We get Privacy for work — Episode 8: The Surge in Data Breach Lawsuits: Trends and Tactics
Balch’s Consumer Finance Compass: How Standing Can Make or Break Certification for Class Action Lawsuits in Debt Collection
Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Universal Injunctions, Associational Standing, and Forum Shopping - Their Effects on Legal Challenges to Regulations
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Eleventh Circuit Grants en banc Review to Resolve Controversial TCPA Standing Ruling
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 313: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 110: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
Let's Talk Child Custody
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Supreme Court’s Rulings On Same-Sex Marriage Spark Many Questions On Employee Benefits
DynCorp's 'Strategic' Defense In Drug Crop Spraying Suit
Bill on Bankruptcy: MF Global Creditors Undeterred by Low Value
Same-Sex Marriage Cases in 90 Seconds
On July 18, 2025, the Eleventh Circuit rejected the notion that plaintiffs can “manufacture” Article III standing by identifying “self-inflicted harm” such as “expenditure of money and wasted time to correct an otherwise...more
ARTICLE III STANDING- The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins was a game-changer. That decision single-handedly raised the bar for a plaintiff alleging a violation of a consumer protection statute...more
A recent case out of the Eastern District of California addressed the split in authority on whether an inaccurate credit report alone is enough to establish a concrete injury in fact for purposes of Article III standing. ...more
On June 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, revisiting some of the Article III standing principles it had set forth in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (2016), and addressing their...more
On June 25, 2021, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in TransUnion v. Ramirez, holding that consumer class action claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) must allege the actual spread of misleading...more
The Supreme Court further limited consumer lawsuits in TransUnion, LLC v. Ramirez, siding with credit reporting agency TransUnion in a 5-4 decision holding that thousands of consumers improperly flagged as potential...more
The Supreme Court has granted certiorari to review a $40 million class action trial judgment for statutory and punitive damages under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and its forthcoming decision later this Term will likely be...more
Synopsis: Last month, the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion, affirming broad Article III standing and holding that, for permissible-purpose claims, a consumer-plaintiff need allege only that his/her credit report was obtained...more
On March 25, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dealt another setback to plaintiffs trying to establish Article III standing to assert a claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681,...more
On Monday, a divided panel of the Ninth Circuit rejected what is perhaps the most common allegation asserted by plaintiffs as a way of achieving standing under FCRA: that, as a result of some alleged misconduct, their credit...more
Plaintiffs’ Other FCRA Claims Survive By “Skin of their Teeth.” In Clements v. Trans Union, LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160931 (Aug. 29, 2018)[1] (“Clements”), a purported class action pending in the United States District...more
The flurry of Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) class actions against employers started in or about 2012 and was not limited to California. Many of those lawsuits resulted in significant payouts for violations of one or more...more
On August 15, 2017, the 9th Circuit, in Thomas Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., reversed the district court’s dismissal of an action alleging willful violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. The 9th...more
In the 9th Circuit’s August 15, 2017 decision in Robins v. Spokeo, the latest in the long-running legal debate about when a consumer cause of action exists for a data breach, the 9th Circuit has declared that inaccuracies in...more
The U.S. Supreme Court held in its 2016 Spokeo decision that for a plaintiff to have standing to assert a claim based on a statutory violation that the plaintiff must have suffered real—and not just legal— harm. Spokeo...more
On remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has held in Spokeo v. Robins that an alleged Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) violation was sufficiently concrete to support Article III...more
An $11.7 million judgment awarded against credit reporting company Experian in a 69,000-member class action brought under the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) was vacated by the Fourth Circuit in Dreher v. Experian...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit held that the plaintiff’s allegations that Experian denied him access to information to which he was entitled under the Fair Credit Reporting Act was insufficient to establish...more
The U. S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has held that a class representative who failed to allege a concrete injury from incomplete or incorrect information on his credit report did not satisfy the standing...more
On May 11, 2017, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a $12 million judgment against Experian Information Solutions, Inc. (“Experian”) in a class action against the credit reporting bureau alleging violations of the...more
The Northern District of California dismissed a Fair Credit Reporting Act case against Lyft upon finding that plaintiff lacked Article III standing based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct....more
In May, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Spokeo v. Robins, providing guidance on the “injury-in-fact” aspect of the constitutional standing requirement for putative class action plaintiffs. 136 S. Ct. 1540...more
On May 16, the Supreme Court issued its Spokeo v. Robins decision. Spokeo was a closely-watched case, as it had the potential to substantially limit federal court jurisdiction in cases where plaintiffs sued for violations of...more