Mars v. Spartanburg Chrysler Plymouth
United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
713 F.2d 65 (1983)
- Written by Alex Ruskell, JD
Facts
Mars (plaintiff) obtained credit from Spartanburg Chrysler Plymouth (defendant). Mars sued Spartanburg, claiming that Spartanburg violated the Truth in Lending Act’s and Federal Reserve Regulation Z’s disclosure requirements. Specifically, Spartanburg’s disclosure documents used the term “amount financed” instead of Regulation Z’s required “unpaid balance” and used eight-point type instead of the required 10-point type for certain numerical amounts in paragraphs covering “Late Payment” and “Prepayment.” The district court entered summary judgment in Spartanburg’s favor, finding Mars had suffered no injury due to Spartanburg’s technical violations of the act. Mars appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hall, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
