This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Banking
Declaratory Relief
Student Loans

Tina M. Ubaldi, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. SLM Corporation, Sallie Mae Inc., SLM PC Student Loan Trust 2004-A

Published: Apr. 12, 2014 | Result Date: Mar. 24, 2014 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 3:11-cv-01320-EDL Bench Decision –  Class Certification Denied

Court

USDC Northern


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Michael D. Braun
(Braun Law Group PC)

William J. Genego

Edward J. Feinstein

Stephen M. Pincus

Wyatt A. Lison
(Feinstein, Doyle, Payne & Kravec, LLC)

Maureen Davidson-Welling
(Stember, Cohn & Davidson-Welling LLC)

Joseph N. Kravec Jr.
(Feinstein, Doyle, Payne & Kravec LLC)

Janet L. Spielberg
(Law Office of Janet L. Spielberg)


Defendant

Julia B. Strickland
(Steptoe LLP)

Joseph A. Escarez

David W. Moon
(Stroock & Stroock & Lavan LLP)

Julieta Stepanyan

Lisa M. Simonetti
(Vedder Price PC)


Facts

Tina Ubaldi and Chanee Thurston filed a class action against SLM Corp., Sallie Mae Inc., and SLM PC Student Loan Trust 2004-A.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
Ubaldi argued that defendants used unenforceable choice of law provisions in their student loan promissory notes, imposed improper later charges, and charged usurious interest. Plaintiffs took out private education loans, which were serviced by Sallie Mae. They claimed that defendants used deceptive practices to make it unclear who the de facto lender for these loans was, and then used further deceptive practices to take advantage of borrowers

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
Defendants opposed class certification, arguing that the class was unascertainable and that common issues did not predominate.

Result

The court agreed with defendants and denied class certification without prejudice.

Other Information

FILING DATE: March 18, 2011.


#97790

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390