Amicus Briefs

April 20, 2006 | Filed under: Other Areas of Interest | Tagged with: State Law Exemption
Court:
California Court of Appeals

This brief states that the judgement of the Superior Court should be reversed because the OCC's poor track record enforcing consumer protection laws shows that it cannot be trusted with the enormous task of enforcing all applicable consumer protection laws against national banks;and the OCC has a financial incentive to please the banks it regulates.
 

March 27, 2006 | Filed under: Credit Reporting | Tagged with: FCRA
Court:
Fourth District Court

The District Court erroneously accepted Experian's "accuracy only" argument and improperly dismissed the claim regarding its reinventigation duties. Because the District Court was misled by Experian regarding both the statutory scheme and this Court's case law, the court erred by not discussing the difference in the duties that Congress has required. The District Court's omission is shown by the absence of any citation to § 1681i and the lack of any discussion regarding the law and facts of this reinvestigation claim.
 

February 22, 2006 | Filed under: Forced Arbitration
Court:
Pennsylvania Supreme Court

This brief states that predatory lending is a public policy crisis, which is perpetuated by mandatory arbitration clauses that contain the kind of provisions found in this case. Further, that mandatory arbitration clauses such as Option One's are a central part of a predatory lender's strategy to avoid scrutiny of its practices. This brief was written by Michael D. Donovan, and is co-signed by NACA, the National Consumer Law Center, Community Legal Services, and AARP.

August 5, 2005 | Filed under: Other Areas of Interest | Tagged with: Consumer Sales Act, Non-economic Damages
Court:
Ohio Supreme Court

NACA brief written in support of Mr. Whitaker's appeal, arising from a jury's finding of eleven different acts of unfair, deceptive or unconscionable conduct under Ohio's Consumer Sales Practices Act ("CSPA"). Although the CSPA allows a consumer victim to "recover his damages," the Appellate Court erroneously limited Mr. Whitaker to recovering only "economic damages." The Appellate Court mistakenly believed that it had "previously determined that plaintiffs may recover only economic damages under the CSPA. This brief, filed in the Supreme Court of Ohio, was written by Ronald Burdge, Laura K. McDowall, Thomas Domonoske, and Clair Dickinson.
 

December 16, 2004 | Filed under: Forced Arbitration | Tagged with: Payday Loan
Court:
New Jersey Superior Court

Motion by NACA, AARP, and Consumers League of New Jersey, to file amicus brief in the payday lending case of Jaliyah Muhammad v. County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, DE. This short brief was written by Deborah Zuckerman, AARP, and Ira Rheingold, NACA.
 

December 13, 2004 | Filed under: Other Areas of Interest | Tagged with: Preemption
Court:
Eighth Circuit

NACA, together with AARP and National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates, argued that Congress did not intend to preempt state consumer protection laws like the Minnesota Wireless Consumer Act, because the Act neither regulates nor directly affects wireless carriers’ rates. The Federal Communications Commission has adopted a “hands-off” approach to the wireless industry, and the industry’s reliance on voluntary consumer code for wireless services does not adequately protectconsumers. Therefore, states have responded to the growing use of and problems associated with wireless service by studying, introducing or enacting additional consumer protections relating to service quality and carriers’ business practices. This Act is one such law. This brief was written by Patrick Pearlman of W. Va. Public Service Comm., Karlen Reed, MA Asst. Attorney General, Christine Mailloux of The Utility Reform Network, and Maureen Grady and David Bergman, Consumer Counsel.
 

October 19, 2004 | Filed under: Other Areas of Interest | Tagged with: Jury Trial Waiver
Court:
California Supreme Court

NACA, together with Consumer Attorneys of California, Trial Lawyers for Public Justice, and Association of Trial Lawyers in America, argues that "the right to a jury trial is a fundamental right that has been an integral part of our justice system for over a hundred years. Its waiver cannot occur freely." This brief, filed in the Supreme Court of California, was written by James C. Sturdevant and Monique Olivier.
 

October 8, 2004 | Filed under: Other Areas of Interest | Tagged with: Reliance, Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices
Court:
Pennsylvania Supreme Court

NACA, together with National Consumer Law Center, and Community Legal Services, Inc., filed this amicus brief in the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, supporting the appellent, Bashera Abdul-Hadi in a fight against deceptive practices. This brief was written by Michael D. Donovan and David H. Searles of Donovan Searles, LLC.
 

September 8, 2004 | Filed under: Credit Reporting | Tagged with: FCRA
Court:
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

NACA, together with AARP, ACLU of Northern California, California Public Interest Research Group, Consumer Federation of California, Consumers Union, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Evan Hendricks, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, and US PIRG, filed this amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit, supporting the California Financial Information Privacy Act, Cal. Fin. Code § 4050 et seq. (2004), popularly known as "SB1." This brief was written by Chris Hoofnagle of Electronic Privacy Information Center.
 

August 25, 2004 | Filed under: Other Areas of Interest | Tagged with: Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices
Court:
Texas Supreme Court

NACA argues that the Texas Supreme Court should reconsider its opinion, 2004 WL 1533274, and correct some of the opinion language to reflect the current state of implied warranty law, especially sincethe parties neither raised nor briefed implied warranty issues.
 

Pages