Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

Experts

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance 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.

District Court (Ga.) Says FCRA Plaintiffs’ Expert Survives Daubert Challenge

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Ma v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, 2017 WL 6378979, at *6 (N.D.Ga., 2017), Judge May denied an FCRA defendant's Daubert challenge to a plaintiff's FCRA expert. This case arises from an alleged mix-up of consumer credit files, sale of inaccurate information to creditors, and a failure to fix the problem. Dkt. No. [1]. Plaintiff alleges these problems occurred when another person's… Read More

4th Cir. Finds Furnisher’s Reinvestigation to be Improper, but Reverses Puni’s Award as Constitutionally Excessive

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Daugherty v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, 2017 WL 3172422, (4th Cir. July 24, 2017), the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the jury's finding of improper reinvestigation and willfulness against a furnisher, but found the punitive damages award to be constitutionally excessive. We must affirm the district court's judgment regarding Ocwen's liability for willful misconduct if there was sufficient… Read More

District Court (Mo.) Allows, But Limits, Testimony of FCRA Plaintiffs’ Expert Evan Hendricks

by Scott J. Hyman |

In McDonough v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 2016 WL 4944099, at *2–3 (E.D.Mo., 2016), Judge Hamilton allowed, but limited, the testimony of Evan Hendricks in an FCRA case. Upon consideration of the Parties' arguments, this Court concludes that Mr. Hendricks is qualified to serve as an expert in this case. He has served as an expert witness in numerous other… Read More

District Court (Az.) Disqualifies Purported-Expert Hendricks from Testifying about Much of Plaintiff’s FCRA Case

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Martin Valenzuela, v. Equifax Information Services LLC, 2015 WL 6811585, at *2-3 (D.Ariz., 2015), Judge Rayes disqualified Plaintiff's expert Evan Hendricks from testifying about much of Plaintiff's FCRA case, except whether Experian had reasonableness policies and procedures. Hendricks is qualified to testify about Equifax's “inner workings” and opine on the reasonableness of its credit reporting policies and procedures. For… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Denies New Trial to Automobile Finance Company; Affirms Jury Verdict of $430,000 to FCRA/ID Theft Plaintiff

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Seungtae Kim v. BMW Financial Services NA, LLC, 2015 WL 6680911, at *2 (C.D.Cal., 2015), Judge O'Connell denied a new trial to an automobile finance company, against whom a $430,000 jury verdict was assessed.  The facts were as follows: On August 28, 2015, the jury rendered its unanimous verdict, finding in Plaintiff's favor on two of his three claims. (Judgment… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Says Furnisher’s FCRA Re-Investigation was Reasonable based on What CRA Told It; “Double-Reporting” Was Not Inaccurate

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Gustafson v. Experian Info. Solutions Inc., No. 2:14-CV-01453-ODW EX, 2015 WL 3477071, at *6 (C.D. Cal. June 2, 2015), Judge Wright granted summary judgment to a debt collector on a Plaintiff's FCRA claim, alleging that the debt was "double-reported". “[S]ummary judgment is not precluded altogether on questions of reasonableness,” but “[i]t is only appropriate ‘when only one conclusion about the… Read More

District Court (Ala.) Finds Factual Question on Whether TCPA Defendant Used ATDS; But Says TCPA Definition of “Use” of ATDS “Must Have Some Outer Limit”

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Hunt v. 21st Mortg. Corp., 2014 WL 426275 (N.D.Ala. 2014), Judge Acker struck Plaintiff's TCPA ATDS Expert  Robert Biggerstaff as being incompetent on the subject of whether Defendant used an ATDS.  However, Judge Acker found a factual questions nevertheless on whether a ATDS was used. In its Opinion and Order of September 17, 2013 (Doc. 31), this court joined the Ninth… Read More

9th Circuit Holds NOI Plaintiff’s Nominal Payment Designed to Give Standing Failed to Confer Such Standing; Says Plaintiffs’ FCRA Expert Evan Hendricks’ Opinion Was “Vague and Abstract”

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Wright v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., --- Fed.Appx. ----, 2013 WL 6137482 (9th Cir. 2013), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed in an unpublished opinion that an automobile customer who paid a small sum of money to set up his right to bring an NOI class action lacked UCL standing to bring the claim.  On April… Read More