Implications of Madden v. Midland Funding

by Dechert LLP

In earlier client OnPoints, we have provided a comprehensive review of recent developments in the U.S. affecting the marketplace lending industry, including the potentially far-reaching Madden v. Midland Funding, LLC case from the Second Circuit involving the preemption of state usury laws.1 We previously discussed how the Second Circuit’s decision, if allowed to stand by the U.S. Supreme Court (the “Supreme Court” or “Court”), could significantly impair the practices of not only marketplace lenders, but also the practices of all purchasers of debt who seek to enforce the interest rates on loans purchased from FDIC-insured banks. On June 27, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in the Madden case and therefore, the Second Circuit’s decision, which in essence held that the purchaser of a loan from a national bank was not entitled to federal preemption of New York’s usury laws, will remain in effect.

The Aftermath of Madden

The Solicitor General’s (“SG”) brief on Midland’s petition for certiorari, which was joined by the Comptroller of the Currency, the principal regulator of national banks, lays out a compelling case against the Second Circuit’s decision (even though the SG, for other reasons, did not recommend that the Supreme Court hear the case). First, the SG brief noted that the Second Circuit failed to recognize that the National Bank Act (“NBA”)—and the common-law principles it implicitly incorporated when enacted—permits a national bank to sell its loans and convey to an assignee the right to enforce the interest rate that was lawfully and initially charged by the bank. Second, the SG argued that the Second Circuit relied on an exceptionally narrow view of federal preemption, mistakenly believing that the New York law was not preempted because the loan originator had no control over (or financial stake in) the loan purchaser’s conduct and efforts to collect the debt owed by the borrower. According to the SG, the Second Circuit failed to consider that the originator is involved in the regular business of selling loans and that its decision would effectively prevent the bank from fully exercising its federal right to sell loans to others at interest rates permitted under the NBA; in other words, the originator does have an economic stake in the transaction because if it cannot sell loans, it must keep them on its balance sheet. The SG’s brief then argued that the proper interpretation is that the NBA defers to the maximum interest rate of the state in which the bank is located, and precludes any other states from imposing a lower maximum. Though not recommending that certiorari be granted, the brief made clear that the SG believed the Second Circuit’s decision to be incorrect.

But what does all of this mean? In short, the Court’s decision means that marketplace lenders and loan purchasers will be vulnerable in the three states subject to the jurisdiction of the Second Circuit—New York, Connecticut, and Vermont—potentially causing them to limit purchases of loans to borrowers in those states at rates in excess of the applicable usury limits. If other circuits decide to follow the precedent in Madden, the impact would be even more widespread. At the same time, the decision could trigger a restructuring of the relationships between marketplace lenders and their funding banks (similar to Lending Club’s restructuring of its relationship with WebBank) to provide the issuing bank with “skin in the game” to distinguish the business arrangement from the facts of Madden.

Concerns of Marketplace Lenders

As a result of the Court’s decision, regulators in certain states may now seek increased regulation of the marketplace lending industry to protect their consumers from being subject to usurious interest rates under state law, despite the fact that the loans were not usurious when made by an originating funding bank. Additionally, the Court’s decision may lead to uncertainty as to the validity of loans, since consumers will now be able to cite Madden to prevent enforcement of loans with interest rates in excess of state usury limits. For example, a putative class-action lawsuit was filed in the state of New York in the United States District Court on April 6 against a major marketplace lender seeking to prohibit said lender from enforcing the interest rate on loans that exceed the rates permitted pursuant to New York’s usury laws. Moreover, as noted above, since the Second Circuit’s decision, some institutional purchasers of marketplace loans have declined to purchase loans to borrowers in the three Second Circuit states that carry interest rates in excess of the respective state usury limits. 

What’s Next?

With the Court’s denial of certiorari to hear the Madden case, and in light of the increased focus on marketplace lending by federal and state regulators, the marketplace lending industry is currently plagued by uncertainty. Will marketplace lenders change their lending practices to distinguish their lending models from the facts in Madden? Will regulators propose increased regulations impacting the marketplace lending industry? Will circuit courts confirm or overrule the precedent established in Madden? Although it is unclear what the near future holds, we look forward to following developments in the marketplace lending industry in the coming months and will provide continued updates throughout.



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.

© Dechert LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Dechert LLP

Dechert LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*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.