Marie Anderson v. H & R Block

Eleventh Circuit

Marie Anderson v. H & R Block

344 F.3d 1131, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 18190, 2003 WL 22048203

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided September 3, 2003·No. 01-11863·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

On June 2, 2003, the United States Supreme Court reversed our decision in this matter, holding that “an action filed in a state court to recover damages from a national bank for allegedly charging excessive interest in violation of both ‘the common law usury doctrine’ and an Alabama usury statute may be removed to a federal court because it actually arises under federal law.” Beneficial Nat'l Bank v. Anderson, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 2058, 156 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003). In light of the Supreme Court’s holding, we AFFIRM and REMAND this case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM:

On June 2, 2003, the United States Supreme Court reversed our decision in this matter, holding that “an action filed in a state court to recover damages from a national bank for allegedly charging excessive interest in violation of both ‘the common law usury doctrine’ and an Alabama usury statute may be removed to a federal court because it actually arises under federal law.” Beneficial Nat'l Bank v. Anderson, — U.S. -, 123 S.Ct. 2058, 156 L.Ed.2d 1 (2003). In light of the Supreme Court’s holding, we AFFIRM and REMAND this case to the district court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Marie Anderson v. H & R Block, 344 F.3d 1131, 2003 U.S. App. LEXIS 18190, 2003 WL 22048203 (11th Cir. 2003).

Pincite

344 F.3d 1131 (Marie Anderson v. H & R Block) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related