Wells Fargo Blasts Phila.'s 'Remote' Connection to Fair Housing Claims
Philadelphia's lawsuit against Wells Fargo over allegations the company's allegedly discriminatory lending practices damaged the city is too much of a stretch to proceed, the company has argued as part of its effort to dismiss a type of action that was only recently sanctioned by the U.S. Supreme Court.
July 25, 2017 at 06:26 PM
4 minute read
Philadelphia's lawsuit against Wells Fargo over allegations the company's allegedly discriminatory lending practices damaged the city is too much of a stretch to proceed, the company has argued as part of its effort to dismiss a type of action that was only recently sanctioned by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In mid-May, Philadelphia city government lawyers sued the national lending company, alleging it violated the Fair Housing Act by targeting minority borrowers with high-risk and high-interest loans. The suit was the first that a city lodged against a financial institution since the Supreme Court's May 1 decision in Bank of America v. City of Miami and Wells Fargo v. City of Miami, which established that municipalities have standing to sue banks over allegedly discriminatory lending practices.
That ruling, however, wasn't a total win for municipalities looking to sue, and, in its motion to dismiss Philadelphia's suit, Wells Fargo cited the heightened burden the high court established for municipalities in suing under the Fair Housing Act.
This content has been archived.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
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllFederal Judge Dismisses Digital Privacy Suit Against E-Commerce Company
4 minute readFederal Judge Hits US With $227,000 Sanction for Discovery Misconduct
3 minute readThe Defense Bar Is Feeling the Strain: Busy Med Mal Trial Schedules Might Be Phila.'s 'New Normal'
7 minute readPa. High Court to Weigh Parent Company's Liability for Dissolved Subsidiary's Conduct
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Here’s What Litigators Want For Christmas
- 2Reported Refusal to Officiate Gay Wedding Prompts Review by NY Judicial Misconduct Watchdog
- 3Frozen-Potato Producers Face Profiteering Allegations in Surge of Antitrust Class Actions
- 4CooperSurgical Class Action Survives Motion to Dismiss
- 5Lawyers Weigh 'Right to Disconnect' During Remote Work
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250