Legal Opinion

Smith v. Highland Bank

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

Decided March 27, 1997No. 96-6159PublishedCited by 25 opinions

Non-Argument Calendar.

1Per curiam

Suzan Smith and members of the plaintiff class allege that Highland Bank (“Highland”), as creditor, and Molton Alen & Williams (“MAW”), as Highland’s assignee, violated the Truth In Lending Act (“TILA”) in handling their mortgages. The district court granted summary judgment to Highland and MAW. We affirm.

Under TILA, a debtor may rescind a mortgage “until midnight of the third business day following the consummation of the transaction or the delivery of the information and rescission forms ..., whichever is later....” 15 U.S.C. § 1635(a). Further, a debtor must receive notice of her right to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Rodash v. AIB Mortgage Co.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1994
  2. Veale v. CITIBANK, F.S.B.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1996
  3. Smith v. Highland BankDistrict Court, N.D. Alabama · 1996

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Associates Home Eq. Servs. v. TroupNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2001
  2. Rand Corp. v. Yer Song MouaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
  3. Harry Carmichael and Louise Carmichael v. The Payment Center, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
  4. Barlow v. EvansDistrict Court, M.D. Alabama · 1997
  5. Fairbanks Capital Corp. v. JenkinsDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2002

20 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