PLAINTIFFS JUMP MOTION TO DISMISS HURDLE IN A PMI CAPTIVE REINSURANCE DISPUTE
A federal district court in Pennsylvania sided with plaintiffs on motions to dismiss filed by the lender, private insurers, and captive reinsurance company in a dispute over premiums charged for private mortgage insurance. Although plaintiffs’ claims were outside the statute of limitations window, the court concluded that equitable tolling applies to RESPA claims, denying defendants’ motions on that issue and allowing plaintiffs to conduct limited discovery on statute of limitations and equitable tolling issues. The court also denied defendants’ motions on the merits of the RESPA and unjust enrichment claims, finding plaintiffs’ argument that the reinsurance relationships are “shams” to be persuasive. Defendants did secure the dismissal of N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law § 349 claims brought by non-New York plaintiffs, however. Cunningham v. M&T Bank Corp., No. 12-1238 (USDC M.D. Pa. Oct. 30, 2013).
This post written by Abigail Kortz.
See our disclaimer.
