Ninth Circuit remands price fixing class action for consideration of evidence that more than a de minimis portion of class members was not injured. District court in D.C. Circuit rules that CAFA jurisdiction is improper unless the complaint itself invokes the class action rule or mechanism.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Mr. Sims is a retired veteran living on a fixed income in
California. Last year, he responded to online
marketing on a website maintained by OppLoans, a Delaware
limited liability company with an Illinois address. Mr. Sims
entered into a loan agreement for a $1,500 loan at 160% annual rate
of interest. The loan agreement preamble stated The words Lender We and us mean
FinWise Bank, an FDIC-insured bank located in Utah, or any of its
direct or indirect assignees. Apparently unhappy
with the arrangement, Mr. Sims filed an action challenging the
CA district court in Sims v. Opportunity Financial LLC dismissed the claim of rent-a-bank scheming and evading California Financing Law after U.S. District Court Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton found that the loan was exempted from California Financial Code § 22050(a).
[co-author: Michael Buckalew]
On April 27, 2021, DWT s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) Taskforce hosted a discussion with the DFPI s General Counsel, Bret Ladine, to get his perspective about what s on the horizon for the financial services industry in California. Mr. Ladine provided insights on what has changed since the passage of the California Consumer Protection Law (CCFPL), including the DFPI s initial priorities, the scope of its jurisdiction, and its enforcement approach.
Among the other topics outlined below, Mr. Ladine signaled that the DFPI intends to utilize its authority under California Financial Code §326. This code section contains very broad authority for the DFPI to enforce anything within its jurisdiction, including the provisions of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010 (12 U.S.C. Sec. 5481 et seq.), or regulations issued by the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau thereunder, with respect to an entity that is licensed,
To embed, copy and paste the code into your website or blog:
Every so often, the extent of state laws providing for the licensing of collection agencies needs to be re-examined. As every state, including two of the most prominent states, California and New York, historically had not licensed collection agencies,
1 the state licensing of collection agencies has not been given as much attention as has been given to the state licensing of other consumer finance activities. This changed in September 2020, when the California legislature, shortly before adjournment, enacted Senate Bill 908 to license debt collectors under a new law called the Debt Collection Licensing Act (the “DCLA”).