The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that a borrower had Article III standing to sue in federal court for statutory damages from a mortgagee for its alleged violations of New York’s mortgage satisfaction recording statutes.
Posts tagged as “Second Circuit”
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently affirmed a trial court’s judgment in favor of a consumer reporting agency (CRA).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently affirmed a trial court’s grant of judgment on the pleadings and dismissal of two individual plaintiffs’ claims in a putative class action lawsuit.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that property in which a debtor’s dependent son lived part-time with his father qualified for the so-called homestead exemption contained in section 522(d)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code, regardless of state law.
The Second Circuit was relatively quiet when it came to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) in 2020, but when it did issue opinions, several were quite impactful in our industry.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that a debt collector did not violate the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) where it unintentionally sent a valid debt collection communication to a non-debtor.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that two plaintiff consumers failed to state a claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) because the plaintiffs did not allege that they reported the alleged errors to a consumer credit reporting agency or that any such agency notified them of the alleged errors; and there is no private right of action arising from a direct dispute of credit reporting with only the furnisher.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) recently issued its final rule clarifying the “Permissible Interest on Loans that are Sold, Assigned, or Otherwise Transferred”.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that the federal False Claims Act (FCA) applies to persons who present false or fraudulent loan applications to Federal Reserve Banks (FRBs) because the latter are “agents of the United States” within the meaning of the FCA and the loan money is provided by the United States to advance a government program or interest within the meaning of the FCA.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of a claim under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act holding that an FDCPA violation occurs, for the purposes of the FDCPA’s one year statute of limitations, when an individual is injured by the alleged unlawful conduct. In so ruling, the Second Circuit clarified that in Benzemann v. Citibank N.A., 806 F.3d 98 (2d Cir. 2015), it did not intend to expand the FDCPA’s statute of limitations by requiring individuals to be injured and receive “notice of the FDCPA violation.” A copy of the opinion in Benzemann…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a case for lack of jurisdiction because when the plaintiffs withdrew their class action allegations in an amended complaint, the withdrawal divested the court of jurisdiction under the federal Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). A copy of the decision in Gale v. Chicago Title Insurance Company is available at: Link to Opinion. The plaintiff, an attorney on behalf of himself and a putative class, sued several title insurance company defendants alleging that they had tortiously interfered with business opportunities and violated Connecticut law because under Conn. Gen.…
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently affirmed entry of summary judgment in favor of a prominent media and information firm against a job seeker’s claims that it furnished false information in a purported “consumer report” obtained by a prospective employer in alleged violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. In so ruling, the Court concluded that the media company was not a “consumer reporting agency,” because it did not intend to furnish “consumer reports” through its services, and thus was not subject to the FCRA, 15 U.S.C. § 1681, et seq. A copy of the opinion…