Archive | Montana Consumer Protection Act

RSS feed for this section

Ally Financial, Inc. v. Stevenson

Ally Financial, Inc. v. Stevenson, 2017 MT 190 (Aug. 8, 2017) (Wheat, J.) (5-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred in determining it had subject matter jurisdiction, and (2) whether venue was proper in Chouteau County under § 30-14-133(1), MCA.

Short Answer: (1) No, and (2) yes.

Affirmed

Facts: Stevenson bought a fifth wheel trailer from Big Sky RV, Inc. in 2014 for $72,595. She traded in her previous trailer for $8,000, provided a down payment of $21,773, and financed the remainder through Ally Bank. Big Sky delivered the new trailer to Stevenson’s home in Chouteau County in August 2014, and picked up her trade-in the same day.…

Jacobson v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC

Jacobson v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, 2016 MT 101 (May 4, 2016) (Wheat, J.; Rice, J., concurring) (5-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the district court erred in holding that Bayview violated the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act; (2) whether the district court erred in holding that Bayview violated the Montana Consumer Protection Act; (3) whether the district court erred in awarding damages to the Jacobsons; and (4) whether the Jacobsons should be awarded costs and fees on appeal.

Short Answer: (1) No; (2) no; (3) no; and (4) yes.

Affirmed

Facts: Jacobsons borrowed money and bought a home in October 2007, executing a promissory note and trust indenture for $391,400 as security. The original lender was CitiMortgage, Inc. and the “nominee” beneficiary of the trust indenture was Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.…

WLW Realty Partners v. Continental Partners

WLW Realty Partners, LLC v. Continental Partners VIII, LLC, 2015 MT 312 (Nov. 3, 2015) (Cotter, J.) (5-0, rev’d)

Issue: (1) Whether Continental preserved its argument about the legal requirements of negligent misrepresentation by raising it in a reply brief supporting a motion in limine; (2) whether the district court erred by imposing liability on Continental for negligent misrepresentation; and (3) whether the district court erred by finding Continental violated the Montana Consumer Protection Act.

Short Answer: (1) Yes; (2) yes; and (3) yes.

Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment for Continental

Facts: Continental bought a lot with two building parcels from Yellowstone Development in 2004. In the buy-sell, the parties agreed that Yellowstone Development would provide the lots with ski-in and ski-out access.…

Amour v. Collection Professionals, Inc.

Amour v. Collection Professionals, Inc., 2015 MT 150 (June 2, 2015) (Baker, J.) (5-0, aff’d)

Issue: (1) Whether the debt Amour owed to the GAL was regulated by the FDCPA; (2) whether the GAL was entitled to quasi-judicial immunity under the Montana Consumer Protection Act; and (3) whether the district court correctly awarded CPI $7,408.70 plus interest.

Short Answer: (1) No; (2) yes; and (3) yes.

Affirmed

Facts: Shannon Amour petitioned for dissolution in 2007. In 2008, the court entered an order naming Nancy Smith the GAL for Amour’s children. The court specified Smith’s duties, granted her immunity, and specified that the gross marital estate was responsible for paying her. Amour entered a contract with Smith agreeing to pay Smith $90/hour plus expenses.…