Press "Enter" to skip to content

Posts tagged as “Statutes of Limitation”

Indiana Supreme Court Explains 3 Options Available to Mortgagees as to Statutes of Limitations

The Indiana Supreme Court recently held that there are important legal differences between closed-end installment contracts (such as ordinary mortgage loans) and open-end accounts (such as HELOCs) when considering statute of limitations, and there is no need to impose a rule of reasonableness when a lender sues for payment on a closed-end installment contract.

COVID-19: Several States Toll Statutes of Limitations on Legal Actions

A number of states have tolled the statutes of limitations on legal actions in response to COVID-19. The Iowa Supreme Court announced a toll on statutes of limitations in a March 17 order regarding court procedures. According to a March 23 operations summary from the Iowa Judicial Branch: “The March 17th order is intended to toll the statute of limitations or similar deadline for commencing an action in district court by 48 days. Tolling means you add that amount of time to the statute of limitations. So, for example, if the statute would otherwise run on April 8, 2020, it…

Texas Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Waiver of Statute of Limitations for Deficiency Claims

The Supreme Court of Texas held that the contractual waiver of the statute of limitations on deficiency claims contained in a guaranty agreement was sufficiently “specific and for a reasonable time” as to be enforceable and not void as against public policy. Accordingly, the Texas Supreme Court affirmed the ruling of the appellate court, although it disagreed with portions of the appellate court’s reasoning. A copy of the opinion in Godoy v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA is available at:  Link to Opinion. The lender extended a loan to the borrower, which loan was secured by property owned by the borrower.  A guarantor…

A Tale of Two Fishers: Unsettling Ohio’s ‘Well-Settled Law’ on the Proper Statute of Limitations for Mortgage Foreclosure Actions

• A bankruptcy court in Ohio recently applied the incorrect statute of limitations in a mortgage foreclosure action. • Ohio’s statute of limitations jurisprudence has evolved from an accepted legal proposition derived from one opinion to supposedly well-settled law stating the complete opposite in another opinion. • Federal courts interpreting Ohio law must apply the correct statute of limitations to mortgage foreclosure actions. In the bankruptcy case of In re Fisher, 584 B.R. 185, 199–200 (N.D. Ohio Bankr. 2018), the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Ohio disallowed a lender’s proof of claim on a mortgage based on…

Branded Credit Card Time Barred By Sale of Goods Limitations Period

The  New Jersey Appellate Division held in a surprising decision that a retail-branded credit card was time barred by its four year statute of limitations for the sale of goods. Trial Court Applied Six Year Statute A debt buyer filed a complaint in July 2012 to recover a defaulted store-branded credit card. The debtor counterclaimed under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act arguing that the purchases she made with her card represented the sale of goods and since she defaulted in August of 2006, the debt buyer’s claim was time barred by New Jersey’s Uniform Commercial Code Article 2-725. The trial court…

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…

The Folly of the FTC’s Take on Statutes of Limitation

The Federal Trade Commission had an epiphany last week – debt collectors must disclose in their communications that a debt subject to a statute of limitations defense creates a “legal right” which prevents a creditor from filing a lawsuit. Read it here: FTC Press Release, 1/30/12. It only took the federal agency 33 years of enforcing the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 1692) (the “FDCPA”) to come to this conclusion. Quite a milestone and quite a reflection of our times. Although I haven’t been working on FDCPA issues quite as long as my colleagues in Washington, I’ve…