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.
New Jersey’s Appellate Division recently held that a creditor could only reach a debtor’s interest in certificated stock certificates through the actual seizure of the shares, unless the debtor had already surrendered the shares to the issuer or the creditor.
The United States District Court for the Northern District of New York recently held that a restraining notice served on a Wells Fargo Advisors branch in Albany was sufficient to restrain the out-of-state assets of a non-party.
The United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire recently granted a lender summary judgment and held that its mortgage was entitled to priority over a prior-recorded mortgage securing a home equity line of credit (“HELOC”) when the HELOC was not fully paid off despite the lender’s actual knowledge of the lien.
The United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island recently held that a bank’s use of a third party’s name in a letter to a consumer was a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”).
The Iowa Supreme Court recently held that a bank’s overdraft fees did not violate a state usury statute because the fees were not extensions of credit.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently affirmed a lower court and found that a consumer could not maintain a lawsuit against his mortgagee’s assignee for the mortgage servicer’s failure to respond to a request for a payoff balance under the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently affirmed a District Court’s grant of summary judgment dismissing a class action complaint that alleged that a lender’s captive reinsurance arrangement violated the anti-kickback provisions of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) because the claims were time-barred.