Chase Bank USA, Na., Petitioner v. James A. Mccoy, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated (562 U.S. 195)
U.S. Supreme Court · decided January 24, 2011 · Supreme Court Database (Spaeth)
- Citation
- 562 U.S. 195 · 131 S. Ct. 871
- Decided
- January 24, 2011
- Term
- October Term 2010
- Vote
- 9–0
- Majority author
- Justice Sotomayor
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Disposition
- Reversed and remanded
- Outcome
- Petitioning party won
- Ideological direction
- Conservative
Opinion excerpt
Justice Sotomayor delivered the opinion of the Court. As applicable to this case, Regulation Z — promulgated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Board) pursuant to its authority under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), 82 Stat. 146, 15 U. S. C. § 1601 et seq. — requires that issuers of credit cards provide cardholders with an “[i]nitial disclosure statement” specifying, inter alia, “each periodic rate” associated with the account. 12 CFR § 226.6(a)(2) (2008). The regulation also imposes “[sjubse-quent disclosure requirements,” including notice to cardholders “[w]henever any term required to be disclosed under §226.6 is changed.” § 226.9(c)(1). This case presents the question whether Regulation Z requires an issuer to notify a cardholder of an interest-rate increase instituted pursuant to a provision of the cardholder agreement giving the issuer discretion to increase the rate, up to a stated maximum, in the event of the cardholder’s delinquency or default. We conclude that the version of Regulation Z applicable in this case does not require such notice. I A Congress passed TILA to promote consumers’ “informed use of credit” by requiring “meaningful disclosure of credit terms,” 15 U. S. C. § 1601(a), and granted the Board the authority to issue regulations to achieve TILA’s purposes, § 1604(a). Pursuant to this authority, the Board promulgated Regulation Z,…
Excerpt of a 36,978-character opinion. The full text and citation network load in the interactive viewer above.