Narrative Opinion Summary
The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's judgment against S. Keith and Rhonda Curran in their lawsuit against Washington Mutual Bank under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), specifically 12 U.S.C. § 2605(e). The plaintiffs contended that RESPA prohibits charging fees for providing mortgage payoff statements. The court referenced a prior ruling in Watt v. GMAC Mortgage Corp., which rejected a similar claim, leading to the rejection of the Currans' argument. The judgment was affirmed, with the appeal submitted on November 17, 2006, and filed on December 18, 2006.
Legal Issues Addressed
Appellate Procedure and Decisionsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The appellate court reviewed the district court's decision and affirmed it, reflecting the legal process of appeal and judgment delivery.
Reasoning: The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court's judgment against S. Keith and Rhonda Curran in their lawsuit.
Application of RESPA under 12 U.S.C. § 2605(e)subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court applied RESPA to assess whether fees could be charged for providing mortgage payoff statements, ultimately rejecting the plaintiffs' argument based on precedent.
Reasoning: The plaintiffs contended that RESPA prohibits charging fees for providing mortgage payoff statements.
Precedential Influence of Watt v. GMAC Mortgage Corp.subscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court relied on the precedent set in Watt v. GMAC Mortgage Corp. to reject the claim made by the Currans against Washington Mutual Bank.
Reasoning: The court referenced a prior ruling in Watt v. GMAC Mortgage Corp., which rejected a similar claim, leading to the rejection of the Currans' argument.