Here is the opinion in Western Sky Financial LLC v. State ex rel. Owens.
Substitute opinion in Western Sky Financial LLC v. State ex rel. Olens (PDF) (12-8-2016).
Here is the opinion in Western Sky Financial LLC v. State ex rel. Owens.
Substitute opinion in Western Sky Financial LLC v. State ex rel. Olens (PDF) (12-8-2016).
Here are the materials in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. CashCall (C.D. Cal.):
Here are the materials in Banks v. CashCall (M.D. Fla.):
Yet another decision captioned Parnell v. CashCall/Western Sky Financial (N.D. Ga.):
54-1 Motion to Compel Arbitration
An excerpt:
Based on the foregoing reasons, the Court declines to enforce the delegation provision and the arbitration provision in the Parnell Loan Agreement. The arbitral forum is unavailable, and the provisions themselves are unconscionable. The Court therefore denies Defendant’s Motion to Compel.
Here are the materials in Smith v. Western Sky Financial LLC (E.D. Pa.):
Another motion to dismiss or stay based on tribal exhaustion and the sham Western Sky arbitration/forum selection clauses. When will Rule 11 kick in?
Here are materials in Dillon v. BMO Harris Bank NA (M.D. N.C.):
162 Dillion Motion to Compel re Generations
165 Bay Cities Bank Opposition
166 Generations Community FCU Opposition
An excerpt:
Using the Heldt analysis, however, Plaintiffs’ logic can be used to assert a colorable claim of tribal jurisdiction, because some of Defendants’ actions involved alleged tribal entities and/or tribal members.”). Operating against that backdrop, these courts mandated tribal exhaustion where the record did not establish (i) the nature of the payday lenders’ relationship to each other and/or the tribe; (ii) the unavailability of the specified tribal arbitral forum; and (iii) for purposes of the Western Sky agreement, (A) who constitutes an “authorized representative of the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribal Nation” and (B) whether any such authorized representative “is a JAMS or AAA arbitrator,” Heldt, 12 F. Supp. 3d at 1193 (internal quotation marks omitted).See id. at 1184-87, 1190-93; see also Brown, 84 F. Supp. 3d at 480-81 (following Heldt).
As discussed below, Dillon bases his Requests and Motions to Compel in significant part on a need to develop a factual record sufficient to overcome the concerns in the Heldt line of cases. (See, e.g., Docket Entry 162 at 1-2; Docket Entry 162-2 at 4-6.).
We posted on this Rule 19 portion of this case here.
Here is the opinion in Parnell v. CashCall Inc.
Materials and briefs here.
Here is the motion in Dillon v. BMO Harris (W.D. Okla.):
Here are materials in the North Carolina portion of this suit.
You must be logged in to post a comment.