Legal Opinion

Maes v. Motivation for Tomorrow, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California

Decided March 7, 1973No. 72968PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION

SWEIGERT, District Judge.

This is an action brought by Rudolph and Leola Maes under the Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq., seeking damages against defendants Motivation for Tomorrow (“Motivation”) and its associate, Webster Home Plan, Inc., for their alleged failure to comply with disclosure requirements provided under 15 U.S.C. § 1638, and Regulation 15 C.F.R. § 226.8 promulgated thereunder, in connection with the sale of certain books and study aids by defendant Motivation to plaintiffs. 1

The complaint alleges that plaintiffs purchased from…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Daniel Dewitt v. Officer R. F. Pail, Wesley M. Young, Assistant Superintendent, Southern Conservation CenterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1966

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. ITT Financial Services v. Woods (In Re Woods)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1986
  2. State v. Minnesota School of Business, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
  3. Benion v. Bank One, Dayton, N.A.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1997
  4. Trist v. FIRST FEDERAL S. & L. ASS'N OF CHESTERDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1979
  5. Wise Furniture v. DehningSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984

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

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

Powered by the Exa API