15 U.S.C. § 1634

Section 1634 · Effect of subsequent occurrence

This is the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914

Amended 1 time on record

Applied in 21 court decisions — leading case Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Milhollin (1980)

Most recently applied in Rojas v. X Motorsport, Inc. (February 2018)

How often courts cite this section

citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year.Markers show enactment, consequential amendments, and circuit splits over this section — watch for a citation surge after a change or a disagreement. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

If information disclosed in accordance with this part is subsequently rendered inaccurate as the result of any act, occurrence, or agreement subsequent to the delivery of the required disclosures, the inaccuracy resulting therefrom does not constitute a violation of this part.