The country’s largest student loan guarantor has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to consider a case that began as a seemingly routine debt dispute but now grapples with a question at the heart of administrative law: How much deference should judges give to agencies’ interpretations of federal regulations?
In a petition filed this week, United Student Aid Funds Inc. urged the high court to grant review of its case against a woman who sued the company for charging her $4,500 in collection costs after she defaulted on her student loans and agreed to a debt rehabilitation program. The woman, Bryana Bible, has argued that she cannot be charged for collection costs because she accepted a rehabilitation agreement within 60 days and successfully completed it by making nine on-time payments of $50.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
