Legal Opinion

Hirsch v. Bank of America

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 28, 2003No. A096725, A096726, A096727, A096728PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

REARDON, J.

The second amended complaints (SAC) in these consolidated appeals alleged that defendant banks engaged with title insurance and escrow companies (hereafter, title companies) in an elaborate and illegal kickback scheme: In exchange for substantial escrow funds deposited with defendants in demand deposit accounts, the banks pursued a series of illegal practices resulting in disguised interest payments to the title companies. These practices violated federal prohibitions against paying interest on demand deposit accounts. Through these practices the banks assisted the title…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
  2. Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court · 1971
  3. Kraus v. Trinity Management Services, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2000
  4. Lectrodryer v. SeoulBankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2000
  5. Lazar v. Hertz Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1999

14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Freeman Industries, LLC v. Eastman Chemical Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Troyk v. Farmers Group, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2009
  3. Peterson v. Cellco PartnershipCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
  4. Sheet Metal Workers Local 441 Health & Welfare Plan v. Glaxosmithkline, PLCDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2010
  5. Montich v. Miele USA, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 2012

29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API