Friday, Aug 28, 2026 The claims desk. Receipts included. POWERED BY LENZ ↗
IsThis

U.S. Bank prevailed because printer misalignment caused a bona fide clerical error.

The Claim

In Watson v. U.S. Bank National Association, Inc., the court held that U.S. Bank National Association, Inc. was not liable under the Truth in Lending Act's bona fide error defense because the complaint did not allege that the error was intentional or that it was not a bona fide error.

Verified by Lenz ·

The Short Version

The decision’s result is accurately identified, but its asserted rationale is not. U.S. Bank obtained summary judgment because evidence showed that printer misalignment caused an unintentional clerical error qualifying for TILA’s bona fide-error defense. The available sources do not show that the ruling rested on omissions from the complaint. That misstatement materially changes the legal basis of the decision.

Caveats

  • The asserted pleading-based rationale is unsupported by the cited case materials.
  • A successful bona fide-error defense depends on proof of statutory elements, not merely omissions from a complaint.
  • Several listed sources address unrelated cases and do not substantiate Watson’s holding.

The Receipts

  1. In re Boganski, 322 B.R. 422 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2005) - Citing Watson v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n, Inc.

    neb.uscourts.gov

  2. NOT RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION File Name: 12a0818n.06 No. 11-1826 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

    govinfo.gov

  3. RMAI Update November 2025 - Receivables Management Association International

    rmaintl.org

  4. Watson v. U.S. Bank, N.A. (1:05-cv-00244), Alabama Southern District Court

    pacermonitor.com

  5. Corbitt v. Old Republic Insurance Company (trial court document), District Court, N.D. Texas, 2023

    exa.ai

Filed Under

Truth in Lending ActU.S. Bank National Association, Inc.Watson v. U.S. Bank National Association, Inc.