Daniels v. SCME Mortgage Bankers, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the plaintiff did 9 not explain how his employment as an electrician apprentice precluded the possibility 10 that was the loan was, “by his own contemporary admission on the loan application, for 11 ‘investment’ purposes”
• finding 11 selection of “investment” on plaintiff’s loan application was a “significant deficiency” 12 weighing against a finding of personal purpose
• finding listing of property as “investment” on loan application was a “significant deficiency” as to personal purpose
• “[B]ecause both Defendant’s first Motion to Dismiss and this Court’s prior Order put 13 Plaintiff on notice of the requirements of TILA and RESPA, the Court GRANTS Defendant’s 14 Motion to Dismiss WITH PREJUDICE . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).