InfoBytes Blog

8th Circuit pauses student debt relief program

On November 14, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit granted an emergency motion for injunction pending appeal filed by state attorneys general from Nebraska, Missouri, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, and South Carolina to temporarily prohibit the Secretary of Education from discharging any federal loans under the agency’s student debt relief plan (announced in August and covered by InfoBytes here). Earlier in October, the 8th Circuit issued an order granting an emergency motion filed by the states, which requested an administrative stay prohibiting the discharge of any student loan debt under the cancellation plan until the appellate court had issued a decision on the states’ motion for an injunction pending an appeal. (Covered by InfoBytes here.) The October order followed a ruling issued by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, which dismissed the states’ action for lack of Article III standing after concluding that the states—which attempted “to assert a threat of imminent harm in the form of lost tax revenue in the future”— failed to establish imminent and non-speculative harm sufficient to confer standing.

In granting the emergency motion, the appellate court disagreed with the district court’s assertion that the states lacked standing. The 8th Circuit reviewed whether the state of Missouri could rely on any harm the Missouri Higher Education Loan Authority (MOHELA) might suffer as a result of the Department of Education’s cancellation plan. The appellate court found that the relationship between MOHELA and the state is relevant to the standing analysis, especially as Missouri law specifically directs MOHELA (which receives revenue from the student loan accounts it services) to distribute $350 million into the state’s treasury. As such, “MOHELA may well be an arm of the State of Missouri” under this reasoning, the appellate court wrote, adding that several district courts have concluded that MOHELA is an arm of the state. However, regardless of whether MOHELA is an arm of the state, the resulting financial impact due to the cancellation plan would, among other things, affect the state’s ability to fund public higher education institutions, the 8th Circuit noted. “Consequently, we conclude Missouri has shown a likely injury in fact that is concrete and particularized, and which is actual or imminent, traceable to the challenged action of the Secretary, and redressable by a favorable decision,” the appellate court wrote, adding that since one party likely has standing it does not need to address the standing of the other states. The appellate court also determined that “the equities strongly favor an injunction considering the irreversible impact the Secretary’s debt forgiveness action would have as compared to the lack of harm an injunction would presently impose.” The 8th Circuit explained that it considered several criteria, including the fact that the collection of student loan payments and the accrual of interest have both been suspended. The Missouri attorney general released a statement applauding the 8th Circuit’s decision.

The 8th Circuit’s decision follows a recent ruling issued by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, which found that the student loan forgiveness program is “an unconstitutional exercise of Congress’s legislative power.” (Covered by InfoBytes here.)

Courts Student Lending State Issues Department of Education Appellate Eighth Circuit State Attorney General Nebraska Missouri Arkansas Iowa Kansas South Carolina

8th Circuit says bank is entitled to proceeds from condo sale

On June 24, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit affirmed a trial court’s decision that a plaintiff bank is entitled to the proceeds from the sale of a condominium despite the defendant’s ex-husband’s bankruptcy and an outstanding balance owed to the bank on a business loan. When the defendant signed and initialed a mortgage securing the financing of a condominium, she consented to her ex-husband’s execution of the note but was not a signatory. The mortgage contained three provisions, including (i) a choice-of-law provision specifying that Iowa law governed the mortgage; (ii) a homestead waiver, in which the defendant and her ex-husband “waive[d] all appraisement and homestead exemption rights relating to” the condominium, except as prohibited by law; and (iii) a future advances clause or “dragnet clause,” which granted the plaintiff a security interest in the mortgage that covered future funds the ex-husband may borrow. The plaintiff initiated litigation against the defendant seeking a declaratory judgment that the defendant’s portion of the escrowed sale proceeds was subject to the mortgage’s future advances clause, and that the plaintiff could apply the proceeds to her ex-husband’s business loan. The trial court concluded that the bank was entitled to the proceeds.

On appeal, the 8th Circuit concluded that the mortgage’s future advances clause encompassed and secured the defendant’s ex-husband's business loan. Among other things, the appellate court rejected the defendant’s arguments that (i) the plaintiff failed to make a prima facie case that it was entitled to the condo sale proceeds because it purportedly “did not prove the proceeds comported with the mortgage’s maximum obligation limit clause (finding “no miscarriage of justice in declining to analyze her claim”); and (ii) the mortgage forced “her to waive her homestead rights in contravention of public policy” and in violation of the FTC’s “unfair credit practices” regulation (16 C.F.R. § 444.2)—a regulation, the appellate court pointed out, that does not apply to “banks” by its own terms. The 8th Circuit also rejected defendant’s unconscionability claim under Iowa law, stating that the “doctrine of unconscionability does not exist to rescue parties from bad bargains.” The appellate court further rejected the defendant’s other “equitable arguments” as “untenable” primarily because the mortgage is a “credit agreement” regulated under Iowa Code § 535.17(5)(c), and that statute expressly displaces equitable remedies.

Courts State Issues Iowa Appellate Eighth Circuit Bankruptcy Mortgages Consumer Finance

HUD announces Nebraska and Iowa disaster relief

On February 24, HUD announced disaster assistance for certain areas in Nebraska and Iowa impacted by severe storms, straight-line winds, and tornadoes on December 15, 2021. This follows President Biden’s major disaster declaration for certain counties on February 23. The disaster relief includes providing an automatic 90-day moratorium on foreclosures of FHA-insured home mortgages for covered properties and making FHA insurance available to victims whose homes were destroyed or severely damaged, such that “reconstruction or replacement is necessary.” Additionally, HUD’s Section 203(k) loan program will allow individuals who have lost homes to finance the purchase of a house, or refinance an existing house and the costs of repair, through a single mortgage. The program will also allow homeowners with damaged property to finance the rehabilitation of existing single-family homes. Flexibility measures for state and local governments, public housing authorities, tribes, and tribally designated house entities are also addressed.

Federal Issues Mortgages Disaster Relief Nebraska Iowa FHA HUD Consumer Finance

Iowa adopts rulemaking for remote notarial acts

On April 29, the Iowa secretary of state adopted rules governing remote notarizations. The rules, which take effect July 1, 2020, govern training, technology, standards for communication, and proof of identity for remote notarial acts.

State Issues Covid-19 Iowa Notary Fintech

Iowa Division of Banking issues statement to bank presidents and CEOs

On April 22, the Iowa Division of Banking issued a statement to bank presidents and CEOs. The statement encourages banks to consider the Paycheck Protection Program Lending Facility created by the Federal Reserve as a liquidity option for Paycheck Protection Program loan activity. The announcement also addresses off-site examinations of financial institutions; the interagency statement on appraisals and evaluations for real estate affected by Covid-19; tracking payment extensions, deferrals, and modifications when working with customers; and loan loss reserve analysis, among other topics.

State Issues Covid-19 Iowa SBA Federal Reserve Bank Compliance

Iowa Division of Credit Unions publishes comprehensive resource for Covid-19 updates

The Iowa Division of Credit Unions published a comprehensive resource containing information on Covid-19 regulatory updates. The document covers a range of regulatory changes applicable to credit unions, including: (i) the SBA-Paycheck Protection Program; (ii) Annual Meeting requirements; (iii) foreclosure moratoriums; (iv) remote notarizations; (v) member assistance; (vi) fraud awareness; (vii) moneys and credits tax filing deadline extensions (viii) loan deferments; and (ix) limitations of services/branch closures.

State Issues Covid-19 Iowa Credit Union Notary Foreclosure Mortgages SBA CARES Act

Iowa Division of Credit Unions issues regulatory bulletin on the Paycheck Protection Program

On April 3, the Iowa Division of Credit Unions issued a regulatory advisory bulletin pertaining to small business lending during the Covid-19 crisis. The bulletin provides details on the new Paycheck Protection Program offered through the Small Business Administration as part of the broader CARES Act. The guidelines provide application details for credit unions seeking to participate in the PPP, and specify that SBA-approved 7(a) lenders already qualify to issue PPP loans. The regulatory changes apply only PPP loans, and do not impact or otherwise change traditional 7(a) loans.

State Issues Covid-19 Iowa Credit Union SBA CARES Act

Iowa Superintendent of Banking provides update on Covid-19 response

On March 24, Iowa’s Superintendent of Banking sent an update letter to bank presidents and CEOs concerning the state’s Covid-19 response efforts. The update highlighted, among other things, the following: (i) loan and grants available to small businesses through state and federal programs; (ii) the governor’s suspension of foreclosures and evictions in the state; (iii) the Division of Banking’s temporary suspension of requirement for in-person annual meetings; (iv) the governor’s outreach to county auditors, recorders and treasurers asking them to facilitate full range of vital mortgage-related services; (v) ongoing efforts to refine the offsite exam process; and (vi) guidance at the federal level from the Treasury Department and the March 22 Interagency Statement regarding loan modifications and troubled debt restructurings (covered by InfoBytes here).

State Issues Iowa Covid-19 Debt Relief Loan Modification

Iowa issues remote notarization guidance

On March 22, Iowa issued temporary remote notarization guidance and FAQs to assist notaries public in working remotely during the Covid-19 crisis. A set of more-stringent provisions is scheduled to take effect on July 1, 2020.

State Issues Covid-19 Iowa Notary Fintech

Iowa suspends foreclosures, declares state of emergency

On March 22, the governor of Iowa proclaimed a state of emergency throughout Iowa.  The proclamation prohibits the commencement of new foreclosures and suspends ongoing foreclosure proceedings on residential, commercial, and agricultural real property in Iowa, authorizes remote notarial acts, and provides a wide range of regulatory licensing relief.

State Issues Covid-19 Iowa Foreclosure Mortgages