Facts: Petitioner Anne McCurry filed suit against respondent Chevy Chase Bank, F.S.B. in the Superior Court for King County after Chevy Chase Bank, in violation of the terms of the deed of trust, charged McCurry fax and notary fees for reconveyance of the deed, asserting that Chevy Chase Bank had unjustly enriched itself by deceptively leading McCurry to believe that the fees were necessary to secure reconveyance and thereby violated Washington’s Consumer Protection Act (Washingon Revised Code §19.86.020(2)). The trial court subsequently granted Chevy Chase Bank’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that McCurry had failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted insofar as federal regulations (12 C.F.R. §560.2) preempt state laws purporting to impose requirements regarding loan-related fees. Upon appeal, the Washington Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s decision. McCurry appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Washington.
Question(s): Does federal regulation preempt the state law upon which McCurry’s claim is based?
Conclusion: Justice Sanders’ opinion for the Court concluded that 12 C.F.R. §560.2 does not preempt McCurry’s claim against Chevy Chase Bank as McCurry’s claim was based in state contract law, which is of general applicability and only incidentally affects federal regulation of loan-related fees rather than directly regulates the terms under which they may be imposed. Thus, the Court held that McCurry’s claim was not preempted and remanded the case for trial.
Docket No. 81896-7 (from Court of Appeals Division I Case No. 60075-3)
Petitioner: Anne McCurry
(Counsel: Robin John Williamson, Guy William Beckett, and Mark Adam Griffin)
Respondent: Chevy Chase Bank, F.S.B.
(Counsel: Timothy J. Filer, Jeffrey S. Miller, Neil Armstrong Dial, and Emanuel Jacobowitz)
Briefs:
- Answer
- Answer to Amicus
- Appellant Brief
- Notice of Supplemental Authority
- Petition for Review
- Petitioner Supplemental Brief
- Petitioners' Answer to Amicus of Wsajf Et Al
- Petitioners' Answer to WA State Amicus
- Reply
- Reply to Answer
- Respondent Brief
- Respondent's Answer to Amici
- Respondent's Answer to WA Amicus
- Respondents Answer to Amicus
- Respondents Supplemental Brief
- Statement of Additional Auth
- WDTL Amicus
Argument: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 10:00am
[Source: TVW, http://tvw.org]
Audio: Washington Supreme Court
Decided: Thursday, June 24th, 2010
Prevailing Party: Anne McCurry (Petitioner)
Vote: 6-3
Citation: Pending
Court: Madsen1 Court (2010-)
Alexander
Johnson
Madsen
Sanders
(Majority)
Chambers
Owens
Fairhurst
Johnson
(Dissent)
Stephens
Opinion
Dissent
Note: We post only slip opinion(s) as published at the time of the decision. Please consult Washington Reports printed volumes for the opinion(s) in their final form. Each opinion should appear next to the Justice who authored it.