Illinois AG wins motion to add Dodd-Frank UDAAP claim to complaint against for-profit college


Earlier this month, an Illinois state court granted the motion of the state’s Attorney General to further amend her complaint in a lawsuit filed against a for-profit college and its owners to add new counts alleging that the defendants’ practices were unfair and abusive under the federal Consumer Financial Protection Act (CFPA) (Title 10 of Dodd-Frank). The AG’s amended complaint alleged that the defendants violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act (ICFA) by making various misrepresentations, including misrepresentations about the cost of a particular academic program, likely outcomes for graduates of such program, and the costs and terms of an in-house financing program for students.

Relying on the AG’s authority under Dodd-Frank Section 1042, the second amended complaint added an allegation that the defendants knew but failed to inform prospective students that a majority of students enrolled in the academic program default on the in-house financing.  In three new counts, the second amended complaint alleges that, based on the misrepresentations and facts not disclosed to students and the financing program’s high default rate, the financing program is unfair under the ICFA and CFPA and is also abusive under the CFPA. 

The motion was granted on the eve of trial. We understand that the AG decided to assert claims using her Section 1042 authority in order to seek relief on behalf of not only Illinois residents but also on behalf of residents of other states.

At the hearing on the AG’s motion to amend the complaint, the defendants indicated that they planned to file a motion to dismiss the complaint. The court has set a briefing schedule for the motion, with oral argument scheduled for July 2.

Defendants might attempt to remove the case to federal court. Federal law gives the defendants the right to remove the case within 30 days of the amendment date because the AG’s Section 1042 claims created a federal question in the case. Having told the state court judge that they intend to file a motion to dismiss and the judge having set a briefing schedule and argument date, however, it could be somewhat awkward for the defendants to now seek to remove the case. 

In March 2014, the Illinois AG became the first state AG to use her Section 1042 authority when she filed a state court lawsuit against a small loan lender alleging violations of the Dodd-Frank prohibition of unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices as well as state law violations.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Ballard Spahr LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:


Ballard Spahr LLP on:

Popular Topics
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.