Blatt v. Capital One Auto Finance, Inc.

Filing 59

ORDER: For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum, the Court GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment and DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment. Entry of this Order shall constitute the judgment in this action. It is SO ORDERED. Signed by Chief Judge Kevin H. Sharp on 2/17/2017. (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(hb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
WAYNE BLATT, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
CAPITAL ONE AUTO FINANCE, INC.,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Case No. 2:15-cv-00015
Judge Sharp

ORDER
Pending before the Court are cross motions for summary judgment. Defendant Capital
One Auto Finance filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on Plaintiff Wayne Blatt’s claims for
violation of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1693e. (Docket No. 30.) Plaintiff
Blatt filed a Response in Opposition of Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and CrossMotion for Partial Summary Judgment. (Docket No. 38.) Defendant filed a Reply. (Docket No.
39.)
For the reasons explained in the accompanying Memorandum, the Court GRANTS
Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment and DENIES Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary
Judgment.
Entry of this Order shall constitute the judgment in this action.
It is SO ORDERED.

____________________________________
KEVIN H. SHARP
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE