12 U.S.C. § 4312
Effect on State law
The provisions of this chapter do not supersede any provisions of the law of any State relating to the disclosure of yields payable or terms for accounts to the extent such State law requires the disclosure of such yields or terms for accounts, except to the extent that those laws are inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency. The Bureau may determine whether such inconsistencies exist.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1998–2024 · leading case: Hirschbach v. NVE BANK, 496 F. Supp. 2d 451 (D.N.J. 2007).
Hirschbach v. NVE BANK, 496 F. Supp. 2d 451 (D.N.J. 2007). “12 U.S.C. § 4312 (2006); 12 C.F.R. § 230.”
Taylor v. Dep't of the Air Force, 18 F. Supp. 2d 1184 (D. Colo. 1998). “” 12 U.S.C. § 4312 (1989 & Supp.1998). Finally, the RFPA provides civil penalties as follows: Any agency or department of the United States or financial institution obtaining or disclosing financial records or information contained therein in violation of this chapter is liable…”
Milles v. Fifth Third Bank, Nat'l Ass'n (S.D. Ohio 2024). “” 12 U.S.C. § 4312 . And an inconsistency arises if state law “requires a depository institution to make disclosures or take actions that contradict the requirements of the federal law.”
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.