The Supreme Court of New York, Westchester County, recently held that the notice provisions of New York Real Property Actions and Proceedings Law § 1304 (“RPAPL § 1304”) do not apply when the borrower is deceased, and a mortgagee foreclosing on a residential property therefore does not need to notify the estate.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit recently held that a misleading validation notice in a debt collection complaint violated the fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) because it would mislead an unsophisticated consumer as to his or her method and deadline to dispute the claim.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that a loan servicer may have violated the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) for responding to a borrower’s qualified written request regarding an alleged error in her account only by informing the borrower that there had been no error and without providing any further information.
A Florida appellate court recently affirmed a lower court’s decision that municipal liens placed on a property after a final judgment of foreclosure but before the judicial sale were not discharged.
The New Jersey Appellate Division recently held that the six-year breach of contract statute of limitations does not apply to actions to collect debts arising from the use of a retail store’s credit card when the use of the card is restricted to that store and, instead, the Uniform Commercial Code’s four-year sale of goods statute of limitations applies.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently held that a debt collector did not violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) by filing a time-barred proof of claim in a bankruptcy proceeding.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently reversed a district court’s decision and found a Nevada statute requiring lenders to “opt in” to receive notice if a homeowners’ association is going to foreclose and extinguish the lender’s lien is unconstitutional.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit recently affirmed a lower court’s grant of summary judgment to a title insurer and held that a parcel with a 30-year revocable right-of-way is not unmarketable and that the policy does not ensure a permanent right of access.
The California Court of Appeals recently affirmed a trial court’s order dismissing breach of contract and negligence claims against a title insurance company and holding that the issuance of a preliminary title report does not require the insurance company to issue a policy.
The United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina recently granted a title insurer’s motion for summary judgment, holding that the insured’s own actions created the title defect at issue in violation of Exclusion 3(a) of the title policy.