Supreme Court gives homeowners another chance in escrow dispute
National News
The Supreme Court on Thursday gave homeowners another chance to force Bank of America and other large banks to pay interest on mortgage escrow accounts.
The court unanimously threw out an appeals court ruling in favor of Bank of America, which has refused to pay interest on money it collects to pay borrowers’ insurance and property tax bills. New York requires banks to pay at 2% interest on escrowed funds.
Thirteen other states have similar laws: California, Connecticut, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and Wisconsin.
A federal judge initially ruled in favor of the borrowers, but the federal appeals court in New York granted Bank of America’s request to dismiss the suits, arguing that the federal law governing national banks does not permit such state-by-state regulation.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the Supreme Court that the appeals court did not perform the kind of nuanced analysis required by federal law and prior Supreme Court decisions to determine if a state law must give way to a federal statute.
In particular, Kavanaugh noted that the Dodd-Frank Act, enacted after the 2008 financial crisis, made clear that not all state banking laws are pre-empted.
Jonathan Taylor, who argued the case for the homeowners, said in an email that the decision is a victory for consumers because it “vindicates Congress’ determination in Dodd-Frank to rein in the kind of aggressive preemption of state consumer-financial laws that helped lead to the financial crisis.”
Bank of America did not immediately comment on the decision.
Related listings
-
TikTok content creators sue the US government over potential ban
National News 05/14/2024Eight TikTok content creators sued the U.S. government on Tuesday, issuing another challenge to the new federal law that would ban the popular social media platform nationwide if its China-based parent company doesn’t sell its stakes within a y...
-
Supreme Court will decide whether mobile voting sites are legal
National News 05/05/2024The state Supreme Court announced Friday that it will decide whether mobile voting sites are legal without allowing any lower appellate courts to rule first.The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty, a conservative law firm, sued in December 2022 o...
-
Court will decide if Trump has immunity in election interference case
National News 04/26/2024Supreme Court arguments have begun over whether former President Donald Trump can avoid prosecution over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss to Democrat Joe Biden.The justices on Thursday took up for the first time whether a former preside...
Texas Adopts Statewide Texting-While-Driving Ban
Effective September 1, 2017, Texas will become the 47th state to pass a statewide ban on texting while driving. Governor Abbott’s signing of House Bill 62 is an effort to unify Texas under a uniform ban and remedy the “patchwork quilt of regulations that dictate driving practices in Texas.”
The bill specifically prohibits drivers from reading, writing, or sending an electronic message on a device unless the vehicle is stopped. That includes texting and emailing. It does not, however, prohibit dialing a number to call someone, talking on the phone using a hands-free device, or using the phone’s GPS system.
Violations would be punishable by a fine ranging from $25 to $99, to be set by each municipality. Although penalties could rise to as much as $200 for repeat offenders.
Studies have found that a driver’s reaction time is half as much when a driver is distracted by sending or reading a text message. According to state officials, in 2015 more than 105,000 traffic accidents in Texas involved distracted driving, leading to at least 476 fatalities.