Photo of Dawn N. Williams

Dawn N. Williams

Subscribe to Dawn N. Williams's Posts

Ms. Williams’ practice focuses on financial services litigation and bank regulatory compliance, in which she represents some of the nation’s largest financial institutions. Ms. Williams also has experience in insurance litigation, employment litigation, and product liability defense. Ms. Williams practices in state and federal courts, at both the trial and appellate levels.

Contact:Read more about Dawn N. Williams
shutterstock_1365698645

From the inception of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), opponents have argued that its single-director structure is unconstitutional. The arguments focused on the executive power that the Constitution vests in the President, positing that limiting the President’s power to remove the CFPB director only for cause infringes upon the President’s executive power and therefore violates the Constitution’s separation of powers.

As Dykema previously blogged, the constitutionality of the CFPB has been litigated in the lower courts, with lower courts siding with CFPB opponents. Notably, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a D.C. Circuit Court judge at the time, delivered an opinion finding the CFPB unconstitutional, explaining “[t]he CFPB’s concentration of enormous executive power in a single, unaccountable, unchecked Director not only departs from settled historical practice, but also poses a far greater risk of arbitrary decision making and abuse of power, and a far greater threat to individual liberty, than does a multi-member independent agency.” Justice Kavanaugh was confirmed to the Supreme Court on October 6, 2018 and has proved favorable for those opposing the CFPB.
Continue Reading The Battle Over the Constitutionality of the CFPB Is Finally Settled… So What Now?

Supreme Court Image 2019

Justice Kavanaugh’s first authored opinion as a Supreme Court Justice in Henry Schein, Inc. v. Archer and White Sales, Inc., No. 17-1272, 586 U.S. ____ (2019) further cements the Supreme Court’s stance on arbitration.

Over the years, the Supreme Court has consistently held in favor of arbitration and rejected attempts by parties and the lower courts to ignore binding arbitration clauses. For instance, in AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (April 2011), the Supreme Court rejected state laws that attempted to prohibit arbitration for certain types of claims, holding “[w]hen state law prohibits outright the arbitration of a particular type of claim, the analysis is straightforward: The conflicting rule is displaced by the [Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) 9 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.].” More recently, in Epic System Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612 (May 2018), the Supreme Court held that arbitration clauses prohibiting class actions in employment contracts were enforceable and were not preempted by the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRA”), 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq.—which guarantees basic rights of private sector employees to take collective action. The Supreme Court reasoned that the FAA and NLRA “have long enjoyed separate spheres of influence . . .” and the FAA is “a Congressional command requiring us to enforce, not override, the terms of the arbitration agreements….” 
Continue Reading The Supreme Court Remains Steadfast in Favor of Arbitration

US Supreme Court 452

After a highly publicized and controversial confirmation process, the senate voted to approve Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court this past Saturday, October 6, 2018. Kavanaugh was sworn in later that day and began hearing cases on Tuesday, October 9, 2018.

It goes without saying that Justice Kavanaugh is a conservative judge and is expected to lean to the right. It also goes without saying that Justice Kavanaugh’s appointment pushes the Supreme Court to the right with a 5-4 ratio. But what does Justice Kavanaugh’s appointment mean for the financial services industry? 
Continue Reading What Can the Financial Services Industry Expect Following Justice Kavanaugh’s Confirmation to the Supreme Court?

Illinois Court Image 1

Three years ago, the Illinois Supreme Court shook up foreclosure professionals when it affirmed the appellate court in 1010 Lakeshore Ass’n v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., 2015 IL 119372, 398 Ill. Dec. 95, 43 N.E.3d 1005 (“1010 Lakeshore”), to find that a homeowners’ association’s lien for past due assessments owed by the previous owner is not extinguished after a foreclosure sale if the new owner fails to pay foreclosure assessments accruing after foreclosure. The court reasoned that section 9(g)(3) of the Condominium Property Act (which requires a new owner to pay assessments “from and after the day of the month after the date of the judicial foreclosure” and provides that such payment confirms extinguishment of the lien), provided an incentive for “prompt payment” of post-foreclosure assessments.
Continue Reading Confusion Still Looms in Illinois Over Past-Due Association Assessments After Foreclosure

Today, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”) released much-anticipated proposed rules for mandatory arbitration clauses, which the CFPB colloquially refers to as “contract gotchas.” The proposed rules follow on the heels of the CFPB’s March 2015 Arbitration Report, which the CFPB concluded demonstrates that mandatory arbitration clauses are detrimental to consumers. As expected, the proposed rules evidence the CFPB’s concerns around mandatory arbitration clauses.
Continue Reading CFPB Releases Arbitration Proposal

Real estate lenders and agents struggling with the new TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure rules will have the opportunity to suggest improvements to the rules this summer. On April 28, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Director Richard Cordray sent a letter to eight financial industry trade groups stating that the agency intends to propose new amendments in late July 2016 to the rules synthesizing mortgage lending disclosures under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA). Issued pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the rules are known as the TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosures (TRID) rule, also referred to by the CFPB as the Know Before You Owe rules.
Continue Reading CFPB to Issue Proposal in July Amending Rules on TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosures