Connection lost
Server error
BRYANT v. MORTGAGE CAPITAL RESOURCE CORP. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: An assignee of high-cost mortgages argued it was shielded from the original lender’s TILA violations. The court held the assignee could be liable for all claims, including state law torts, that the borrower could have brought against the original lender, but some claims were time-barred.
Legal Significance: Establishes that under HOEPA, an assignee’s liability is expansive, subjecting it to all claims (including state law torts) the borrower had against the original predatory lender. A signed acknowledgment of disclosure is not conclusive proof of delivery for rescindable loans.
BRYANT v. MORTGAGE CAPITAL RESOURCE CORP. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Plaintiffs, representing a putative class of homeowners, obtained high-cost mortgage loans regulated by the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act (HOEPA), an amendment to the Truth in Lending Act (TILA). They alleged the original lender, Mortgage Capital Resource Corp. (MCR), engaged in a “bait and switch” predatory lending scheme. MCR allegedly failed to provide mandatory HOEPA disclosures at least three business days before closing, as required by 15 U.S.C. § 1639(b)(1), instead providing them only at the closing itself. To conceal this violation, MCR allegedly falsified closing documents to reflect timely disclosure. Defendant Residential Funding Corporation (RFC) later purchased a large portfolio of these MCR-originated loans on the secondary market. Plaintiffs sued RFC, as an assignee, seeking to hold it liable for MCR’s TILA violations and related state law claims of fraud and RICO violations, pursuant to HOEPA’s assignee liability provision, 15 U.S.C. § 1641(d)(1). RFC moved to dismiss, arguing it was shielded from liability.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act (HOEPA) subject an assignee of a high-cost mortgage to liability for all claims, including state law claims, that the consumer could have asserted against the original lender, even when the consumer signed documents acknowledging timely receipt of disclosures?
Yes. The court denied the assignee’s motion to dismiss on the merits, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet,
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act (HOEPA) subject an assignee of a high-cost mortgage to liability for all claims, including state law claims, that the consumer could have asserted against the original lender, even when the consumer signed documents acknowledging timely receipt of disclosures?
Conclusion
This case clarifies that HOEPA's assignee liability provision is exceptionally broad, intentionally Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exer
Legal Rule
An assignee of a mortgage subject to HOEPA is subject to all Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pa
Legal Analysis
The court first addressed whether a signed acknowledgment of receipt provided the Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident,
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- For rescindable HOEPA loans, an assignee cannot rely on a borrower’s