Extraordinary Leadership for North Dakota Banks
menu
menu
Advocacy
Strategic Partners
Education
NDBanks Benefit Trust
Communications
About
Events
Career Network
Sign In
Extraordinary Leadership for North Dakota Banks
About
Events
Career Network
Sign In
Advocacy
Ask Kennedy
Bank Exam Prep Center
Legislative Updates
Legal Publications
Legal Counsel
Legislative Committee
NDBankPAC
Advocacy Resources
Strategic Partners
Endorsed Vendors
Partner Resources
Business Partner Directory
Associate Member Listing
2024 Associate Member Guide
Associate Member Benefits
Associate Member Application
Sponsorship Opportunities
Advertising Opportunities
Education
2024 NDBA Ag Credit Conference
Peer Groups
Conferences
Schools
IT Certification Programs
Online Training
Financial Literacy
NDBanks Benefit Trust
NDBBT Board of Directors
Communications
News
NDBA Bulletin
Service Award Application
Directory
Advertising Opportunities
Bank Holiday Signs
Advocacy
Strategic Partners
Education
NDBanks Benefit Trust
Communications
Home
»
Communications
»
News
»
Credit Card Late Fees Lawsuit to Remain in Texas After Legal Wrangling
Credit Card Late Fees Lawsuit to Remain in Texas After Legal Wrangling
Posted:
Apr 10 2024
A district court erred when it transferred a lawsuit seeking to overturn the CFPB’s rule limiting credit card late fees from Texas to Washington, D.C., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has ruled. ABA, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and four business groups sued the CFPB in March over the rule, which would lower the safe harbor dollar amount for late fees to $8 and eliminate the annual inflation adjustment for the safe harbor. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, but the judge in the case transferred the case to a Washington, D.C, district court after the bureau challenged whether the Texas court had jurisdiction in the matter.
In a 2-1 ruling, the appeals court ruled that the Texas district court erred in transferring the case because the Fifth Circuit had already granted a temporary stay that paused the transfer order. The plaintiffs also appealed the ruling against the injunction. “Once a party properly appeals something a district court has done—here, the effective denial of a preliminary injunction—the district court has zero jurisdiction to do anything that alters the case’s status,” the appeals court ruled. However, the justices emphasized that their decision was “exceedingly narrow and procedural,” being focused on the correctness of the transfer order and not whether the Texas court has proper jurisdiction in the lawsuit.
To view the opinion, visit:
https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/pub/24/24-10266-CV0.pdf