Moss & Barnett is privileged to represent a number of regional and community banks in their lending transactions, workouts and foreclosures, litigation and regulatory matters.
In addition, the attorneys at Moss & Barnett routinely represent individuals and businesses in a variety of commercial transactions, including:
Product sales and warranties
Equipment leases
Service, management and consulting contracts
Software sales and licensing
Borrowing and lending
Guaranties
Secured transactions
Collections
Letters of credit
Our Banking and Commercial Transactions group is qualified and well-positioned to help borrowers and lenders meet their needs, opportunities and challenges in an ever-more challenging and entrepreneurial environment.
[05/07] Family Home & Fin. Ctr, Inc. v. Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp. In mortgage broker's action raising claims against Freddie Mac for intentional interference with contract, unfair competition under California state law, and defamation, summary judgment and a related ruling for Freddie Mac are affirmed where: 1) the intentional interference claim failed as there was no admissible evidence that Freddie Mac influenced or caused another party to terminate its mortgage broker contract with plaintiff, intentionally or otherwise; 2) Freddie Mac's placement of plaintiff on its "Exclusionary List" did not constitute unfair competition; 3) for purposes of the defamation claim, plaintiff failed to show malice to defeat the Common Interest Privilege; and 4) there was no abuse of discretion in denying a request to defer ruling on summary judgment.
[05/07] Decisioning.com, Inc. v. Federated Dep't Stores, Inc. In a patent infringement action involving automated financial account processing systems, summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of defendants is affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded where: 1) the construction of "remote interface" only encompasses publicly-accessible computer equipment and not consumer owned personal computers; 2) thus, defendant-Federated was entitled to summary judgment; 3) defendants-TD Ameritrade and HSBC were entitled to summary judgment only with respect to systems that are accessed solely via consumer-owned personal computers; but 4) further proceedings were required as to those defendants based on certain modified claim constructions.
