The Second Department held that a Dutch bank’s passive receipt of a fraud-induced wire into a Netherlands account did not establish personal jurisdiction in New York.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed that a municipal advisor’s division of underwriting fees was prohibited fee-splitting and upheld the SEC’s full set of remedies.
The Ninth Circuit enforced a fraudulent-instructions exclusion and rejected the insured’s attempt to import a narrower defined term from other policy provisions.
The Ninth Circuit reversed dismissal of a False Claims Act qui tam suit alleging PPP fraud by a California mortgage company, holding that a NAICS industry code alone does not publicly disclose fraud and that a company’s own website does not qualify as ‘news media’ for purposes of t
The Ninth Circuit affirms a preliminary injunction blocking FinCEN’s “Border GTO” — which required money services businesses in 30 southwest border ZIP codes to file cash-transaction reports for amounts as low as $200 — finding the order was likely a rule requiring notice-and-comment rulemaking and
Second Department affirms foreclosure summary judgment and rejects criminal usury counterclaim where defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact that the effective interest rate exceeded the criminal threshold; affirms guaranty enforcement after mortgage assignment.
The First Department upholds civil contempt liability for City National Bank’s violation of a CPLR 5222(b) restraining notice, holding that a debtor’s payments to the bank on a separate debt are still ‘property in which the judgment debtor has an interest’—and that full satisfaction of the judgment does not moot the contempt claim.
The First Department dismisses RPAPL 1921 and Real Property Law § 275 mortgage discharge penalty claims as time-barred under CPLR 214(2)’s three-year limitations period, and holds that American Pipe tolling does not carry over to a successive class action after the first was voluntarily dismissed.
The First Department affirms dismissal of fiduciary duty claims arising from Iberdrola’s buyout of Avangrid minority shareholders, holding that the MFW-compliant deal structure under New York’s Kenneth Cole framework triggers deferential business judgment review.
The Fourth Department affirms that a merchant cash advance structured as a revenue purchase agreement is not a usurious loan under New York law, applying the three-factor test of reconciliation provisions, finite term, and bankruptcy recourse.
The Appellate Division, First Department, allows aiding-and-abetting fraud and breach of fiduciary duty claims to proceed against a biotech co-founder/CFO based on false PPM representations about board composition, audit committee, and auditor retention, while dismissing a redundant aiding-and-abetting breach of fiduciary duty claim against a defendant who was himself a primary fiduciary.
The Appellate Division, Third Department, affirms a deficiency judgment against guarantors of a defaulted $5 million commercial loan on a historic Albany campus, holding that RPAPL § 1371(2) fair market value is anchored to comparable sales and present conditions—not aspirational development projections of $71.5 million—where development was not imminent as of the foreclosure sale date.
The First Department affirmed cancellation of a $786,450 mortgage and promissory note under RPAPL 1501(4), holding that FAPA’s retroactive elimination of the RPAPL 1301(3) toll bars lenders from claiming extra limitations time during the pendency of a prior foreclosure action — constitutional challenges to FAPA’s retroactivity rejected.
The Third Department affirms Surrogate’s Court’s settlement of a trust accounting, dismissal of objections regarding alleged overconcentration of stock, and award of trustee’s counsel fees payable from the objecting beneficiary’s share.
The Texas Supreme Court held that the constitutional forfeiture remedy for home equity loan violations applies only to breaches of constitutionally mandated loan conditions, not to every contractual breach by a lender.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for an insurer, holding that unambiguous lending exclusions in a professional liability policy barred coverage for a California bank’s defense and settlement costs arising from Ponzi scheme litigation.
The Ninth Circuit revived willful FCRA and CCRAA claims against Wells Fargo for pulling credit reports after opening unauthorized bank accounts, but upheld dismissal of negligence claims for insufficiently pleaded actual damages.
The Ninth Circuit affirms that Bank of America’s right to compel arbitration under its standard Deposit Agreement is not subject to an exception for judicial reference under California CCP § 638, holding that judicial reference applies only when neither party has invoked arbitration.
First District holds that a Wells Fargo employee’s assurance that a fraudulent check had cleared states a cause of action for negligent misrepresentation, while affirming dismissal of breach of contract and other claims based on the deposit account agreement’s express disclaimers.
Central District of California affirms a bankruptcy court order dismissing a state-court quiet-title suit against a Chapter 7 trustee, holding the trustee was entitled to quasi-judicial immunity for acts approved by the bankruptcy court — even though the Barton doctrine evaporated once the case was
The court dismissed financial-elder-abuse and Electronic Funds Transfer Act claims by a Social Security beneficiary against Comerica Bank and the operator of the Direct Express debit-card program after $6,815 in fraudulent transactions, ruling that the complaint did not allege the bank had actual kn
Judge Orrick grants summary judgment for Comerica Bank on its acceleration of a $5.9 million commercial real estate loan to Alexander Group, LLC, holding that the loan documents are unambiguous and that Alexander Group triggered acceleration by missing payments and failing to provide required corpor
Judge Gilliam denies a pro se TRO that would have blocked a January 6, 2026 sheriff’s sale of plaintiffs’ Pennsylvania home, holding that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine likely strips the court of jurisdiction to invalidate the underlying state-court foreclosure judgment, and warning the litigants — who