18 U.S.C. § 27
Mortgage lending business defined
In this title, the term “mortgage lending business” means an organization which finances or refinances any debt secured by an interest in real estate, including private mortgage companies and any subsidiaries of such organizations, and whose activities affect interstate or foreign commerce.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1998–2024 · leading case: United States v. Herbert Vederman
United States v. Herbert Vederman (2019)
“9 The Government cross-appeals from the District Court's judgment acquitting Fattah and Vederman on Counts 19 and 20, arguing that the District Court erred in interpreting the definition of a "mortgage lending business" under 18 U.S.C. § 27 . We address these arguments in turn.”
United States v. Chaka Fattah, Sr. (2018)
“9 The Government cross-appeals from the District Court's judgment acquitting Fattah and Vederman on Counts 19 and 20, arguing that the District Court erred in interpreting the definition of a "mortgage lending business" under 18 U.S.C. § 27 . We address these arguments in turn.”
HILL v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF GEORGIA Et Al. (2019)
“hemes 1 and 2)[;] (c) Billing, without proper authorization to do so, Medicaid/PeachCare beneficiaries for services that had been disallowed by CMS, (Scheme 3)[; and] (d) When Defendants were made aware of these various false claims, they did nothing to rectify overpayments and…”
United States v. Jason Springer (2017)
“” 18 U.S.C. § 27 . The district court agreed with the government that GMAC was a mortgage lending business and therefore denied Makohoniuk’s motion.”
United States v. Fattah (2016)
“See 18 U.S.C. § 27 (emphasis added). The record is devoid of any evidence that CUMA finances or refinances any debt.”
United States v. Colón-Rodríguez (2012)
“” 18 U.S.C. § 27 . This case does not require us to decide whether the FSA is included within the expanded definition of "financial institution.”
United States v. Colon-Rodriguez (2012)
“" 18 U.S.C. § 27 . This case does not require us to decide whether the FSA is included within the expanded definition of "financial institution.”
United States v. Young-Bey (2024)
“Specifically at issue was the question of whether one interstate mortgage transaction was enough to satisfy the requirement set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 27 to be a mortgage lending business.”
Houle v. Wells Fargo, NA (2023)
“§ 20 ; 18 U.S.C. § 27 ; 18 U.S.C. § 1001 ; 18 U.”
United States v. John Glenn (2021)
“2019) (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 27 ). 5 Id. at 172 (citing United States v.”
United States v. Chaka Fattah, Sr. (2020)
“We also held that CUMA is “an organization which finances or refinances [ ] debt secured by an interest in real estate” under 18 U.S.C. § 27 , and thus qualified as a financial institution.”
Velazquez v. United States (2022)
“After a five-day trial, a jury convicted Carpenter and Velazquez of conspiracy to kidnap, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 27 1201(a)(1) and (c), and kidnapping, in violation of 18 U.”
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.