Boyd v. U.S. Bank, N.A.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that an ICFA clam can be premised on a practice that “violates a standard of conduct contained in an existing statute or common law doctrine” (internal quotations and citation omitted)
• allegations of \damage to [homeowner's] credit\ and \the inability `to fairly negotiate a plan to stay in [his] home'\ sufficiently pled economic damages under the ICFA
• allegations of “damage to [homeowner’s] credit” and “the inability ‘to fairly negotiate a plan to stay in [his] home’ ” sufficiently pled economic damages under the ICFA
• same, where the violation of HAMP directives led to the borrower's \inability to fairly negotiate a plan to stay in his home\
• same, where the servicer allegedly \violated HAMP directives\ by failing to consider a potentially eligible homeowner for a HAMP modification
• same, where the violation of HAMP directives led to the borrower’s “inability to fairly negotiate a plan to stay in his home”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).