United States First Circuit

District court judgment dismissing plaintiff's action seeking to rescind his transaction with defendant is affirmed where, even if the omissions in the notice of date of the transaction was missing, they were at most technical violations that did not give rise to an extended rescission period, as the Federal Reserve Board's form was used and the notice was clear and conspicuous despite the omissions, such that a reasonable borrower could not have been misled.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/11/2009
• Published 06/11/2009

Judges

• BOUDIN, Circuit Judge., Before BOUDIN, HANSEN, and LIPEZ, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States First Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Christopher M. Lefebvre with whom Claude F. Lefebvre and Christopher M. Lefebvre, P.C. were on brief for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Jeffrey S. Patterson with whom David E. Fialkow and Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP were on brief for appellees Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.