The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently held that a debt collector’s letter to debtors that stated a current balance but that did not disclose that the amount could increase over time due to interest or fees violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”).
The Arizona Court of Appeals recently held that an individual who was the trustor of an insured trust and the managing member of an insured limited liability company had no standing to sue a title insurer under the title policies.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently held that a condominium association may obtained multiple liens on condominium units for unpaid common expenses, all of which may have priority over prior-recorded mortgages.
The United States District Court for the District of Columbia recently held that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) lacked the authority to investigate an entity’s process for accrediting for-profit schools.
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York recently held that a debtor whose property was sold at a foreclosure sale lost his right of redemption despite satisfying the judgment before the property could be conveyed.
The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey recently held that a tax sale foreclosure complaint filed against the wrong defendant did not violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) because the plaintiff failed to allege that the foreclosure sought a “debt” under the FDCPA.
The South Carolina Supreme Court recently held that county administrators and registers of deed may not pursue an action against Mortgage Electronic Registration System (“MERS”) under the state’s recording statute.
The Supreme Court of New York, Suffolk County, recently held that a municipality could not fine a shell fisherman for harvesting shellfish from underwater lands because the lands were owned by the State.
New Jersey’s Appellate Division recently held that a creditor’s complaint, in which it sought to nullify a debtor’s transfer of property, was made within the statute of limitations for a fraudulent transfer, because the four-year limitations period did not begin running until the deed at issue was recorded.
The United States Supreme Court recently affirmed an opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirming the dismissal of the claim by two spouses that a lender’s requirement that they sign guarantees violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (“ECOA”), but the Court’s 4-4 decision has limited applicability.