Johnson v. Capital One Bank

Good Law
120 Cal. App. 4th 942·15 Cal. Rptr. 3d 917
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 12, 2004B169516California1,806 words

Opinion

Opinion

Epstein, J.

Pursuant to Virginia law, which governs this action, credit card holders who sue a credit card issuer for conduct that does not comply with the federal Truth-in-Lending Act (TILA, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.) are limited to the remedies provided by TILA and its implementing regulations. We conclude the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the credit card issuer in this action for breach of the cardmember agreements, since the action is based on conduct regulated by TELA.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

Defendant Capital One is a Virginia-chartered bank. Plaintiffs Carlyn Johnson and Tad Lumpkin each entered into cardmember agreements with Capital One for credit card accounts. These agreements expressly provide that they “will be governed by Virginia law and Federal law.” Plaintiffs brought this class action against Capital One for breach of contract. They alleged that Capital One charged late charge penalties even when cardmembers’ payments were received “in time ... to be credited by the following statement closing date” in direct violation of the terms of the cardmember agreements. They also alleged that Capital' One improperly calculated daily…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.