Although the majority opinion in the en banc ruling on PHH Corp. v. CFPB focused almost entirely on the constitutionality question, there was more about the statutory interpretation of RESPA in the 250-page document.
The breakdown came in a concurring opinion authored by Judge David S. Tatel, with Judges Patricia A. Millet and Nina Pillard.
In this concurrence, the judges say they would have resolved the statutory differences in RESPA differently. Read on to see why they differed.
TO READ THE FULL STORY
Cover Story: