Robert P. McDaniel Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. The Fulton Nat'l Bank of Atlanta, Defendant-Appellant-Cross Jan T. Barksdale v. Peoples Fin. Corp. Of Alpharetta, James R. Barrett v. Vernie Jones Ford, Inc., 578 F.2d 1185 (5th Cir. 1978). · Go Syfert
Search
Robert P. McDaniel Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross v. The Fulton Nat'l Bank of Atlanta, Defendant-Appellant-Cross Jan T. Barksdale v. Peoples Fin. Corp. Of Alpharetta, James R. Barrett v. Vernie Jones Ford, Inc., 578 F.2d 1185 (5th Cir. 1978). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“he established policy of is to recognize the binding effect of a prior decision by another panel of ourt subject only to reversal by the ourt sitting en banc.”
6 citation events across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: United States v. All Tract 686.64 Acres of Property (gamd, 1993-04-27)
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) United States v. All Tract 686.64 Acres of Property
M.D. Ga. · 1993 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
he established policy of is to recognize the binding effect of a prior decision by another panel of ourt subject only to reversal by the ourt sitting en banc.
discussed Cited "see" In Re McMurray
Bankr. E.D. Tenn. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Martin v. Commercial Securities Co., Inc., 589 F.2d 521 , 529 (5th Cir.1976) (Acceleration and prepayment are “conceptually antithetical.”), overruled in part, McDaniel v. Fulton Nat’l Bank of Atlanta, 571 F.2d 948 (5th Cir.1978) (en banc), reh’g denied, 576 F.2d 1156 , appeal after remand, 578 F.2d 1185 (5th Cir.1978). “[A]eceleration, by definition, advances the maturity date of a debt so that payment thereafter is not prepayment but instead is payment made after maturity.” In re Ridgewood Apartments of DeKalb County, 174 B.R. 712, 721 (Bankr.S.D.Ohio 1994)(quoting Matter of …
cited Cited "see" Tarplain v. Baker Ford, Inc.
D.R.I. · 1979 · signal: see · confidence high
See Barnett v. Vernie Jones Ford, 395 *1347 F.Supp. 904 (N.D.Ga.1975), aff’d, 578 F.2d 1185 (5th Cir. 1978).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Arthur Quiller, Lillie Mae Quiller, and All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. Barclays American/credit, Inc.
11th Cir. · 1985 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Bozeman v. Tifton Federal Savings & Loan Ass’n, 164 Ga. App. 260 , 297 S.E.2d 49 (1982); Kelly v. Sylvan Motors, Inc., 160 Ga.App. 420 , 287 S.E.2d 359, 360 (1981); Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Spann, 153 Ga.App. 535 , 265 S.E.2d 863, 865 (1980); Cook v. First National Bank, 130 Ga.App. 587 , 203 S.E.2d 870, 871 (1974); see also Barrett v. Vernie Jones Ford, Inc., 395 F.Supp. 904, 909 (N.D.Ga. 1975), aff'd, 578 F.2d 1185 (5th Cir.1978).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Robert P. McDaniel Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross
v.
The Fulton National Bank of Atlanta, Defendant-Appellant-Cross Jan T. Barksdale v. Peoples Financial Corp. Of Alpharetta, James R. Barrett v. Vernie Jones Ford, Inc.
75-2410.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Aug 23, 1978.
578 F.2d 1185
Cited by 1 opinion  |  Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 86%
Citer courts: M.D. Georgia (1)

578 F.2d 1185

Robert P. McDANIEL, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross Appellant,
v.
The FULTON NATIONAL BANK OF ATLANTA,
Defendant-Appellant-Cross Appellee.
Jan T. BARKSDALE, Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
PEOPLES FINANCIAL CORP. OF ALPHARETTA, Defendant-Appellant.
James R. BARRETT et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees,
v.
VERNIE JONES FORD, INC., et al., Defendants-Appellants.

Nos. 75-2410, 75-2514 and 75-2515.

United States Court of Appeals,
Fifth Circuit.

Aug. 23, 1978.

Marion H. Allen, III, Richard R. Cheatham, Atlanta, Ga., for Fulton Nat. Bank of Atlanta.

E. Lundy Baety, Atlanta, Ga., for Robert P. McDaniel.

Albert C. Ruehmann, III, Richard R. Cheatham, Atlanta, Ga., for Peoples Financial Corp. of Alpharetta and Vernie Jones Ford, Inc.

Graydon W. Florence, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for Jan T. Barksdale.

Mary Joyce Johnson, N. David Buffington, Atlanta, Ga., for James R. Barrett.

Sewell K. Loggins, Douglas N. Campbell, Atlanta, Ga., for amicus curiae Beneficial Finance Co.

Ernest L. Sarason, Jr., Willard Ogburn, Boston, Mass., for amicus curiae Nat. Consumer Law Center, Inc.

Before TUTTLE, GOLDBERG and RONEY, Circuit Judges.

TUTTLE, Circuit Judge:

1

These three truth-in-lending cases commenced in three suits filed in the Northern District of Georgia, which having been considered by magistrates were then decided by three different district judges. In all cases, judgment was had in favor of the plaintiffs and against the respective defendants. The sole question in issue was whether the Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1638(a)(9) and Regulation Z, § 226.8(b)(4) required a creditor to disclose as a default charge the fact that the loan agreement gave him the contract right to accelerate and demand payment of the entire indebtedness, including unearned finance charges.

2

When these three cases were heard on appeal, this Court had decided another case, Martin v. Commercial Securities Co., 539 F.2d 521 (5th Cir. 1976), in which the Court held that the right to accelerate and demand such unearned finance charges was not such a "default, delinquency, or similar charge." Thus, this Court, considering itself bound by the Martin decision, reversed the judgments of the district court, stating that:

3

The established policy of this Court is to recognize the binding effect of a prior decision by another panel of the Court subject only to a reversal by the Court sitting en banc.

4

Thereupon a petition for rehearing en banc was filed and the Court by appropriate vote reheard the case en banc. The en banc opinion has now been published, and a petition for rehearing has been denied, 571 F.2d 948, 576 F.2d 1156 (5th Cir. 1978).

5

The en banc court, having reversed the holding in Martin and the panel decision in these three captioned cases relying on that decision, remanded the cases to the panel for final disposition.

6

The decision of this Court, sitting en banc, requires our affirmance of the three judgments in the district court.

7

The judgments are AFFIRMED.