Ask a Lawyer and Get Answers to Your Legal Questions
Causey v US Bank is marked not for publication but that 7th Circuit decision is based upon the unambiguous language of the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) rather than common law which had formed the historical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 Included in my answer was the affirmative defense that I had rescinded (for lack of receiving any documents at closing) the mortgage within the 3 year period with no opposition from plaintiff thus voiding the mortgage and note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).