Fischl v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.

708 F.2d 143 (1983)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Fischl v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
708 F.2d 143 (1983)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

Terry Fischl (plaintiff) was a 27-year-old single homeowner with two sales jobs and a monthly income of $4,000. Fischl had high credit ratings on credit accounts with several retailers, and all his accounts were in good standing. Fischl applied for a $12,000 car loan from General Motors Acceptance Corp. (General Motors) (defendant) to purchase a car. General Motors obtained a credit report on Fischl from a local credit-reporting agency. The report erroneously listed one of his current jobs as a former job and described a credit account that was in good standing as a credit inquiry. General Motors denied Fischl’s loan application after relying on the credit report. Fischl received a letter informing him that his loan application had been denied. The letter stated that Fischl’s credit references were insufficient but did not explain that General Motors had relied on a credit report from the credit-reporting agency. Fischl later learned that General Motors had obtained the credit report. Fischl filed a lawsuit against General Motors in federal district court, alleging that General Motors had violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to explain its specific reasons for denying him credit and for not disclosing that it had relied on a credit report from a credit-reporting agency. The district court entered judgment for General Motors, holding that General Motors had satisfied all statutory requirements by telling Fischl that his credit references were insufficient. Fischl appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Politz, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 742,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 742,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership