Category: Banking

In a new article published in the Yale Journal on Regulation, Dorsey & Whitney partner Eric B. Epstein examines the growing rift between how one would expect the bank examination privilege to operate and how the privilege actually works when banks become involved in litigation with nongovernmental parties.

Dorsey partners Eric Epstein, David Scheffel, and Nicholas Vlietstra have authored an article titled, “Ten Key Points about the Bank Examination Privilege,” which has been published by Business Law Today.

On February 6, 2017, Dorsey partners Eric Epstein, David Scheffel, Nicholas Vlietstra, and Jenny Lee presented a webinar titled, “The Bank Examination Privilege – Current Developments.”

Dorsey partners Eric Epstein, David Scheffel, and Nicholas Vlietstra have published an article on Columbia Law School’s Blue Sky Blog. The post, “Keeping Bank Examinations Confidential in Litigation,” is based on their legal treatise, The Bank Examination Privilege, which was published this month by the American Bar Association.

On September 15, 2016, Dorsey partners David A. Scheffel, Eric Epstein, and Nicholas A. J. Vlietstra of Dorsey’s Consumer Financial Services Practice Group gave a presentation on the bank examination privilege.

The Supreme Court of Iowa recently held that non-sufficient funds fees (“NSF fees”) charged by a state-chartered Iowa bank are not subject to the usury provisions of the Iowa Consumer Credit Code (“ICCC”) because the transactions at issue did not constitute extensions of credit.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s Decision in Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. SUMMARY. In Texas Department of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc., 576 U.S. ___, 2015 WL 2473449 (Jun. 25, 2015), the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, held that disparate impact discrimination claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act, 82 Stat. 81, as amended,...