Cases
Search U.S. court opinions (CourtListener / Free Law Project), or resolve a reporter citation to its case via the Caselaw Access Project. Facts only — name, court, date, status, citation count. Never a holding-summary.
20 opinions for “Jackson v. HSBC Auto Finance”
AMENDED MEMORANDUM OPINION Marvin Isgur, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE Defendants, U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., Caliber Home Loans, Inc., and HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc. have filed motions to dismiss Jose and Teresa Trevino’s complaint for failure- to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Case No. 13-07031; ECF Nos. 79 and 80). The motions are granted in part and denied in part. The' follow
MEMORANDUM OPINION Marvin Isgur, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE Defendants, U.S. Bank Trust, N.A., Caliber Home Loans, Inc., and HSBC Mortgage Services, Inc. have filed motions to dismiss Jose and Teresa Trevino’s complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. (Case No. 13-07031; ECF Nos. 79 and 80). The motions are granted in part and denied in part. The following claims
Reiber v. GMAC, LLCpublic domain
PER CURIAM: This consolidated appeal raises the question of whether the portion of an automobile retail instalment sale obligation attributable to a trade-in vehicle’s “negative equity” (ie., debt owed above and beyond the current collateral value of the traded-*56in vehicle) should be considered part of the purchase-money security interest arising from the sale of a veh
Peaslee v. GMAC, LLCpublic domain
CALABRESI, Circuit Judge: The underlying question in this case is whether the portion of an automobile retail instalment sale obligation attributable to a trade-in vehicle’s “negative equity” (ie., debt owed above and beyond the current collateral value of the traded-in vehicle) should be considered part of the purchase-money security interest (“PMSI”) arising from the sale of a vehicle, and therefore protected fro
General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Peasleepublic domain
373 B.R. 252 (2007) GENERAL MOTORS ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, Plaintiff, v. Faith Ann PEASLEE, et al., Defendants. HSBC Auto Finance, formerly known as Household Automotive Finance Corporation, Plaintiff, v. Pamela D. Jackson, formerly known as Pamela D. Harris, Defendant. GMAC, LLC, Plaintiff, v. Faith Ann Peaslee, et al., Defendants. Sovereign Bank, Plaintiff, v. Michael Colombai, et al., Defendants. America
In re Sperrypublic domain
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER ON OBJECTION OF HSBC BANK USA, N.A. TO CONFIRMATION OF FIRST AMENDED PLAN Melvin S. Hoffman, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge HSBC Bank USA, N.A. has objected to my confirming the First Amended Chapter 13 Plan dated February 24, 2016, of Penny and Jason Sperry, the debtors in this case. HSBC maintains that the plan, which requires HSBC to send the Sperrys monthly mortgage loan statement
City of Almaty v. Ablyazovpublic domain
MEMORANDUM & ORDER ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge: On June 21, 2016, the Court granted in part and denied in part the motion of Triadou SPV S.A. (“Triadou”) to dismiss various crossclaims that are asserted against it by the City of Almaty, Kazakhstan (“Almaty”) and BTA Bank JSC (“BTA”) (together, the “Kazakh Entities”). Dkt. No. 174. In light of the Supreme Court’s decision issued the previous day i
Lillemoe v. United States Department of Agriculturepublic domain
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA BRETT LILLEMOE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. No. 15-cv-2047 (DLF) UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOREIGN AGRICULTURAL SERVICE, Defendant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiffs Brett Lillemoe and GTR, LLC bring this suit against the U.S.
United States v. Thomas Tankepublic domain
Concurrence by Judge WALLACE. *1298OPINION FISHER, Circuit Judge: We must decide when mailings sent to avoid detection or responsibility for a fraudulent scheme are sent “for the purpose of executing such scheme.” 18 U.S.C. § 1341. We hold that such mailings fall within the mail fraud statute when they are sent prior to the sc
Ramirez v. Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc.public domain
(2008) ANA RAMIREZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. GREENPOINT MORTGAGE FUNDING, INC., Defendant. No. C08-0369 TEH. United States District Court, N.D. California. May 13, 2008. ORDER DENYING MOTION TO DISMISS THELTON E. HENDERSON, District Judge. This matter comes before the Court on Defendant GreenPoint Mortgage Funding, Inc.'s ("GreenPoint's") motio
U.S. Bank National Assn. v. Eichtenpublic domain
KELLER, J. In this foreclosure action, the defendant Karin C. Eichten 1 appeals from the judgment of strict foreclosure rendered by the trial court in favor of the plaintiff, U.S. Bank National Association, as trustee, successor in interest to Bank of America, National Association as trustee as successor by me
Dymarkowski v. Savage (In re Hadley)public domain
MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER REGARDING CROSS-MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge Plaintiff Douglas A. Dymarkowski (“Plaintiff’ or “Trustee”) is the Chapter 7 Trustee in the underlying Chapter 7 case filed by Robert F: Hadley, Jr. (“Debtor”). On August 1, 2014, Plaintiff commenced this adversary proceeding, seeking to avoid and recover alleged avoid
Kolinek v. Walgreen Co.public domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER MATTHEW F. KENNELLY, District Judge: In July 2013, Robert Kolinek filed suit against Walgreen Co. (Walgreens) on behalf of a class of similarly situated Walgreens customers. Kolinek alleged that Walgreens had made unsolicited calls to him and other current and former customers on their cellular telephones in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA), 47 U
City of Los Angeles v. Citigroup Inc.public domain
*944ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [29] AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE [30] OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This is one of a handful of cases that Plaintiff the City of Los Angeles (“L.A.”) has brought against lending institutions under the federal Fair Housing Act (“FHA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 360
Miller v. Citimortgage, Inc.public domain
ORDER SAM A. LINDSAY, District Judge. Before the court is Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs First Amended Complaint (“Motion to Dismiss”), filed on January 17, 2013 [Dkt. No. 26]. The case was referred to Magistrate Judge David L. Horan, who entered Findings, Conclusions and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (“Report”) on April 26, 2013 [Dkt. No. 35], recommen
City of Los Angeles v. Wells Fargo & Co.public domain
ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS [21] AND DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STRIKE [22] OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION This action arises from Defendants Wells Fargo & Co. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s alleged discriminatory lending practices. However, unlike many of the home-mortgage cases before this Court, Plaintiff in this action is not a mortgagor bu
Opinion issued August 30, 2016 In The Court of Appeals For The First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-14-00648-CV ——————————— BARRETT WAKEFIELD AND HOWARD WAKEFIELD III, Appellants V. SAM AYERS AND CLAUDIA AYERS, Appel
Sgroe v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.public domain
MEMORANDUM OPINION AMOS L. MAZZANT, United States Magistrate Judge. Pending before the Court is Defendants Weds Fargo Bank, N.A. (“Weds Fargo”) and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation’s (“FHLMC”) Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. # 22). The Court, having considered the relevant pleadings, finds that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted. BACKGROUND
Vulcan Golf, LLC v. Google Inc.public domain
(2008) VULCAN GOLF, LLC, John B. Sanfilippo & Son, Inc., Blitz Realty Group, Inc., and Vincent E. "Bo" Jackson, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. GOOGLE INC., Oversee.Net, Sedo LLC, Dotster, Inc., a/k/a Revenue Direct.Com., Internet Reit, Inc., d/b/a Ireit, Inc., and John Does I-X, Defendants. No. 07 C 3371. United States District Court, N.D. Illinois. East
In Re Peasleepublic domain
585 F.3d 53 (2009) In re Faith Ann PEASLEE, Jonathan T. Vanmanen, Michael Colombai, Shannon A. Colombai, Pamela D. Jackson George M. Reiber, Defendant-Appellant, v. GMAC, LLC, Ford Motor Credit Company, General Motors Acceptance Corporation, Sovereign Bank, HSBC Auto Finance, Plaintiffs-Appellees. Docket Nos. 07-3962-bk(L), 07-3952-bk(CON), 07-3964-bk(CON), 07-3986-bk(CON), 07-3990-bk(CON). United