Summary of Decision May 5, 2014
Justice Burke delivered the opinion of the Court. Affirmed.
Case Name: IN THE MATTER OF A VIOLATION OF THE WYOMING RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE PRACTICES ACT BY CALCON MUTUAL MORTGAGE CORPORATION: CALCON MUTUAL MORTGAGE CORP v. STATE OF WYOMING, ex rel., WYOMING DEPARTMENT OF AUDIT, DIVISION OF BANKING
Docket Number: S-13-0130
Appeal from the District Court of Laramie County, the Honorable Thomas T.C. Campbell, Judge.
Representing Appellant: James R. Salisbury and Anthony M. Reyes, Riske & Salisbury, Cheyenne, Wyoming. Argument by Mr. Salisbury.
Representing Appellee: Peter K. Michael, Attorney General; Martin L. Hardsocg, Deputy Attorney General; Ryan T. Schelhaas, Senior Assistant Attorney General. Argument by Mr. Schelhaas.
Date of Decision: May 5, 2014
Facts: The Wyoming Department of Audit, Division of Banking (Division) conducted a compliance examination of Appellant, CalCon Mutual Mortgage Corporation (CalCon), and determined that, in six separate brokering transactions, CalCon had received application fees and “yield spread premiums” exceeding those previously disclosed to its customers in violation of the Wyoming Residential Mortgage Practices Act. The Division sought reimbursement of the fees charged in those transactions. CalCon objected and the matter was referred to the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) for a contested case hearing. The OAH determined that CalCon had violated the Act and the State Banking Commissioner subsequently ordered CalCon to reimburse the fees. CalCon filed a petition for review in the district court, and the district court affirmed. CalCon appeals from the district court’s decision.
Issues: 1) Whether the Office of Administrative Hearings erred as a matter of law in its construction and interpretation of Wyoming Statute § 40-23-114(d). 2) Whether the decision of the Office of Administrative Hearings is arbitrary, capricious, and not supported by substantial evidence.
Holdings/Conclusion: Because CalCon received fees in excess of the fees originally disclosed to the borrowers in the transactions at issue, and because it did not provide a clear written explanation of the increased fees or the reason for charging fees exceeding those which were previously disclosed, the Banking Commissioner properly concluded that CalCon was statutorily precluded from accepting the increased fees.
In its second issue, CalCon contends the Commissioner’s decision was per se “arbitrary and capricious” because the Division has not used its regulatory powers to define the phrase “most recent good faith estimate.” We find no merit in this argument. We have already determined that the plain language of the statute is sufficient to convey the meaning of the phrase “most recent good faith estimate.” Accordingly, we conclude that the Commissioner’s decision was not arbitrary or capricious. Affirmed.
Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.
[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. You will also note, when you look at the opinion, that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you need to provide a pinpoint citation to a quotation, the universal portion of the citation will use that paragraph number. The pinpoint citation in the P.3d portion will need to have the reporter page number. If you need assistance in putting together a citation from this, or any future opinion using the Universal Citation form, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library and we will provide any needed assistance.]
Monday, May 05, 2014
Summary of Decision May 5, 2014