New York Bankruptcy Resources - Debt Consolidation
The sites below were reviewed for content which is relevant to the New York bankruptcy issues appearing within
this site. For more information, please see our review policy. If you have further
questions, do not hesitate to email us at admin@new-york-bankruptcy.org.
We welcome all sites submitted for review and respond to all requests within 3 business days.
Debt Consolidation Information and Services:
- Debt Consolidation - refresh.
Recent Notable Opinions of the Supreme Court of The United States:
Household Credit Services, Inc. v. Pfennig, No. 02-857 (2004), Argued February 23, 2004, Decided April 21,
2004, CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT.
The Truth in Lending Act (TILA) regulates, inter alia, the disclosures credit card issuers must
extend to
all consumers, and provides credit card consumers with a basic civil remedy for
a lender's failure to comply. Among other things, the lender's periodic balance statement to the consumer must include "]he amount
of any finance charge," Sec. 1637(b)(4), which is defined as an amount "payable directly or indirectly by the
consumer, and imposed directly or indirectly by the creditor as an incident to the extension of credit."
Sec. 1605(a). Section Sec. 1604(a) expressly gives to the Federal Reserve Board expansive authority to prescribe
regulations containing "such classifications, differentiations, or other provisions," as, in the Board's judgment,
"are necessary or proper to effectuate TILA's purposes, to prevent circumvention or evasion thereof, or to
facilitate compliance therewith." The Board's Regulation Z interprets Sec. 1605(a)'s "finance charge" definition
to exclude "charges for exceeding a credit limit" (over-limit fees). Held: Regulation Z is not an unreasonable interpretation of Sec. 1605
in the present cuircumstance. Because respondent does not challenge
the Board's authority under Sec. 1604(a) to issue binding regulations, this Court faces only two questions. It
asks, first, whether "Congress has directly spoken to the precise question at issue," Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v.
Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837, 842, in which case courts, as well as the Board, "must give
effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress," id. at 842—843. However, whenever Congress has
"explicitly left a gap for the implementing agency to fill," the agency's regulation is "given controlling weight
unless it is arbitrary, capricious, or manifestly contrary to the statute." Id. at 843—844.
The websites included on this page relate in some way to filing New York Bankruptcy cases, whether laws, rules, discharge, reorganization or other topics . Vast bodies of law
pertain to New York Bankruptcy proceedings and are incorporated by the courts. As New York Bankruptcy laws are
created each year, the coverage of this site will continue to
grow.
|
