Legal Opinion
McCurry v. Chevy Chase Bank, FSB
Washington Supreme Court
Decided June 24, 2010No. 81896-7PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSanders, J.
¶1 — We are asked to decide whether the state laws at issue here are preempted by federal regulation of federal savings associations. To reconvey title, Chevy Chase charged fax and notary fees that Anne and Chris McCurry argue were not permitted by the deed of trust. The trial court held state laws supporting the McCurrys’ contract and consumer protection claims were preempted by federal regulation. The Court of Appeals affirmed. But these laws are generally applicable with only an incidental effect on lending operations, thus we reverse and remand the case to the trial court for further…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Conley v. GibsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1957
- Fidelity Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. De La CuestaSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Halvorson v. DahlWashington Supreme Court · 1978
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- Cafasso v. General Dynamics C4 Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- Webb v. Nashville Area Habitat for Humanity, Inc.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2011
- Kumar v. Gate Gourmet, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2014
- Washburn ex rel. Estate of Roznowski v. City of Federal WayWashington Supreme Court · 2013
- Hawkeye Foodservice Distribution, Inc. v. Iowa Educators CorporationSupreme Court of Iowa · 2012
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.