Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “Eighth Circuit”

8th Cir. Holds Removal Proper Where Absence of CAFA Jurisdiction Not ‘Established to a Legal Certainty’

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that the requirements for the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) were met and the matter was properly removed to federal court, where the plaintiffs could not “establish to a legal certainty” that their claims were for less than the requisite amount. A copy of the opinion in Dammann v. Progressive Direct Insurance Company is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff insureds purchased automobile insurance from the insurer. The insureds’ policies required deductible payments of $100 for medical expense payments and $200 for economic loss payments.  Both policies provided…

8th Cir. Holds ‘Citizen’ Does Not Equal ‘Resident’ Under CAFA’s ‘Local Controversy’ Exception

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that “citizen” is not synonymous with “resident” under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), 28 U.S.C. 1332(d), such that the class action lawsuit at issue could not be remanded to state court under CAFA’s “local controversy” exception but rather should remain in federal court. A copy of the opinion in Tammy Hargett v. St. Bernard’s Hospital Inc, et al is available at:  Link to Opinion. The plaintiff was injured in a car accident and received treatment at a hospital, which required her to assign her Medicaid beneficiary rights to it. The hospital later contracted with…

8th Cir. BAP Holds Secured Creditor Has No Duty to Verify Ownership or Possession of Collateral

The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit recently held that a secured creditor obtained a valid lien on collateral because technical defects in the bill of sale did not invalidate a transfer of title to the collateral, and rejected the argument that the secured creditor should have inspected the bill of sale before advancing funds. A copy of the opinion in In re Leonard is available at:  Link to Opinion. This was a dispute over the validity and priority of interest in collateral in goods.  The seller sold the collateral to the debtor, a broker who delivered the collateral…

8th Cir. Reverses Data Breach Class Settlement, Holds Appellate Bond Not to Include Delay-Based Administrative Costs

In a data breach putative class action, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that the trial court had not conducted the required “rigorous analysis” of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)’s class certification prerequisites when certifying the settlement class or when evaluating arguments raised by class objectors. Additionally, the Eighth Circuit also reversed the trial court’s ruling on the amount of the appeal bond, holding that an appellate bond should not include costs associated with delays in administering a class action settlement while the matter was on appeal. A copy of the opinion in Jim…

8th Cir. Holds Trial Court Did Not Err in Using ‘Percentage of the Benefit’ Over ‘Lodestar’ in TCPA Class Fee Award Dispute

In an appeal involving the settlement of four separate class actions under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by electing to use the “percentage-of-the-benefit” method to calculate class counsel’s fee award, as opposed to the “lodestar” method. The Eighth Circuit also held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing the respective class counsel to distribute the award amongst themselves without judicial oversight or approval. A copy of the opinion in Lindsey Thut  v.  Life Time…

8th Cir. Upholds Class Settlement in ‘Excessive Property Inspection’ Case, Rejects Attempt to Add Trespass Claims

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s approval of a proposed class settlement in an action arising from a mortgage loan servicer’s practice of automatically ordering and charging for drive-by property inspections on delinquent borrowers, holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion. In so ruling, the Court also affirmed the trial court’s denial of a borrower’s motion to join a trespass claim to the putative class action. A copy of the opinion in Kenneth Njema v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is available at:  Link to Opinion. In 2008, four borrowers…

8th Cir. Rejects FDCPA Claims Regarding Follow Up Calls for Location Information, Alleged Harassment

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that a debt collector did not violate the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act for making subsequent telephone calls to a person other than the consumer regarding the location of the debtor, because the debt collector reasonably believed that the person’s initial response was incomplete. In so ruling, the Eighth Circuit held as a matter of law that 14 calls over a period of approximately two months did not rise to the level of harassment prohibited under the FDCPA, at 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(5). A copy of the opinion in Kuntz…

Eighth Circuit Confirms Collection Action Not ‘Adverse Action’ Under FCRA

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a debtor’s federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), and state law claims where a debt collector for a major bank pulled the debtor’s credit report and served a garnishment summons after the debtor allegedly had sent a cease-and-desist letter to the debt collector. In so ruling, the Court confirmed that: (1) a debt collector may pull a debtor’s credit report for collection purposes, and that the debt collector did not need to notify the debtor before reviewing such information;…

7th Circuit FDCPA Decision Sides with CFPB, FTC on Time Barred Debt

Earlier this week the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in the consolidated appeals of McMahon v. LVNV Funding, LLC and Delgado v. Capital Management Services, L.P., concerning the collection of time barred debt without the threat of litigation. The result is not good for the credit and collections industry, principally because it further confuses application of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act across the nation. Background In both cases the debt collectors offered to settle the debts, without mention of a lawsuit or any legal action. Both suits claimed that the letters were false, deceptive and misleading, in violation…