Lawsuits

The state court seemed open to a narrower view of the legal applicability to loans predating the statute than of broad constitutional challenges to it.

Retroactive interpretations have bedeviled mortgage servicers and the market for older loans. The industry will be watching other cases in New York closely now.

A group of homeowners filed a class action lawsuit against the largest homebuilding company in the United States, seeking all money lost.

The company anticipates a $139.8 million contingency liability and nearly $60 million related expense in a court battle with Pine River Capital Management.

The closely watched case centers on bank allegations the government corporation promised certain reverse-mortgage assets in return for funding then reneged.

There still is potential for the Supreme Court to review nuances of its landmark Tyler v. Hennepin County decision as other lawsuits raise questions about it.

The federal district court order in Mississippi allows allegations of servicer responsibility for insurance shortcomings and excessive costs to proceed.

The Justice Department has asked the high court to intervene and halt reinstatements of federal employees who were fired by the Office of Personnel Management.

The Trump administration intended to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau through a mass workforce reduction, which could be a smoking gun in a court battle with the bureau's union.

A coalition of national financial organizations filed a friend-of-the-court brief for preemption after regulators filed one against it in a key servicing case.

Texas Capital is arguing against summary judgment, saying prior assertions about reverse mortgages' initial and subsequent draws need to be examined in court.

The Department of Housing and Urban Development did not assign any fault or liability in conjunction with the "historic" settlement.

The company, now known as Onity, is challenging a previous interpretation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act in the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

The bank had asked for partial summary judgment on an Administrative Procedures Act claim in the case involving its right to some reverse-mortgage collateral.

The order by the judge, who had previously dismissed part of the original loan modification-related claims, shortens the legal process for allegations that remain.

Ginnie Mae had tried to slow the pace of Texas Capital Bank's case and move it to a different court but the judge rejected its legal arguments for doing so.

The lawsuit, which the plaintiff seeks class certification for, involves a transfer, overpayments during a grace period and allegations of improper late fees.

The motion calls upon the judge to rule quickly on an Administrative Procedures Act claim involving a bank's right to reverse mortgage collateral.

The HUD agency contends that the bank's agreements involving certain reverse-mortgage assets call for the closely watched case to be filed there.

Texas Capital Bank wants to bring the Administrative Procedures Act into the case, but Ginnie Mae said the legal proceedings are outside its scope.