U.S. Code » Title 12 » Chapter CHAPTER 27— REAL ESTATE SETTLEMENT PROCEDURES

12 U.S.C. § 2614

Jurisdiction of courts; limitations

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 12 CasesGoogle Scholar

Any action pursuant to the provisions of section 2605, 2607, or 2608 of this title may be brought in the United States district court or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, for the district in which the property involved is located, or where the violation is alleged to have occurred, within 3 years in the case of a violation of section 2605 of this title and 1 year in the case of a violation of section 2607 or 2608 of this title from the date of the occurrence of the violation, except that actions brought by the Bureau, the Secretary, the Attorney General of any State, or the insurance commissioner of any State may be brought within 3 years from the date of the occurrence of the violation.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 357 cases (84 in the last 5 years), 1977–2026 · leading case: David Merritt v. Countrywide Fin. Corporat, 759 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
David Merritt v. Countrywide Fin. Corporat, 759 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2014). · cites it 12× “smissed the Merritts’ Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) rescission claim because they did not tender the rescindable value of their loan prior to filing suit or allege ability to tender its value in their complaint; and (2) whether the Merritts’ claims under Section 8 of the Real…”
Mary Edmondson v. Eagle Nat'l Bank, 922 F.3d 535 (4th Cir. 2019). · cites it 3× “To decide this issue, we will consider (A) whether RESPA's one-year statute of limitations for claims under Section 2607, 12 U.S.C. § 2614 , is subject to tolling based on fraudulent concealment; (B) if so, whether the district court applied the proper test in holding that…”
PHH Corp. v. Consum. Fin. Prot. Bureau, 881 F.3d 75 (D.C. Cir. 2018). · cites it 4× “Specifically, the question is whether administrative actions to enforce RESPA’s ban on referral fees are subject to the specific three year statute of limitations contained in RESPA, 12 U.S.C. § 2614 , as PHH argues, or whether, as the Bureau contends, they are subject only to…”
PHH Corp. v. Consum. Fin. Prot. Bureau, 839 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “” 12 U.S.C. § 2614 . Note that the referenced Section 2607 of Title 12 is Section 8 of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act.”
Chapman v. Houston Welfare Rights Org., 441 U.S. 600 (1979). · cites it 2× “, 12 U. S. C. § 2614 (Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974); 15 U.”
Schmidt v. Household Fin. Corp., II, 661 S.E.2d 834 (Va. 2008). · cites it 2× “4 12 U.S.C. § 2614 (2000 & Supp. V 2005). Schmidt, however, claims that the theory of equitable tolling applies and that, therefore, the applicable statutes of limitation do not bar his claims under either TILA or RESPA.”
Judith Cunningham v. M&T Bank Corp, 814 F.3d 156 (3d Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “Cunningham, Deimler, and Vanover closed on their home mortgage loans in May 2007, June 2008, and October 2007, respectively.”
Egerer v. Woodland Realty, Inc., 556 F.3d 415 (6th Cir. 2009). · cites it 2× “Claims pursuant to § 2607(a) must be brought within one year from the date the violation occurs in accordance with 12 U.S.C. § 2614 , which provides in relevant part: Any action pursuant to the provisions of section .”
Mullinax v. Radian Guar. Inc., 199 F. Supp. 2d 311 (M.D.N.C. 2002). · cites it 3× “12 U.S.C. § 2614 . Initially, and before reaching the substance of Radian’s argument, the Court notes that Radian’s assertion that the statute of limitations bars Plaintiffs’ action is an affirmative defense.”
Christopher Blake v. JP Morgan Chase Bank NA, 927 F.3d 701 (3d Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “12 U.S.C. § 2614 . So Blake and Orkis need to bridge the gap from when they closed their mortgages in 2005 and 2006 to when they sued in 2013.”
Garcia v. Wachovia Mortg. Corp., 676 F. Supp. 2d 895 (C.D. Cal. 2009). · cites it 2× “) RESPA damages claims under Section 2607 are subject to a one-year limitations period that accrues at closing, while claims under 2605 are subject to a three-year statute of limitations.”
Kelley v. Mortg. Elec. Reg. Sys., Inc., 642 F. Supp. 2d 1048 (N.D. Cal. 2009). · cites it 2× “12 U.S.C. § 2614 . The mortgage transaction at issue here was consummated on March 28, 2006.”
Show all 357 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.