Samuel Mickens v. Mercantile Bank Mortg. Co.
Cases that cite this one
3 later published cases cite this decision.
- Premium Properties v. Mercantile Bank (6th Cir. 2018)
- Precious Creation v. Mercantile Bank Mortgage Co. (6th Cir. 2018)
- Tyrone Guy v. Mercantile Bank Mortgage Co. (6th Cir. 2017)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Plaintiff-Appellant Samuel Mickens challenges the district court’s ruling that his Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) claims for discriminatory lending practices against Defendants Mercantile Bank Mortgage Company, LLC and its parent, Mercantile Bank Corporation (collectively Mercantile) are time-barred under 15 U.S.C. § 1691e(f). The district court held that the two-year limitations period ran from Mercantile’s last alleged culpable act in 2007, making Mickens’ 2015 filing untimely. The district court also held that Mickens was not entitled equitable tolling on the facts alleged.
On appeal, Mickens argues that the district court erred by rejecting the discovery rule and failing to apply equitable tolling, and that as a practical matter this improperly converted § 1691e(f) into a statute of repose. We review the motion to dismiss for failure-to-state-a-claim ruling de novo and, having duly considered the parties’ arguments below and on appeal, we find that the district court properly disposed of each of his arguments in its well-reasoned opinion dated October 27, 2016. We therefore AFFIRM the judgment of the district court based on the analysis set forth in its opinion.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.