Canieva Hood and Congress of California Seniors v. Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and Pacific Capital Bank, N.A., Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Barbara, Case No. 1156354
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…
Read MoreWadley v. Experian, 4th District Court, Final
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…
Read MoreWill Salley, Jr. v. Option One Mortgage Corp.; CIT Group; John Doe Trustee, John Doe Trust and John Doe’s #’s 1-100; Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District
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…
Read MoreCraig L. Whitaker v. M. T. Automotive, Inc., d/b/a Montrose Toyota, on appeal from the Summit County Court of Appeals, Ninth Appellate District
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…
Read MoreJaliyah Muhammad v. County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, DE, et al., Superior Court of New Jersey.
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…
Read MoreCellco Partnership D/B/A Verizon Wireless, et al., v. Mike Hatch, Attorney General of Minnesota, United States District Court, Minnesota
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,…
Read MoreGrafton Partners L.P., Allied Capital Partners L.P., Six Sigma LLC, and its members v. Superior Court in and for the County of Alameda, Respondent, and Price Waterhousecoopers, Real Party In Interest
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…
Read MoreSiddeeq Jackson and Bashera Abdul-Hadi, H/W v. Metro Nissan, Inc., Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
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…
Read MoreAmerican Bankers Association, et al. v. Lockyer, Attorney General, 9th Circuit
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…
Read More