AVANTA FEDERAL CREDIT UNION v. Shupak

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that credit union’s statutory charge back rights were not subject to equitable estoppel
• holding that credit union’s statutory charge-back rights were not subject to equitable estoppel
• “[T]he customer who detrimentally relies on the negligent misrepresentations of the bank’s agents, and thereby suffers damage, is not without recourse.”
• “[T]he customer who detrimentally relies on the negligent misrepresentations of the bank’s agents, and thereby suffers damage, is not without recourse.”
• The general rule is that the “prevailing party is the one who has an affirmative judgment rendered in his favor at the conclusion of the entire case.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).