Search for: "Security Savings Bank v. California" Results 1 - 20 of 157
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
11 Apr 2012, 1:13 am by Kevin LaCroix
    Jonathan Joseph is a member of the California State Bar and has focused for over 33 years on regulatory, corporate, securities and transactional matters for banks and bank holding companies and officers and directors of distressed and failed institutions. [read post]
30 Oct 2010, 11:19 pm by Mike
On June 12, 2006 Plaintiff and World Savings Bank entered into a refinance loan secured by a deed of trust on his property. [read post]
29 Jan 2011, 6:36 am by Mandelman
Claudia told Bob Egelko of the San Francisco Chronicle that the bank was nice enough to contact her attorney the day before the sale to offer her the chance to save her home by agreeing to a higher monthly payment. [read post]
8 Mar 2021, 12:37 pm by Richard Brunette
  But because of the utility of guaranties to lenders, vendors, landlords and others, guaranties are viewed as essential to the availability of credit to companies and other limited liability entities, California courts generally enforce them  Mariner Savings v. [read post]
1 Dec 2009, 10:23 am
On the day plaintiff signed the loan documents, Pham deposited $4,500 in plaintiff's bank account and later asked plaintiff for a bank receipt showing the balance in her account. [read post]
2 May 2014, 4:41 am
Kidde, 2014 WL 703514 (California Court of Appeals 2014). [read post]
12 Nov 2007, 10:23 pm
College Savings Bank, 527 U.S. 627 (1999)]Hmmm, that gets to the legalities but doesn't address what the WSJ was talking about.First, some background (from the Supreme Court decision):Since 1987, respondent College Savings Bank, a New Jersey chartered savings bank located in Princeton, New Jersey, has marketed and sold certificates of deposit known as the CollegeSure CD, which are essentially annuity contracts for financing future college… [read post]
27 Jun 2017, 5:34 am by John Jascob
The court held in a 5-4 vote that American Pipe’s equitable tolling rule is unavailable to save an individual suit filed outside the three-year repose period contained in Securities Act Section 13. [read post]