Home Menu ↓
Clicking on our sponsor links helps insure continued free access to this website.
Please support our efforts by visiting our sponsors:

 

FIRST AMERICAN FINANCIAL v. EDWARDS

Docket No.: 10-708
Certiorari Granted: 06/20/11
Argued: November 28, 2011
Decided: 06/28/12

Topics:

Article I, FOIA, Sherman Act, antitrust, privacy, property rights

PartyNames: First American Financial Corporation, Successor in Interest to The First American Corporation, et al. v. Denise P. Edwards
Petitioner: First American Financial Corporation, Successor in Interest to The First American Corporation, et al.
Respondent: Denise P. Edwards

Court Below: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Citation: 610 F.3d 514
Supreme Court Docket

First American Financial Corporation, Successor in Interest to The First American Corporation, et al.
v.
Denise P. Edwards
Background:

Section 8(a) of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act of 1974 ("RESPA" or "the Act") provides that "[n]o person shall give and no person shall accept any fee, kickback, or thing of value pursuant to any agreement or understanding ... that business incident to or a part of a real estate settlement service involving a federally related mortgage loan shall be referred to any person." 12 U.S.C. § 2607(a). Section 8(d)(2) of the Act provides that any person "who violate[s]," inter alia, § 8(a) shall be liable "to the person or persons charged for the settlement service involved in the violation in an amount equal to three times the amount of any charge paid for such settlement service." Id. § 2607(d)(2).

Consideration Limited:

LIMITED TO QUESTION 2 PRESENTED BY THE PETITION.

Question Presented:

1. Did the Ninth Circuit err in holding that a private purchaser of real estate settlement services has standing under RESPA to maintain an action in federal court in the absence of any claim that the alleged violation affected the price, quality, or other characteristics of the settlement services provided? 2. Does such a purchaser have standing to sue under Article III, § 2 of the United States Constitution, which provides that the federal judicial power is limited to "Cases" and "Controversies" and which this Court has interpreted to require the plaintiff to "have suffered an 'injury in fact,'" Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992)?

Question:

Does Edwards have standing to sue?

FIRST AMERICAN FINANCIAL v. EDWARDS
ORAL ARGUMENT

11/28/11

Listen to Oral Argument in FIRST AMERICAN FINANCIAL v. EDWARDS
Holding: DISMISSED AS IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED
Vote: 9-0
Majority: Roberts, Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan
Opinion By: Per Curiam
Database Connection failed: SQLSTATE[HY000] [1045] Access denied for user 'restauz8_sophi'@'localhost' (using password: YES)