logo
Google Reviews Logo

317.636.6481

One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Make a Payment
logo
CONTACT US
CALL US
  • Home
  • Firm Overview
  • Our Attorneys
  • Practice Areas
    • Pharmaceutical Drug & Medical Device Litigation
    • Personal Injury
    • Sexual Abuse
    • Class Action
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Eminent Domain
    • Family Law
    • Business Services, Real Estate & Business Litigation
    • Bankruptcy, Creditor’s Rights, & Commercial & Business Law
    • Appellate Law
  • Firm News
    • News & Announcements
    • Alerts
  • Resources
    • Video Library
    • Blog
  • Contact Us
Google Reviews Logo

317.636.6481

One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Make a Payment
  • Home
  • Firm Overview
  • Our Attorneys
  • Practice Areas
    • Pharmaceutical Drug & Medical Device Litigation
    • Personal Injury
    • Sexual Abuse
    • Class Action
    • Medical Malpractice
    • Eminent Domain
    • Family Law
    • Business Services, Real Estate & Business Litigation
    • Bankruptcy, Creditor’s Rights, & Commercial & Business Law
    • Appellate Law
  • Firm News
    • News & Announcements
    • Alerts
  • Resources
    • Video Library
    • Blog
  • Contact Us

Home » Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of Payday Loan Victims in Two Separate Appeals

Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of Payday Loan Victims in Two Separate Appeals

Two separate panels of the Indiana Court of Appeals have ruled in favor of payday loan victims represented by Cohen & Malad, LLP in two separate class action cases. The two appeals, Geneva-Roth Ventures, Inc. v. Edwards, 956 N.E.2d 1195 (Ind. Ct. App. 2011), reh’g denied, and Apex 1 Processing, Inc. v. Edwards, No. 49A05-1103-PL-85 (Ind. Ct. App. Jan. 20, 2012), involved whether payday loan victims would be allowed to bring their case in court—where the thousands of loan victims can seek to vindicate their rights through a single representative class action—or whether the lenders would be able to force victims into out-of-court, individual arbitration, which few victims have the resources or knowledge to pursue. The appeals courts in both cases agreed with the trial judge who found that the arbitration clause the lenders had used in their contracts was void and impossible to perform because it required the use of an arbitrator that no longer conducts consumer arbitrations. Absent further appeal, the case will go back to the trial court where Ms. Edwards will seek to have the case certified as a class action on behalf of all Indiana loan victims of the online payday lenders in both of the two cases. The lenders, Geneva-Roth and Apex 1, are commonly known as LoanPoint USA and Paycheck Today respectively.

One Indiana Square Suite 1400
Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

Copyright ©  Cohen & Malad, LLP. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer  |  Privacy Policy

 

Schedule a free consultation Today
  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Schedule a free consultation Today

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

ALERTS

University of Southern California Agrees to $852 Million Settlement in Sexual Abuse Lawsuit

More than 700 women who claim University of Southern California campus gynecologist Dr. George Tyndall sexually abused .. Read More

SEE ALL ALERTS

In the News

Natalie A. Lyons Joins Class Action Practice at Cohen & Malad, LLP Six Cohen & Malad, LLP Attorneys Named to 2021 Indiana Super Lawyers Rising Stars List Thirteen Cohen & Malad, LLP Attorneys Named to 2021 Indiana Super Lawyers List
READ OUR NEWS