The People's Lawyer Consumer News Alert | |||
![]() |
|||
|
|||
Subscribe to the Newsletter Helpful Links Texas Consumer Complaint Center Credit Reports and Identity Theft Your Guide to Small Claims Court Contact Us 1-713-743-2168 |
The People’s Lawyer’s Tip of the DayIf you have been a victim of identity theft there is a way to make sure it never happens again. Texas law allows you to put a "security freeze" on your credit report, preventing an identity thief from using your information. To find out more, Student Loan Rates May DoubleIf Congress doesn't act before July 1, Stafford loans interest rates will increase from 3.4 percent to 6.8 percent. The difference would equate to an additional $6.8 billion, with an average jump of $5,000 per student. Comparing the Top Income Tax RatesJust how much do those in the top income tax rate pay compared to other countries? FDA OKs Long Term Nicotine ReplacementWant to quit smoking, but you're not quite sure how? Your MoneyWhat is your FPI - Financial Preparedness Index?
For the LawyersClass action plaintiff cannot avoid removal to federal court by stipulating total damages would be less than the $5 million jurisdictional threshold for application of the Class Action Fairness Act. Plaintiff filed a purported class action in Arkansas state court seeking reimbursement from a homeowners’ insurance company for the cost of repairing storm damage. The plaintiff stipulated that recovery would be limited to less than $5 million, the minimum for federal court jurisdiction under the Act. The Supreme Court held that a stipulation as to damages could not overcome a judicial finding that the Act’s jurisdictional threshold had been met. “We do not agree that CAFA forbids the federal court to consider, for purposes of determining the amount in controversy, the very real possibility that a nonbinding, amount-limiting, stipulation may not survive the class certification process. This potential outcome does not result in the creation of a new case not now before the federal court. To hold otherwise would, for CAFA jurisdictional purposes, treat a nonbinding stipulation as if it were binding, exalt form over substance, and run directly counter to CAFA’s primary objective: ensuring ‘Federal court consideration of interstate cases of national importance.”
|
||
To stop receiving email news alerts from the Center for Consumer Law, please click here. |