§Why CasetextPricing

PARKS v. MBNA AMERICA BANK

Respondent’s Supplemental Reply Brief

29 Cited authorities

  1. Landgraf v. USI Film Prods.

    511 U.S. 244 (1994)   Cited 3,796 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a statute may apply retroactively when "clear congressional intent favor such a result"

  2. Bragdon v. Abbott

    524 U.S. 624 (1998)   Cited 1,640 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that DOJ's administrative guidance on ADA compliance is entitled to deference

  3. Bowen v. Georgetown University Hospital

    488 U.S. 204 (1988)   Cited 1,716 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts will not defer to an agency's litigating position where it contradicts the agency's prior “regulations, rulings, or administrative practice”

  4. Jerman v. Carlisle

    559 U.S. 573 (2010)   Cited 749 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the bona fide error defense in § 1692k(c) does not apply to a violation of the FDCPA resulting from a debt collector's incorrect interpretation of the requirements of that statute" and reversing the contrary judgment of the court of appeals

  5. Reiter v. Sonotone Corp.

    442 U.S. 330 (1979)   Cited 1,156 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "injury to business or property" was not limited to commercial interests

  6. Barnett Bank of Marion County, N.A. v. Nelson

    517 U.S. 25 (1996)   Cited 486 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a federal statute permitting banks to act as agents of insurance companies, although not insurers themselves, was a statute regulating the "business of insurance" for McCarran-Ferguson purposes

  7. Cty. of Wash. v. Gunther

    452 U.S. 161 (1981)   Cited 450 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that technical amendment of Title VII merely incorporates affirmative defenses of Equal Pay Act, and does not substantively alter criteria for Title VII gender-based wage discrimination claims

  8. Western Security Bank v. Superior Court

    15 Cal.4th 232 (Cal. 1997)   Cited 287 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that Legislature's retroactive intent was plain because the bill stated that it was intended to abrogate a specific court of appeal holding and " ‘confirm the expectation of the parties’ " that an earlier interpretation of applicable law would apply

  9. Federal Energy Administration v. Algonquin SNG, Inc.

    426 U.S. 548 (1976)   Cited 108 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding AIA did not bar challenge to “fees” because fees not “assessed under” the Internal Revenue Code

  10. National Min. Ass'n v. Department of Labor

    292 F.3d 849 (D.C. Cir. 2002)   Cited 106 times
    Holding that a rule is impermissibly retroactive if "applied to claims that were pending on the regulations' effective date"

  11. Section 1461 - Short title

    12 U.S.C. § 1461   Cited 736 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Providing for the establishment of federally chartered savings and loan associations

  12. Section 24 - Corporate powers of associations

    12 U.S.C. § 24   Cited 662 times   43 Legal Analyses
    Authorizing banks "[t]o exercise . . . all such incidental powers as shall be necessary to carry on the business of banking; by discounting and negotiating promissory notes, drafts, bills of exchange, and other evidences of debt . . . and by obtaining, issuing, and circulating notes"

  13. Section 21 - Formation of national banking associations; incorporators; articles of association

    12 U.S.C. § 21   Cited 496 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Governing formation of national banks and their entry into articles of association

  14. Section 25b - State law preemption standards for national banks and subsidiaries clarified

    12 U.S.C. § 25b   Cited 56 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Establishing that state consumer financial laws are preempted if their "application ... would have a discriminatory effect on national banks, in comparison with the effect of the law on a bank chartered by that State"

  15. Section 43 - Interpretations concerning preemption of certain State laws

    12 U.S.C. § 43   Cited 23 times
    Authorizing OCC to issue opinion letters or interpretative rules on the scope of federal preemption

  16. Section 6701 - Operation of State law

    15 U.S.C. § 6701   Cited 18 times   2 Legal Analyses

    (a) State regulation of the business of insurance The Act entitled "An Act to express the intent of Congress with reference to the regulation of the business of insurance" and approved March 9, 1945 ( 15 U.S.C. 1011 et seq.) (commonly referred to as the "McCarran-Ferguson Act") remains the law of the United States. (b) Mandatory insurance licensing requirements No person shall engage in the business of insurance in a State as principal or agent unless such person is licensed as required by the appropriate

  17. Section 17209 - Service of brief or petition on attorney general

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17209   Cited 18 times
    Requiring service of appellate briefs or petitions in UCL matters on the Attorney General within three days of filing with the court

  18. Section 1748.9 - Extension of credit through use of preprinted check or draft

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1748.9   Cited 9 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Paragraphing omitted

  19. Section 7.4008 - Lending by national banks

    12 C.F.R. § 7.4008   Cited 65 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Allowing banks to make non-real estate loans without regard to, inter alia, “disclosure and advertising”

  20. Rule 8.29 - Service on nonparty public officer or agency

    Cal. R. 8.29   Cited 6 times

    (a)Proof of service When a statute or this rule requires a party to serve any document on a nonparty public officer or agency, the party must file proof of such service with the document unless a statute permits service after the document is filed, in which case the proof of service must be filed immediately after the document is served on the public officer or agency. (Subd (a) relettered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as subd (b).) (b)Identification on cover When a statute or this rule requires