Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caDC-97-07211/USCOURTS-caDC-97-07211-1/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 371
Nature of Suit: Truth in Lending
Cause of Action: 

---

<<The pagination in this PDF may not match the actual pagination in the printed slip opinion>>

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Argued December 11, 1998 Decided August 1, 2000

No. 97-7211

Lillie May DeBerry,

Appellant

v.

First Government Mortgage and Investors Corporation,

Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Columbia

(No. 96cv00708)

Mark L. Hessel argued the cause for appellant. With him

on the briefs was Mark L. Leemon.

Nathan I. Finkelstein argued the cause for appellee. With

him on the brief was Laurie B. Horvitz.

Before: Wald,* Tatel and Garland, Circuit Judges.

Opinion for the Court filed Per Curiam.

__________

* Former Circuit Judge Wald was a member of the panel at the

time of oral argument, but did not participate in this decision.

USCA Case #97-7211 Document #533162 Filed: 08/01/2000 Page 1 of 2
<<The pagination in this PDF may not match the actual pagination in the printed slip opinion>>

Per Curiam: The facts of this case are set out fully in

DeBerry v. First Gov't Mortgage & Investors Corp., 170 F.3d

1105 (D.C. Cir. 1999). As relevant here, appellant Lillie May

DeBerry brought an action alleging that appellee First Government had violated the District of Columbia Consumer

Protection Procedures Act, D.C. Code s 28-3904(r), by financing and refinancing her home with four mortgage loans

containing unconscionable terms and conditions. The district

court dismissed DeBerry's claims relating to loans made in

1991 and 1992, finding them barred by the statute of limitations. The district court also granted summary judgment to

appellee First Government with respect to DeBerry's other

CPPA claims solely on the ground that the CPPA does not

apply to real estate mortgage finance transactions.

In DeBerry, this court certified to the District of Columbia

Court of Appeals the question whether D.C. Code

s 28-3904(r) applies to real estate mortgage finance transactions. See id. at 1110. This court also held that assuming

the CPPA does apply to such transactions, the district court

erred in dismissing DeBerry's claims relating to the 1991 and

1992 loans before discovery could be conducted. See id. at

1110-11.

On December 30, 1999, the D.C. Court of Appeals answered

the certified question, holding that section 28-3904(r) of the

CPPA does apply to real estate mortgage finance transactions. DeBerry v. First Gov't Mortgage & Investors Corp.,

743 A.2d 699, 703 (D.C. 1999), reh'g en banc denied (May 16,

2000). Accordingly, DeBerry's CPPA claims relating to loans

made in 1991 and 1992 are reinstated and the district court's

grant of summary judgment to First Government on all of

DeBerry's other CPPA claims is reversed.

So ordered.

USCA Case #97-7211 Document #533162 Filed: 08/01/2000 Page 2 of 2