The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s holding that the trustee of a California deed of trust is not a “debt collector” under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) because the trustee only was enforcing a security interest.
The United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida recently held that a title insurance company was not liable for the alleged failure to diligently prosecute an action or the alleged failure to conduct a reasonable title search after another court held that the public had a right to access a portion of the beach-front property.
Governor Andrew Cuomo recently signed a bill that clarified the obligations of settlement service providers under two federal consumer statutes by defining the term “consummation of a mortgage loan” as “when the applicant for the mortgage loan executes the promissory note and mortgage.”
The United States Supreme Court recently held that a fraudster who obtained a bank customer’s account information and stole the customer’s money was guilty of bank fraud. See Shaw v. United States, 2016 WL 7182235 (Dec. 12, 2016).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit recently affirmed a lower court’s decision to grant a bank’s motion for summary judgment, holding, inter alia, that the consumer lacked standing to bring the claims under the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”).
The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida recently held that a third-party defendant title insurance company was entitled to summary judgment on the defendant sellers’ claim for negligence in connection with a short sale, on the ground that the insurer owed no duty to the defendant sellers.
The United States District Court for the District of New Jersey recently dismissed a complaint arising from a refinancing of a residential mortgage loan against a lender and a closing agent because the statute of limitations had expired.
The Tenth Circuit recently affirmed that a title insurance policy did not cover a loss caused by an assessment levied against the insured property after the policy was issued, even if the assessment was based on a Notice of Intention to levy assessments that pre-dated the policy.
The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York recently held that plaintiffs in a putative class action alleging violations of New York state statutes requiring mortgagees to file timely mortgage satisfactions do not have Article III in light of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S.Ct. 1540 (2016).