12 U.S.C. § 1976

Injunctive relief for persons against threatened loss or damages; equitable proceedings; preliminary injunctions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 12 CasesGoogle Scholar

Any person may sue for and have injunctive relief, in any court of the United States having jurisdiction over the parties, against threatened loss or damage by reason of a violation of section 1972 of this title, under the same conditions and principles as injunctive relief against threatened conduct that will cause loss or damage is granted by courts of equity and under the rules governing such proceedings. Upon the execution of proper bond against damages for an injunction improvidently granted and a showing that the danger of irreparable loss or damage is immediate, a preliminary injunction may issue.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1977–2005 · leading case: Vendo Co. v. Lektro-Vend Corp., 433 U.S. 623 (1977).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Vendo Co. v. Lektro-Vend Corp., 433 U.S. 623 (1977). · cites it 2× “§ 1731b (i) (§ 513 of the National Housing Act); 12 U. S. C. § 1976 (Bank Holding Company Act); 15 U.”

Sundance Land Corp., a Washington Corp. v. Cmty. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n Columbia River Serv. Corp., 840 F.2d 653 (1st Cir. 1988). · cites it 3× “The statutory provision which governs the imposition of injunctive relief for violations of the BHCA anti-tie-in provisions, 12 U.S.C. § 1976 , provides, in relevant part: Any person may sue for and have injunctive relief, in any court of the United States having jurisdiction…”

Oak Rubber Co. v. Bank One, N.A., 214 F. Supp. 2d 820 (N.D. Ohio 2002). “Count II seeks injunctive relief from Bank One’s attempt to collect the plaintiffs’ loan under 12 U.S.C. § 1976 . Count III alleges that the defendant’s actions constitute fraud.”

Ticket Ctr., Inc. v. Banco Popular De Puerto Rico, 399 F. Supp. 2d 79 (D.P.R. 2005). “§ 1975 (granting federal question jurisdiction to redress and enjoin violations involving anti-competitive tie-ins and conditional agreements of banking products), and various supplemental state tort and antitrust causes of actions.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.