Citations
- 618 F.2d 397
Full opinion text
PER CURIAM: The district court correctly held that the transaction which formed the basis of plaintiff-appellant’s claim in this action was not covered by the Consumer Leasing Act of 1976 (15 U.S.C. § 1667) and section 226.15 of Regulation Z (12 C.F.R. § 226.15), or the Truth-in-Lending Act (15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq.) and section 226.8 of Regulation Z (12 C.F.R. § 226.8). The judgment appealed from is AFFIRMED.