Ex parte Darr

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an MCPA claim could not be based on alleged misrepresentations made after the plaintiffs had entered into the agreement at issue
• finding that plaintiffs stated a MCPA claim where they alleged defendant falsely stated they would consider plaintiffs for a loan and defendant “managed to run up late fees and other default related charges and strip cash from [p]laintiffs prior to foreclosure”
• discussing whether an issue raised and not litigated is precluded by collateral estoppel10
• loan modification assistance is representative of “a typical, arm’s-length creditor/debtor relationship founded on a mortgage _ loan”
• “Although Plaintiffs allege that Defendants repeatedly promised that they would consider Plaintiffs' loan modification requests, these allegations are insufficient to sustain the inference that these promises amounted to an ‘offer.’”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).