the complaint would not be futile. A copy of the opinion in Hoang v. Bank of America is available at:  Link…