Mary S. Smith v. Don Chapman, D/B/A Don Chapman Motor Sales

How courts have described this case

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

• resolving a claim involving a car loan and stating that “[s]trict compliance [with TILA] does not necessarily mean punctilious compliance”
• \It is not necessary that the plaintiff-consumer have been deceived in order for there to be a violation.\
• because all 374 contracts executed during year contained TILA violations, bona fide error defense inapplicable
• well-settled that an objective standard is used in determining violations of the Truth-in-Lending Act; it is not necessary that the plaintiff-consumer actually have been deceived for there to be a violation
• \It is not necessary that the plaintiff-consumer actually have been deceived in order for there to be a [TILA] violation.\
• “A misleading disclosure is as much a violation of TILA as a failure to disclose at all.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).