Neill Hannon v. Security National Bank

Good Law
537 F.2d 327·1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 12336
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 18, 197674-2588California903 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Hannon, in propria persona, sued Security National Bank for 12 separate violations of section 127 of the Truth in Lending Act of 1968, 15 U.S.C. § 1637 , alleging that the bank failed to disclose on the 12 monthly Master Charge statements sent to him in the previous year the annual percentage rates of interest charged on overdue balances. The district judge granted Hannon’s motion for summary judgment, awarding $1200 damages plus costs but not allowing attorney’s fees. From this part of the judgment he appeals and we affirm.

At the time this suit was brought, the Truth in Lending Act provided for civil liability as follows:

15 U.S.C. § 1640 (a) (1974), as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 1640 (a) (Supp.1976). From the time this case was filed until the lower court’s decision, Hannon was a law school graduate but was not licensed to practice law. Even though Hannon did not retain an attorney and was not an attorney himself, he claims that he is entitled to a reasonable attorney’s fee under the statute because such a rule would effectuate the statute’s purpose of encouraging private enforcement of the law.

We agree that the statute should be liberally construed to encourage private…

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.