Gallegos v. Stokes’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 10 district · 11 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(b) Correction of errors A creditor or assignee has no liability under this section or section 1607 of this title or section 1611 of this title for any failure to comply with any requirement imposed under this part or part E of this subchapter, if within sixty days after discovering an error, whether pursuant to a final written examination report or notice issued under section 1607(e)(1) of this title or through the creditor’s or assignee’s own procedures, and prior to the institution of an action under this' section or the receipt of written notice of the error from the obligor, the creditor or assignee notifies the person concerned of the error and makes whatever adjustments in the appropriate account are necessary to assure that the person will not be required to pay an amount in excess of the charge actually disclosed, or the dollar equivalent of the annual percentage rate actually disclosed, whichever is lower. (c) Unintentional violations; bona fide errors A creditor or assignee may not be held liable in any action brought under this section or section 1635 of this title for a violation of this subchapter if the creditor or assignee shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error. Examples of a bona fide error include but are not limited to, clerical, calculation, computer malfunction and programming, and printing error”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 846 F. Supp. 445 - Abel v. Knickerbocker Realty Co. · Ralls v. Bank of New York (In Re Ralls)

2. “Congress required more than just the maintenance of procedures which were designed to provide proper disclosure^] .... Rather, it required procedures designed to avoid and prevent the errors which might slip through procedures aimed at good faith compliance. This means that the procedures which Congress had in mind were to contain an extra preventative step, a safety catch or a rechecking mechanism. Congress left the exact nature of the preventative mechanism undefined. It is clear, however, that Congress required more than just a showing that a well-trained and careful clerk made a mistake. On the other hand, a showing that the first well-trained clerk’s [action] was checked by a second well-trained clerk or that one clerk [employed a procedure to double cheek his or her own action] would satisfy Congress’ requirements.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Webster v. Centex Home Equity Corp. (In Re Webster)

3. “when an issue, not appearing in the pleadings, is raised without objection at trial, it is deemed to have been tried by the implied consent of the parties.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jessie P. Smith v. Denver Public School Board