15 U.S.C. § 1701

Definitions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 15 CasesGoogle Scholar

For the purposes of this chapter, the term—(1) “Director” means the Director of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection;(2) “person” means an individual, or an unincorporated organization, partnership, association, corporation, trust, or estate;(3) “subdivision” means any land which is located in any State or in a foreign country and is divided or is proposed to be divided into lots, whether contiguous or not, for the purpose of sale or lease as part of a common promotional plan;(4) “common promotional plan” means a plan, undertaken by a single developer or a group of developers acting in concert, to offer lots for sale or lease; where such land is offered for sale by such a developer or group of developers acting in concert, and such land is contiguous or is known, designated, or advertised as a common unit or by a common name, such land shall be presumed, without regard to the number of lots covered by each individual offering, as being offered for sale or lease as part of a common promotional plan;(5) “developer” means any person who, directly or indirectly, sells or leases, or offers to sell or lease, or advertises for sale or lease any lots in a subdivision;(6) “agent” means any person who represents, or acts for or on behalf of, a developer in selling or leasing, or offering to sell or lease, any lot or lots in a subdivision; but shall not include an attorney at law whose representation of another person consists solely of rendering legal services;(7) “blanket encumbrance” means a trust deed, mortgage, judgment, or any other lien or encumbrance, including an option or contract to sell or a trust agreement, affecting a subdivision or affecting more than one lot offered within a subdivision except that such term shall not include any lien or other encumbrance arising as the result of the imposition of any tax assessment by any public authority;(8) “interstate commerce” means trade or commerce among the several States or between any foreign country and any State;(9) “State” includes the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the territories and possessions of the United States;(10) “purchaser” means an actual or prospective purchaser or lessee of any lot in a subdivision;(11) “offer” includes any inducement, solicitation, or attempt to encourage a person to acquire a lot in a subdivision; and(12) “Bureau” means the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection.(Pub. L. 90–448, title XIV, § 1402, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 590; Pub. L. 93–383, title VIII, § 812(a), Aug. 22, 1974, 88 Stat. 736; Pub. L. 96–153, title IV, § 401, Dec. 21, 1979, 93 Stat. 1122; Pub. L. 100–628, title X, § 1089(a), Nov. 7, 1988, 102 Stat. 3283; Pub. L. 111–203, title X, § 1098A(4), July 21, 2010, 124 Stat. 2105.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2010—Par. (1). Pub. L. 111–203, § 1098A(4)(A), added par. (1) and struck out former par. (1) which read as follows: “ ‘Secretary’ means the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development;”.

Par. (12). Pub. L. 111–203, § 1098A(4)(B)–(D), added par. (12).

1988—Par. (10). Pub. L. 100–628 inserted “and” after semicolon.

1979—Par. (3). Pub. L. 96–153 substituted provisions defining “subdivision” as the division or proposed division of land into lots for the purpose of sale or lease as part of a common promotional plan, for provisions defining “subdivision” as the division or proposed division of land into fifty or more lots for the purpose of sale or lease as part of a common promotional plan and presumptions respecting activities as being deemed part of such common promotional plan.

Pars. (4) to (11). Pub. L. 96–153 added par. (4) and redesignated former pars. (4) to (10) as (5) to (11), respectively.

1974—Par. (3). Pub. L. 93–383, § 812(a)(1), inserted “, located in any State or in a foreign country” after “any land”.

Par. (7). Pub. L. 93–383, § 812(a)(2), inserted “or between any foreign country and any State” after “States”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2010 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–203 effective on the designated transfer date, see section 1100H of Pub. L. 111–203, set out as a note under section 552a of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.

Effective Date of 1979 Amendment

Pub. L. 96–153, title IV, § 410, Dec. 21, 1979, 93 Stat. 1132, provided that: “The amendments made by this title [enacting section 1719a of this title and amending this section and sections 1702, 1703, 1708, 1709, 1711, 1715, and 1717 of this title] shall become effective on the effective date of regulations implementing such amendments, but in no case later than six months following the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 21, 1979], except that section 1403(b)(7) of the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act [section 1702(b)(7) of this title], contained in the amendment made by section 402, shall become effective on the date of enactment.”

Effective Date

Pub. L. 90–448, title XIV, § 1423, formerly § 1422, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 599, as renumbered by Pub. L. 96–153, title IV, § 409, Dec. 21, 1979, 93 Stat. 1132, provided that: “This title [enacting this chapter] shall take effect upon the expiration of two hundred and seventy days after the date of its enactment [Aug. 1, 1968].”

Short Title

Pub. L. 90–448, title XIV, § 1401, Aug. 1, 1968, 82 Stat. 590, provided that: “This title [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the ‘Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act’.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 236 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: Nahigian v. Juno Loudoun, LLC, 684 F. Supp. 2d 731 (E.D. Va. 2010).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nahigian v. Juno Loudoun, LLC, 684 F. Supp. 2d 731 (E.D. Va. 2010). · cites it 9× “Defendant Ritz-Carlton responds with a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint.”

Dean Beaver v. Tarsadia Hotels, 816 F.3d 1170 (9th Cir. 2016). · cites it 2× “Specifically, Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants failed to make certain disclosures in the course of the sale transactions, as required by the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (ILSA), 15 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq., which applies in this case by operation of the UCL’s…”

Oginsky v. Paragon Props. of Costa Rica LLC, 784 F. Supp. 2d 1353 (S.D. Fla. 2011). · cites it 5× “Count VIII: Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act The Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1701 (“ILSFDA”), prohibits fraud in the sale of subdivision property, and requires subdivision developers to disclose certain information to buyers of property within…”

Adair v. Hunt Int'l Resources Corp., 526 F. Supp. 736 (N.D. Ill. 1981). · cites it 3× “, (Count II); section 12(2) of the Securities Act, (Count III); the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act (“interstate Land Sales Act”), 15 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq., (Counts IV and V); and the Illinois Land Sales Act (“ILSA”), Ill.”

Hammar v. Cost Control Mktg. & Sales Mgmt. of Virginia, Inc., 757 F. Supp. 698 (W.D. Va. 1990). · cites it 7× “The plaintiffs brought this action pursuant to the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act [the Act], 15 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. The case comes before the court only under the court’s federal question jurisdiction, since the plaintiffs have not pled either diversity jurisdiction…”

Liles v. Ginn-La West End, Ltd., 631 F.3d 1242 (11th Cir. 2011). · cites it 3× “PER CURIAM: This appeal involves the interaction of the specific terms in a series of land purchase contracts and the anti-waiver and venue provisions of the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. (“ILSA”). The plaintiffs, individually and…”

Total Realty Mgmt., LLC v. R. A. North Dev., Inc., 706 F.3d 245 (4th Cir. 2013). · cites it 2× “” 15 U.S.C. § 1701 (5). The Trustee asserts that R.”

United States v. Maze, 414 U.S. 395 (1974). · cites it 2× “590 , 15 U. S. C. § 1701 et seq. Coffey & Welch, Federal Regulation of Land Sales: Full Disclosure Comes Down to Earth, 21 Case W.”

Pigott v. Sanibel Dev., LLC, 576 F. Supp. 2d 1258 (S.D. Ala. 2008). · cites it 3× “Plaintiffs contend that their right of rescission arises under the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1701 et seq. (“ILSFDA” or the “Act”), based on Sanibel’s failure to provide plaintiffs with disclosures in the form of a printed property report.”

Raul F. Rodriguez v. Banco Cent. Corp., 990 F.2d 7 (1st Cir. 1993). · cites it 2× “On August 2, 1982, the buyers brought suit in the district court, making claims against the real estate company, the financing bank, and a number of individuals.”

Donner v. Nicklaus, 778 F.3d 857 (10th Cir. 2015). · cites it 2× “Claims Under the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act The Donners also argue that the district court erroneously dismissed their claims under the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1701 et seq. (2006). According to the Donners, they bought a lot based on…”

Streambend Props. II, LLC v. Ivy Tower Minneapolis, LLC, 781 F.3d 1003 (8th Cir. 2015). “” 15 U.S.C. § 1701 (5). The statute defines an agent as “any person who represents, or acts for or on behalf of, a developer in *1016 selling or leasing, or offering to sell or lease, any lot or lots in a subdivision,” excluding attorneys providing solely legal services.”

Show all 236 citing cases →

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.