Cases

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: William A. Blagogee appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his complaint alleging violations of the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C.A. §§ 1601 to 1667(f) (West 2009 & Supp.2012), and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692 to 1692p (2006

OPINION Opinion by Justice Bridges Santander Consumer USA, Inc. appeals the trial court’s order granting Palisades *904 Collection, LLC’s motions for summary judgment. In three issues, Santander argues the trial court erred because (1) Palisades failed to plead and prove a b

762 F.Supp.2d 217 (2010) SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC. and Drive Trademark Holdings, LP, Plaintiffs, v. Mark WALSH, Inofin, Inc, Drive USA 1, Inc. Drive USA 2, Inc. Drive USA 3, Inc. and Drive USA 4, Inc., Defendants. Civil Action No. 08-11778-MBB. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. November 30, 2010. *222 Frank Alvare

OPINION CHÁVEZ, Justice. {1} Eileen Dalton purchased two used cars under separate finance contracts which contained provisions that retained self-help remedies for both parties, and that allowed either party to compel arbitration of any claim or dispute arising out of the contracts that exceeded the jurisdiction of a small

I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document New Mexico Compilation Commission, Santa Fe, NM '00'05- 15:54:22 2016.12.13 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO Opinion Number: 2016-NMSC-035 Filing Date: September 22, 2016 Docket No. S-1-SC-3

In the Missouri Court of Appeals Eastern District DIVISION TWO TERENCE E. PORTER, JR., ) ED107161 ) Appellant, ) Appeal from the Circuit Court of ) St. Louis County v.

OPINION VANZI, Judge. In this case, we determine whether an arbitration scheme in a vehicle financing contract that carves out exceptions from mandatory arbitration for self-help and small claims remedies is substantively unconscionable. We also determine whether the district court improperly shifted the burden of proof and whether, according to our Supreme Court’s interp

1 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 2 Opinion Number: _______________ 3 Filing Date: December 30, 2014 4 NO. 33,136 5 EILEEN J. DALTON, 6 Plaintiff-Appellee, 7 v. 8 SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC., 9 Defendant-Appellant, 10 and 11 PERFORMANCE AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC. 12 d/b/a PERFORMANCE BUICK PONTIAC GMC; 13 LAWRENCE BARELA; JASON HICKS; BDF 14 ACQUISITIONS OF NEW MEXICO, INC. d/b/a 15 SIERRA SANTA FE GMC BUICK; TRAVELERS 16 CASUALT

ORDER CHARLENE EDWARDS HONEYWELL, District Judge. This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Santander Consumer USA, Inc.’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss or in the alternative, Motion for a More Definite Statement (“Motion to Dismiss”) (Doc. 9). Plaintiff Emmanuel Augustin (“Plaintiff’) filed a Response in opposition (“Response”) (Doc. 10). The Motion to Dismiss is ripe for review. Upo

CORNISH, Bankruptcy Judge. Creditor appeals an order of the bankruptcy court awarding actual damages of $474.86 and punitive damages of $25,000 to the individual Chapter 11 debtors as a sanction for its repossession of their vehicle.1 Believing the debtors had missed two monthly payments, creditor repossessed the vehicle approximately one year after the confirmed Chapter 11 plan re-vested the veh

Reversed by published opinion. Judge DUNCAN wrote the opinion, in which Judge SHEDD and Judge CAIN joined. OPINION DUNCAN, Circuit Judge: Santander Consumer USA (“Santander”) appeals from the district court’s order denying its motion to compel arbitration and stay court proceedings of Antonia Rota-McLarty’s (“Rota-McLarty”) claim

652 F.Supp.2d 805 (2009) SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC., Successor in Interest to Drive Financial Services LP, Plaintiff and counter-defendant, v. MANHEIM AUTOMOTIVE FINACIAL SERVICES, INC.; DFW Auto Ranch, Inc.; and Joulani Auto Group, Inc., Defendants and counter-plaintiffs. No. EP-09-CV-45-PRM. United States District Court, W.D. Texas, El Paso Division. September 10, 2009.

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT FLINT EDWARDS and CARLYNE DESIR, Appellant, v. P.M.R. TOWING, LLC; JOSE ALVARADO BURGOS; and SANTANDER CONSUMER USA, INC., Appellees. No. 2D2025-2360 February 11, 2026 Appeal pursuant to F

*********************************************** The “officially released” date that appears near the be- ginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be pub- lished in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the be- ginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the “officially released” date appearing in the opinion. All opinions are subject to modification and technical corr

2021 IL App (5th) 190327 NOTICE Decision filed 02/18/21. The text of this decision may be NO. 5-19-0327 changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Peti ion for Rehearing or the disposition of IN THE the same. APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT _________________________________________________

Digitally signed by Reporter of Decisions Reason: I attest to Illinois Official Reports the accuracy and

ELIZABETH A. WOLFORD, United States District Judge *85INTRODUCTION Plaintiff William Sharp ("Plaintiff") asserts claims against defendant Ally Financial, Inc. ("Defendant") pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991,

Dennis Jacobs, Circuit Judge, concurring: I concur in Parts I and II.B.3 of the opinion of the Court (Associational Discrimination) and I therefore concur in the result. Mr. Zarda does have a sex discrimination claim under Title VII based on the allegation that he was fired because he was a man who had an intimate relationship with another man. I write separately because, of the several justifications advanced in that opinion

RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) File Name: 21a0279p.06 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ┐ GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA, INC.; GUN OWNERS

MEMORANDUM OPINION WILLIAM D. QUARLES, JR., District Judge. UBS Financial Services, Inc. (“UBSFS”) petitioned the Court to vacate an arbitration award issued in connection with an arbitration brought pursuant to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) Dispute Resolution Program. ECF Nos. 1, 12. Treating UBSFS’s petition as a motion to vacate the arbitration award,1