How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Lucy, Esq. Your Own Question
Lucy, Esq.
Lucy, Esq., Attorney
Category: Legal
Satisfied Customers: 27196
Experience:  Lawyer
Type Your Legal Question Here...
Lucy, Esq. is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

Causey v US Bank is marked not for publication but that 7th

This answer was rated:

Causey v US Bank is marked not for publication but that 7th Circuit decision is based upon the unambiguous language of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) rather than common law which had formed the historical basis for lower courts and thereby placed defendants at such disadvantage that the purpose of TILA was subverted. The Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, a new Federal entity replacing the Commentary Office of the Federal Reserve as the authoritative interpreter of TILA promulgated the interpretation of Causey in an amicus brief in Rosenfield v Bank of America (?). Is such a brief dispositive and can I use it effectively with reference to the Causey dicta? I plan to file a motion for an temporary restraining order in Federal Court to block a threatened but yet unscheduled sale of the property.

Previous question already answered:

Is a partial summary judgment ruling final for the purpose of appeal? This is cook county il case 06CH05391. It has had 4 judges, 3 paintiffs, 3 servicers, and over six years of my pro se efforts. The third judge allowed unverified assertions with a robo-signed affidavit of proveup and nothing verified on personal knowledge in motion for partial summary judgement all of which I denied in my verified answer. Included in my answer was the affirmative defense that I had rescinded (for lack of receiving any documents at closing) the mortgage within the 3 year period with no opposition from plaintiff thus voiding the mortgage and note (see marr v bank of america).


My name is XXXXX XXXXX I'd be happy to answer your questions today.

Am amicus brief is not dispositive, as it's merely another lawyer's arguments in support of or against a particular issue in a case. You can look at the reasoning in the brief, you can cite it, and you can review the cases or other sources used in the brief, but it's not binding on an appeals court.
Lucy, Esq. and 5 other Legal Specialists are ready to help you