FindLaw News

Case Summaries

Bankruptcy Law

[08/27] Campbell v. Countrywide Home Loans Inc.
In a suit accusing defendant of filing a claim attempting to collect a pre-petition debt in violation of an automatic stay in plaintiffs' Chapter 13 bankruptcy, an interlocutory order granting partial summary judgment for plaintiffs is reversed where: 1) unpaid escrow payments that accumulate pre-petition in the year that a bankruptcy petition is filed, and which the creditor had a right to collect under the loan documents, constitute a "claim" under the Bankruptcy Code; but 2) the filing of a proof of claim including the amounts of these payments does not by itself violate an automatic stay in a bankruptcy proceeding.

[08/26] In re: Porter
In a bankruptcy case, a ruling excepting from discharge a judgment debt that appellee had obtained against debtor in an employment retaliation case is affirmed where the bankruptcy court correctly bankruptcy court gave collateral estoppel effect to the judgment, and found that the jury in the retaliation case necessarily found that debtor willfully and maliciously injured appellee.

[08/26] In re: Hamilton
11 U.S.C. section 524(a) makes a state-court judgment void ab initio when entered against a debtor whose dischargeable debts have been discharged.

[08/22] In the Matter of: Ferrell
Statutory damages are not available for violations of 15 U.S.C. sections 1632(a) and 1638(b)(1), provisions of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA).

Read More

Consumer Protection

[08/22] Clemmer v. Key Bank Nat'l Ass'n
In a case raising the issue of whether the Electronic Funds Transfer Act (EFTA) permits an automated teller machine's (ATM) on-screen notice to read that a fee "may" be charged when a fee "will" be charged, summary judgment for bank is affirmed where the use of the less definite "may", coupled with the more definite requirement that a user press "yes" to accept the fee to continue the transaction, put the user on sufficient notice that a fee would be incurred.

[08/22] Barany-Snyder v. Weiner
In a case arising out of a state court debt collection action brought by defendants against plaintiff, alleging that defendants engaged in improper debt collection in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), judgment on the pleadings for defendants is affirmed where plaintiff failed to state a claim under the FDCPA.

[08/20] Boschetto v. Hansing
The sale of one automobile via the eBay website, without more, does not provide sufficient "minimum contacts" to establish jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant in the forum state.

[08/20] Rosenau v. Unifund Corp.
In a class action under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) alleging that defendant sent deceptive debt-collection letters, judgment for defendant on the pleadings is reversed and remanded where the "least sophisticated debtor" reading defendant's letter might reasonably interpret it as being from an attorney when in fact it was not.

Read More

Family Law

[08/22] In re A.C.
Order terminating parental rights is affirmed where: 1) the dependency court's noncompliance with section 372 standing alone does not violate the parent's due process rights; and 2) the error is subject to a harmless error standard.

[08/22] Iglesias v. Mukasey
Petition for review of BIA's denial of motion to reopen the case is denied where: 1) petitioner's allegation that BIA had ignored evidence put forth by petitioner regarding his marriage to an American citizen was an allegation of legal error subject to appellate review; but 2) petitioner did not provide clear and convincing evidence that his marriage was bona fide.

[08/21] Combs v. Homer-Center Sch. Dist.
In a suit by parents who home-school their children seeking declaratory relief and a permanent injunction to prohibit the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania from requiring plaintiffs to comply with reporting and review requirements, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) the challenged statute was a neutral law of general applicability, subject to rational basis review, and was constitutional as it rationally furthered legitimate state interests; 2) plaintiffs did not assert a valid "hybrid-rights" claim under which, as a potential violation of both free-exercise rights and the parental right to direct a child's education, the law might be subject to greater scrutiny; 3) plaintiffs' claims did not fall under the narrow exception of Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205 (1972), requiring heightened scrutiny when parents challenge compulsory-education laws on religious grounds; and 4) having disposed of all federal claims, the court declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over state-law claims under the Religious Freedom Protection Act.

[08/21] US v. Carson
Sentence for conspiring to transport a minor across state lines for the purpose of unlawful sexual activity and interstate travel to engage in illicit sexual conduct is affirmed where, for purposes of applying a sentencing enhancement, the minor victim was properly determined to be in defendant's custody, care, or supervisorial control, despite argument that the victim's mother's presence gave her sole custody and control.

Read More