## Facts

- Paul R. Stieger held a Visa credit card issued by Chevy Chase Savings Bank, F.S.B.
- Stieger voluntarily gave the card to Ms. Garrett for the limited purpose of renting a car and paying hotel expenses during a business trip.
- Stieger contacted the rental agency and hotel and was told he needed to provide written authorization; he claimed he did so, but could not produce a hotel letter he said limited liability to $350.
- After the trip, Stieger learned Garrett made additional charges he said he had not specifically authorized.
- Stieger’s signature had worn off the back of the card; Garrett signed the card as “P. Stieger.”
- Twenty-two charges were made; the bank dropped seven before trial, leaving fifteen disputed charges.
- On thirteen of the fifteen disputed charge slips, Garrett signed “P. Stieger”; on two, she signed her own name.
- Stieger obtained a judgment against Garrett for $3,200 but collected only $750, and Garrett could not be located.
- Stieger sued the bank claiming the disputed charges were “unauthorized use” under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), which generally limits a cardholder’s liability for unauthorized use.

## Issues

1. Whether a cardholder who permits another to use a credit card for a limited purpose is liable for additional charges not specifically authorized when the user signs the cardholder’s name on charge slips.
2. Whether such charges fall outside TILA’s “unauthorized use” limitation because the user had apparent authority under TILA.

## Decision

- The District of Columbia Court of Appeals affirmed the Superior Court’s ruling that Stieger was fully liable for the thirteen charges signed “P. Stieger.”
- The court held that the combination of Stieger’s voluntary relinquishment of the card and the matching signature on the charge slips established apparent authority for those thirteen transactions under TILA.
- The court left undisturbed the treatment of the two charges signed in Garrett’s own name as unauthorized and subject to TILA’s liability limitation.

## Legal Principles

- Under TILA, “unauthorized use” excludes use by a person who has actual, implied, or apparent authority.
- A cardholder’s voluntary delivery of a credit card to a third party can create apparent authority as to third parties when the user’s signature on charge slips appears to be the cardholder’s.
- Apparent authority may be supported by signature conformity between the card and the charge slips, permitting merchants and the issuer to treat transactions as authorized.
- Where the user signs her own name (not the cardholder’s), the mismatch can negate apparent authority and support application of TILA’s unauthorized-use protections.

## Conclusion

The court held that a cardholder who voluntarily gives a credit card to another may be fully liable under TILA for additional charges when the user signs in a manner consistent with the cardholder’s name, because those circumstances can establish apparent authority and remove the transactions from TILA’s unauthorized-use limitation.


Stieger v. Chevy Chase Sav. Bank, F.S.B., 666 A.2d 479 (D.C. 1995)