Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 70

Lenders beware -- California decision may ignite next wave of lender liability litigation

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
March 13 2013

In a recent decision from the California Court of Appeals entitled Jolley v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, the Court severely curtailed lenders' ability

U.S. Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) orders Argentina to submit proposal for alternative payment plan to avoid debt default... Again

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
Argentina, USA
-
March 8 2013

On March 1, 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ordered Argentina to submit its proposal for the terms on which it is prepared to

Lenders beware - oral statements may trump written agreements

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
March 4 2013

The California Supreme Court recently held that a borrower may rely upon oral promises to support a fraud claim against its lender even when such

California court holds that borrowers may enjoin a foreclosure if a lender fails to meet servicing guidelines

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
February 4 2013

In Pfeiffer v. Countrywide Home Loans, --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2012 WL 6216039 (Dec. 13, 2012), mortgage borrowers filed a damages claim against a

Fifth Circuit expected to issue landmark ruling concerning recognition of foreign bankruptcy proceedings contrary to US public policy

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
November 20 2012

In a widely followed dispute, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will soon render a decision on the appeal of a Texas Bankruptcy Court’s refusal to recognize non-debtor third party releases in the Mexican reorganization proceeding (concurso mercantil) of Mexican glass manufacturer Vitro SAB de CV

TILA does not require a loan servicer to identify who owns a loan, unless the servicer owns the loan by assignment

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
October 16 2012

In Gale v. First Franklin Loan Services, 686 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 2012), the Ninth Circuit held that a borrower has no right under the federal Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) to require a loan servicer to identify the owner of a loan obligation

Unreasonable reliance: Ninth Circuit affirms dismissal of FAL, fraud and UCL claims at the pleading stage

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
September 17 2012

In Davis v. HSBC Bank Nevada, N.A., No. 10-56488, 2012 WL 3804370 (9th Cir. Aug. 31, 2012), the Ninth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of claims for (1) false advertising in violation of the California Business and Professions Code 17500, et seq. (“FAL”); (2) fraudulent concealment; (3) “unlawful” business practices in violations of California Business and Professions Code 17200, et seq. (“UCL”); and (4) “unfair” and “fraudulent” business practices in violation of the UCL, at the pleading stage

Brick by Illinois Brick: Ninth Circuit builds high wall for indirect purchaser suits

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
August 10 2012

The Ninth Circuit unanimously affirmed a grant of summary judgment for defendants in an antitrust suit involving alleged price-fixing of ATM fees, holding that the plaintiffs were indirect purchasers within the meaning of Illinois Brick Co. v. Illinois, 431 U.S. 720 (1977) and could not satisfy an exception to the “Illinois Brick wall,” which deprives indirect purchasers of standing to bring federal antitrust claims

Court of Appeal reaffirms MERS' ability to foreclose, holds that recorded documents do not overcome a specifically pled violation of Section 2923.5

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
July 30 2012

In Skov v. U.S. Bank N.A., 2102 WL 2549811 (June 8, 2012), the Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s decision to sustain a demurrer against plaintiff Andrea Skov’s second amended complaint, holding that she had stated a claim for violation of Civil Code Section 2923.5, which requires a lender to contact a defaulted borrower to discuss alternatives to foreclosure before starting a nonjudicial foreclosure by recording a notice of default

Court of Appeals affirms commercial division ruling stating creditors of SIV-Lites have no cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty and tortious interference without a contract

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
-
USA
-
July 16 2012

In Oddo Asset Management v. Barclays Bank PLC, et al., No. 126 (Jul. 27, 2012), Chief Judge Lippman, in a unanimous decision, affirmed the holdings of the Commercial Division of Supreme Court (Kapnick, J.), as upheld by the Appellate Division, 1st Department, by dismissing a lawsuit where a creditor alleged both a breach of fiduciary duty by the collateral managers of the debtor and a claim of tortious interference with contract against the seller of the debt

next >