Legal Opinion

Giannangeli v. Target National Bank, N.A.

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided October 24, 2013No. 12-1344UnpublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

CARLOS F. LUCERO, Circuit Judge.

Plaintiff Marie Giannangeli filed a putative class action complaint against Target National Bank (“Target”), 1 alleging that Target committed usury by charging more than the seven percent maximum interest rate found in the National Banking Act (“NBA”), 12 U.S.C. §§ 85 & 86. The distinct court granted Target’s motion to dismiss. Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm.

I

Giannangeli’s complaint sets forth a simple factual premise. She obtained a Target “REDcard” credit card in 2009 and received a copy of the credit card…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
  2. Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
  3. Servants of the Paraclete v. DoesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
  4. Beneficial National Bank v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  5. Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich, L.P.A.Supreme Court of the United States · 2010

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Moore v. MB Financial Bank, N.A.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2017
  2. Danny Lee Warner Jr. v. Demetric Godfrey, et al.District Court, D. Montana · 2026

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API