EDUARDO DE LA TORRE V. CASHCALL, INC., No. 14-17571 (9th Cir. 2018)
Annotate this CaseThis opinion or order relates to an opinion or order originally issued on April 21, 2017.
Download PDF
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT EDUARDO DE LA TORRE; LORI SAYSOURIVONG, Plaintiffs-Appellants/ Cross-Appellees, v. CASHCALL, INC., Defendant-Appellee/ Cross-Appellants. Nos. 14-17571 15-15042 D.C. No. 3:08-cv-03174MEJ OPINION Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California Maria-Elena James, Magistrate Judge, Presiding Argued and Submitted February 16, 2017 Submitted September 17, 2018 San Francisco, California Filed October 3, 2018 2 DE LA TORRE V. CASHCALL Before: A. Wallace Tashima and Andrew D. Hurwitz, Circuit Judges, and Lynn S. Adelman, * District Judge. Per Curiam Opinion COUNSEL James C. Sturdevant (argued), The Sturdevant Law Firm, San Francisco, California; Jessica Riggin and Steven M. Tindall, Rukin Hyland Doria & Tindall LLP, San Francisco, California; Arthur D. Levy, Law Office of Arthur D. Levy, San Francisco, California; for Plaintiffs-Appellants/CrossAppellees. Brad W. Seiling (argued), Donald R. Brown, and Joanna S. McCallum, Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP, Los Angeles, California, for Defendant-Appellee/Cross-Appellant. Caryn Becker, Oakland, California, as and for Amicus Curiae Center for Responsible Lending. Ted Mermin, Berkeley, California, as and for Amicus Curiae Public Good Law Center. Michael J. Quirk, Williams Cuker Berezofsky LLC, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, for Amicus Curiae National Association of Consumer Advocates. * The Honorable Lynn S. Adelman, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, sitting by designation. DE LA TORRE V. CASHCALL 3 OPINION PER CURIAM: In light of the judgment of the Supreme Court of California in De La Torre v. CashCall, Inc., No. S241434, 422 P.3d 1004 (Cal. 2018), the judgment of the district court is VACATED and this case is REMANDED to that court for further proceedings consistent with that opinion. VACATED AND REMANDED.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
