Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Financial Services

The following summaries are of recent published decisions of the California appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. The summaries are presented without regard to whether Severson & Werson represented a party in the case.

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

CCP 580d does not bar a creditor from suing a borrower to collect on a note secured by a junior lien that was extinguished by a non-judicial foreclosure of a senior lien, even if the creditor also held the senior lien on which it non-judicially foreclosed.  Read More

An entity that collects debts that it has purchased for its own account is not a “debt collector” for FDCPA purposes, since it is collecting on the debts for itself and not for another.  Read More

Reporting to a credit agency on the deliquency or overdue status of a debt is not a per se violation of the automatic stay, which only forbids collection on the debt, not reports about it.  Read More

Trial court properly found defendants liable under the unfair competition law in view of their fraudulent scheme to acquire semi-abandoned properties through a combination of adverse possession and the recordation of wild deeds.  Read More

Neither the statute of limitations nor a release barred borrower’s recovery for usurious interest charged in a series of roll-over notes and forbearance agreements.  Read More

Filing a facially time-barred creditor’s claim in a Chapter 13 is not a false, deceptive, misleading, unconscionable or unfair means of collecting a debt under the FCDPA, since Chapter 13 debtors are protected from paying dubious claims by the Chapter 13 trustee's supervision of the case.  Read More

An Anti-SLAPP motion was properly granted against suit alleging that creditor violated state and federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Acts by recording an abstract of judgment creditor had obtained against plaintiff’s former domestic partner.  Read More

A loan servicer violates Civil Code section 2923.6 by sending the borrower a loan modification denial letter erroneously stating that the borrower has only 15 days to appeal the denial.  Read More

Plaintiff city sufficiently alleged standing to sue by averring that defendant banks' lending to African-Americans and Latinos on less favorable terms than white Anglos led to a tide of foreclosures in minority neighborhoods, lowering property values and thus the city's tax revenues while also requiring greater expenditures by the city to police and maintain the gutted neighborhoods; but further consideration… Read More

A creditor seeking to void a transfer under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act loses if the transferee proves that it gave reasonably equivalent value for the transfer and lacked fraudulent intent and actual, not constructive, knowledge of the transferor’s fraudulent intent.  Read More

If a junior lien securing a non-recourse debt is wiped out by a senior creditor’s foreclosure sale before the debtor files a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition, the sold-out junior lienholder is not entitled to a recourse claim against the Chapter 11 bankruptcy estate.  Read More

Under 28 USC § 3304(a), the federal government may void as fraudulent any transfer made by a debtor who does not receive equivalent value, and a judgment debtor’s disclaimer of an inheritance fits that definition.  Read More

Borrowers’ Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claims arising from non-judicial foreclosure actions were properly dismissed, except for claim under 15 USC § 1692f(6) for threatening foreclosure when no right to foreclose existed.  Read More

A home loan borrower could survive summary judgment on her claims for breach of contract and violation of the unfair competition law based on deceptive processing and denial of the borrower's loan modification applications, since servicer should have known from the beginning that borrower’s loan exceeded eligibility guidelines yet reviewed her three times anyway.  Read More

Successive suits by mortgage borrower based on breach of contract and the Truth in Lending Act are not barred by the merger-and-bar aspect of res judicata, since the primary right sued upon is different—TILA protects a right of disclosure of key loan terms, whereas contract law protects the parties' agreement.  Read More

A purchaser at a foreclosure sale need not perfect its title in the property by recording a trustee's deed upon sale before serving the occupant(s) with a notice to quit, so long as title is perfected before the ensuing unlawful detainer action is filed and served.  Read More

A factoring agreement under which an agricultural products distributor sells its accounts receivable to a factor at a discount is not a breach of the distributor’s fiduciary duties to growers, so the factor is not liable for the distributor’s debts to growers.  Read More

A declaratory relief claim based on equitable subrogation in a priority dispute between two home equity lines of credit is not governed by a three-year limitations period and so was wrongly dismissed.  Read More

1 6 7 8 9 10