Miller v. American Express Co.
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
688 F.2d 1235 (1982)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
In 1966 Maurice Miller applied for and received a credit card from American Express Co. (defendant). Later that year, Virginia Miller (plaintiff), Maurice’s wife, applied for and received a supplementary credit card. Under her credit card agreement, Virginia was personally liable for all charges she made on her card. In 1979 Maurice passed away. A few months later, Virginia attempted to use her credit card and was told that it had been canceled. American Express informed Virginia that her credit card had been canceled pursuant to a policy of closing all supplementary accounts if the owner of a basic account died. Because Maurice was the owner of the basic credit card account to which Virginia’s account was a supplement, Virginia’s account was automatically canceled when Maurice died. Virginia subsequently applied for and received a basic credit card from American Express. Virginia then filed a lawsuit against American Express in federal district court alleging that American Express violated the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) by canceling her supplementary credit card. Virginia reasoned that American Express had closed her account on the basis of a change in her marital status, when she went from married to widowed after Maurice’s death. American Express moved for summary judgment, arguing that it canceled Virginia’s account pursuant to a policy of automatic cancellation, not because of the change in Virginia’s marital status. The district court granted summary judgment for American Express. Virginia appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Boochever, J.)
Dissent (Poole, 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.