Stephen C. Tingey

Representative Highlights

• Legal Tender Services, PLLC v. Bank of American Fork, 506 P.30 1211 (2022 Utah App. 26) (Successfully Represented bank in a case brought by an account holder. The appellate court decision held that a bank's general duty of care does not constitute an independent duty for purposes of the economic loss rule).
• Hansen v. Bank of New York Mellon, 303 P.30 1025 (2013 Utah App. 132) (Successfully obtained dismissal of claim against mortgage lender on grounds of res judicata, based on prior federal court action against trustee of trust deed).)
• Madsen v. Washington Mutual Bank, 199 P.3d 898 (Utah 2008) cert. denied 556 U.S. 1282 (2009) (Represented defendant mortgage lender in a class action seeking interest on tax and insurance escrowed funds. The trial court’s judgment in favor of the plaintiff class was reversed by the appellate court on grounds of federal preemption.) (Related case at Madsen v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., 296 P.3d 671 (Utah 2012)).
• Free Motion Fitness, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank West, N.A., 208 P.3d 1066 (Ut. Ct. App. 2009) (Represented defendant bank, acting as escrow agent, in case seeking damages for breach of an escrow agreement. The trial court’s summary judgment in favor of the defendant bank was affirmed on appeal based on a finding of no damages.)
• U.S. Bank, N.A. v. HMA, LLC, 169 P.3d 433 (Utah 2007) (Represented bank in action to collect $500,000 overdraft. Defendants counterclaimed alleging that the payor bank’s untimely return of an item by a highly expeditious means barred the plaintiff depository bank from charging back the returned item that caused the overdraft. The trial court’s summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff bank was affirmed on appeal, holding that the item was timely returned.)
• Ramsey v. Hancock, 79 P.3d 423 (Ut. Ct. App. 2003) (Represented depository bank in action brought by non-customer payee of check that was deposited by the other payee without endorsement. The trial court’s summary judgment in favor of the bank was affirmed on appeal, holding that the depository bank owed no duty to the non-customer payee of the check.)
• APS v. Briggs, 927 P.2d 670 (Ut. Ct. App. 1996) (Represented lender in an action to collect the deficiency amount owed by the makers of the note following foreclosure of the trust deed securing the note. The trial court dismissed the action based on the statute of limitations. The appellate court reversed, holding that the combined effect of the Utah one-action rule, and the bankruptcy of the co-maker, tolled the statute of limitations.)
• City Consumer Services v. Peters, 815 P.2d 234 (Utah 1991) (Represented amicus party in advocating that the Utah one-action rule and Utah deficiency statute do not apply to a junior lienholder foreclosed out by a senior lienholder.)