As expected, the U.S. Supreme Court’s grant of Seila Law’s cert petition is impacting other cases in which the CFPB’s constitutionality has also been challenged.  

In CFPB v. CashCall, CashCall appealed to the Ninth Circuit from the district court’s decision ordering CashCall to pay a $10 million statutory fine based on its finding

In a span of three days, the CFPB, under Acting Director Mulvaney, significantly retreated in the payday-lending space and suffered a court defeat in its request for monetary relief with respect to a CashCall installment lending program.  The federal district court’s decision in CashCall followed a bench trial that occurred before Mr. Mulvaney’s first day

On April 20, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit declined to hear an interlocutory appeal  by CashCall of the district court’s order granting the CFPB’s partial summary judgment motion and denying CashCall’s summary judgment motion in the CFPB’s lawsuit against CashCall.  The district court previously had certified its decision for interlocutory

The California federal district court judge who is presiding over the CFPB’s lawsuit against CashCall and several related companies that funded, purchased, serviced, and collected online installment loans has granted the defendants’ motion to certify an interlocutory appeal of the district court’s August 31, 2016 order to the Ninth Circuit.  That order granted the CFPB’s

A federal district court has refused to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the CFPB in December 2013 against CashCall, several related companies and their principal, which asserted UDAAP violations based on the defendants’ efforts to collect loans that were purportedly void in whole or in part under state law.  The companies allegedly funded, purchased, serviced

The CFPB has broken new ground in an attack in Massachusetts federal court against CashCall, several related companies and their principal.  The companies funded, purchased, serviced and collected online installment loans made by a tribally-affiliated lender the CFPB did not sue.  The defendants were charged with engaging in unfair, deceptive and abusive acts and practices