On April 22, 2024 (almost 2 months before Judge Daniel Domenico issued a preliminary injunction against the UCCC Administrator and Colorado Attorney General), Administrator Martha Fulford issued an Interpretive Opinion Letter regarding the Colorado opt-out law (to be codified on its effective date of July 1, 2024 as C.R.S. Section 5-13-106) (the “Colorado Opt-out Law”).… Continue Reading
Burt M. Rublin
Colorado federal court issues preliminary injunction prohibiting Colorado from enforcing DIDMCA opt-out to loans made to Colorado residents by out-of-state state-chartered banks
The Colorado federal district court hearing NAIB, et al v. Weiser, et al., the lawsuit filed by three consumer financial services industry trade groups challenging Colorado’s opt-out legislation, has granted the plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction. As interpreted by the defendant State officials, Colo. Rev. Stat. § 5-13-106 (Opt-out Law), ), which is due to take effect on July 1, purports to apply Colorado’s interest rate and fee limits to interstate loans made by federally insured out-of-state state-chartered banks to Colorado borrowers. … Continue Reading
Preliminary Injunction Hearing in Federal Court on Colorado DIDMCA Opt-Out Challenge
On May 16, the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado held a hearing in NAIB, et al v. Weiser, et al. on a motion filed by three financial services industry trade groups to preliminarily enjoin Colorado from enforcing Colo. Rev. Stat. § 5-13-106 (the “Opt-Out Legislation”) to the extent it purports to apply Colorado’s interest rate and fee limitations to loans made by federally insured out-of-state state-chartered banks to Colorado borrowers.… Continue Reading
Pennsylvania appellate court finds no state court standing to bring FACTA claim based solely on statutory violation
In its 2016 decision in Spokeo v. Robins, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff alleging a Fair Credit Reporting Act violation does not have standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to sue for statutory damages in federal court unless the plaintiff can show that he or she suffered “concrete,” “real” harm as a result of the violation.… Continue Reading
Third Circuit holds application of PA usury law to auto title loans made to PA residents at out-of-state locations does not violate Commerce Clause
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently ruled that the application of Pennsylvania usury laws to auto title loans made to Pennsylvania residents who travel outside of Pennsylvania to obtain such loans does not violate the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The decision could have significant implications for all providers of consumer credit whose operations involve cross-border lending.… Continue Reading
SCOTUS agrees to review FCRA class action judgment where most class members suffered no actual injury
The Supreme Court has granted certiorari to review a $40 million class action trial judgment for statutory and punitive damages under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and its forthcoming decision later this Term will likely be the Supreme Court’s most important ruling in the consumer financial services space since its 2016 ruling in Spokeo, Inc.… Continue Reading
Rehearing en banc sought in case prohibiting class representative incentive awards
In Johnson v. NPAS Solutions, LLC, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 29682, 2020 WL 5553312 (11th Cir. Sept. 17, 2020), a panel of the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that incentive awards to class representatives are impermissible.
A petition for rehearing en banc has been filed by the plaintiff. … Continue Reading