Common Law Torts

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

In In re Sonic Corp. Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig., No. 1:17-md-2807, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114891 (N.D. Ohio July 1, 2020), Judge Gwin allowed a negligence claim to stand in a data breach case against Sonic.  The facts were as follows. Sonic restaurants are largely franchisee-owned. Sonic Defendants only directly own about 6% of Sonic restaurants. However, Sonic exerts… Read More

In Sarrouf Law LLP v. First Republic Bank, 97 Mass. App. Ct. 467, 471-79 (2020), the Massachusetts Court of Appeals held that a law firm's negligence action against its bank arising out of the dishonor of funds the firm deposited in the bank due to the fraud of a client was properly dismissed because the bank had no duty to detect… Read More

In Vega v. CarMax Auto Superstores, LLC, 2018 WL 3216347, at *5 (Cal.App. 2 Dist., 2018), the Court of Appeal held in an unpublished decision that a son, whose mother purchased a vehicle for him, could not recover for economic loss and personal injuries sustained when the vehicle he drove malfunctioned and had an accident, causing him personal injury and… Read More

In McCray v. Jefferson Chevrolet Company, Inc., 2018 WL 1964674, at *2–3 (E.D.Mich., 2018), Judge Drain found that a Plaintiff's testimony that the RISC was blank when she signed it created a triable issue of fact as to whether TILA disclosures were given. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants violated 15 U.S.C. § 1638(3)–(6), and (9) by not disclosing the amount financed, the finance charge,… Read More

In Romero v. Department Stores National Bank, 2018 WL 1079728, at *1 (C.A.9 (Cal.), 2018), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in an unpublished decision that a TCPA plaintiff had Spokeo standing. The district court erred in concluding that Romero lacked standing under Article III to bring a TCPA claim. The district court did not have the benefit of Van… Read More

In Geismar v. Owen Loan Servicing, LLC., 2018 WL 276813, at *4 (N.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Corely tired of waiting for the DC Circuit to issue its decision in the ACA Int'l proceedings and lifted a stay, but granted a lender's motion to dismiss a common law negligence claim that was filed as  corollary to a TCPA claim. The Court recognizes that some California federal… Read More

In Montegna v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 2017 WL 4680168, at *8–9 (S.D.Cal., 2017), the District Court found that a Rosenthal Act claim survived a statute of limitations challenge based on the plaintiff's allegation of a "continuing violation". Second, as for Plaintiff's claim under the Rosenthal Act, the applicable statute of limitations provides a plaintiff a year from an alleged violation to… Read More

In Schwartz-Earp v. Advanced Call Center Technologies, LLC, 2016 WL 899149, at *1-2 (N.D.Cal., 2016), Magistrate Judge James denied summary judgment to a debt collector under the FDCPA, but granted summary judgment against the Plaintiff on her TCPA/common law claims. The facts were as follows: On or about February 3, 2014, Plaintiff applied in-store for a JCPenney-branded credit card, issued… Read More

In Sain v. Adams Auto Group, Inc., 2016 WL 47730, at *1 (N.C.App.,2016), the North Carolina Court of Appeal addressed an increasingly common factual situation. Plaintiffs purchased a used 2010 Honda Civic automobile (“the vehicle”) from defendant, Adams Auto Group (“Adams”) on 18 January 2013. The vehicle was previously owned by the Freemans, who are not a party to this action.… Read More

In Auto Liquidation Center, Inc. v. Chaca, 2015 WL 8479305, at *3 (Ind.App.,2015), a jury returned a verdict for Jorge on all counts, awarding damages in the amount of $45,883.86 for the conversion claim and the trial court entered a final judgment for Jorge in the amount of $121,069.66, which included prejudgment interest and attorney's fees.  The customer had taken the… Read More

In Overholt v. CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC, 2015 WL 403873 (E.D.Cal. 2015), Judge Burrell granted summary judgment to a car dealer who allegedly had falsely stated that the vehicle was “certified” and allegedly had failed to disclose that the vehicle was prior daily rental. On December 31, 2011, Plaintiff purchased a used 2010 Jeep Liberty (the “Jeep.”) from CarMax.… Read More

In Varnado v. Midland Funding LLC, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2014 WL 1994622 (N.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Ryu found that the Plaintiff stated no claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress against a debt collector nor any claim for punitive damages.  Judge Ryu found, however, that a claim for intrustion on seclusion was stated.  Judge Ryu found that debt collectors do not… Read More

In Rector v. WFDS, here, Judge Fischer granted summary judgment on Plaintiff's TCPA, FDCPA, and Intrusion on Seclusion claims. Plaintiff, a third party who was listed as credit reference on customer's credit application, claimed that Wells Fargo made dialer calls to his cell phone.  Wells Fargo made a handful of calls to Plaintiff to question the whereabouts of the customer… Read More

In Masuda v. Citibank, N.A., --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2014 WL 1759580 (N.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Hamilton allowed a Rosenthal Act and Intrusion on Seclusion claim to proceed by a third party who was not the debtor (but was alleged to be). Citibank contends that the first cause of action fails to state a claim because Masuda has not alleged facts showing… Read More

In Sepehry-Fard v. Department Stores National Bank, 2013 WL 6574774 (N.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Orrick, among other things, found that a debtor had failed to properly plead negligence and TCPA claims against his credit card company.  As to Negligence, Judge Orrick found: In his negligence cause of action, plaintiff alleges that the Financial Entities harassed, intimidated and trespassed on plaintiff and… Read More

In Vartanian v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, 2013 WL 877863 (C.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Otis Wright III addressed a litany of FCRA and FDCPA claims brought by the Kaas Law Group.  Judge Wright held that a FCRA Plaintiff need not plead that its dispute to the CRA was not frivilous; i.e. non-frivilousness is not an element of a FCRA claim. Contrary… Read More

In Iyigun v. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC, 2013 WL 93114 (C.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Fitzgerald found no FCRA/CCRAA claim properly pleaded for wont of an inaccuracy. Iyigun's claims for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) and the California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act (“CCRAA”) fail because the FAC does not sufficiently plead the element of inaccurate credit reporting. The… Read More

In Dabney v. Total Relocation Services, LLC, Not Reported in A.3d, 2013 WL 68727 (N.J.Super.A.D. 2013), the New Jersey appellate court found, in an unpublished decision, complete preemption of common defamation claims by FCRA. Having canvassed the vast array of judicial opinions dealing with FCRA preemption, we conclude that the straight forward total preemption approach of these courts of appeal is most… Read More

In Kleiman v. Equable Ascent, 2013 WL 49754 (C.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Snyder allowed an FDCPA-telephonic harassment claim to proceed as adequately pleaded. Defendant's argument that plaintiff must allege the exact time debt collection phone calls occurred and the names of the individuals who made the calls appears to rest on the mistaken assumption that the heightened pleading standards of Federal Rule… Read More

1 2