AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Yesterday might ultimately be remembered as among the most consequential days in the history of the Supreme Court and the nation. That will be determined when a decision in Trump v. Anderson is issued....more
In Valentine v. Mullooly, Jeffrey, Rooney & Fylnn LLP the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey found that the plaintiff had not suffered an injury in fact and therefore lacked standing to assert a claim under...more
The Eleventh Circuit has now joined seven other circuits in holding that receipt of unwanted text messages constitutes concrete injury for standing. On July 24, the Eleventh Circuit issued an en banc decision in Drazen v....more
On May 11, 2023, US District Court, M.D. Florida found a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) violation can occur even where the intended human recipient of a fax did not print and review the fax or did not know that...more
On September 8, 2022, in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection and Management Services, Inc. , No. 19-14434, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued an en banc decision which departs significantly from the panel decision on...more
Widening a split among courts that have considered the issue, a North Carolina district court held that a violation of the Do Not Call (DNC) regulations of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) triggered liability under...more
In line with the recent trend of courts giving increased scrutiny to standing in consumer finance cases, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed an appeal this week under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”)...more
Justice Kavanaugh said earlier this summer that “[c]ourts sometimes makes standing law more complicated than its needs to be.” The majority in the Eleventh Circuit took that statement to heart in its en banc opinion in...more
In April of 2019, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision in Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier Inc. that was widely viewed as swinging open the doors of courts in the circuit...more
Colloquially known as the ‘‘Rocket Docket,’’ the Eastern District of Virginia (‘‘EDVA’’) has been the speediest federal court for civil trials since 2008, according to the annual data compiled by the Administrative Office of...more
A three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (Fourth Circuit) recently held in Baehrs v. The Creig Northrop Team et al that although the plaintiffs had alleged a violation of the Real Estate...more
- In a matter of first impression within the 9th Circuit, the court held that each member of a certified class must have Article III standing in order to recover individual monetary damages at trial. - Those class members...more
In Ramirez v. Trans Union, the Ninth Circuit addressed whether, at the class certification stage of a putative class case, only the named plaintiff or all class members must have Article III standing (i.e., a concrete injury...more
On December 16, 2019, the Supreme Court denied DISH Network’s petition for certiorari seeking to overturn a $61 million judgment for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) violations based on telemarking calls made to...more
Earlier this month, in Buchholz v. Meyer Njus Tanick, P.A., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision that a plaintiff who alleged that the defendant had violated the Fair Debt...more
Does a “call placed in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, without any allegation or showing of injury—even that plaintiffs heard the phone ring—suffice to establish concrete injury for purposes of Article III...more
In an important opinion, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court’s ruling that plaintiffs in the ongoing Facebook biometric privacy class action have alleged a concrete injury-in-fact to confer Article III standing and that...more
In Frank v. Gaos, the Supreme Court appeared poised to decide a divisive class action issue: whether settlement awards to third-party charities (known as cy pres awards) are valid. On March 20, however, an 8-1 majority...more
The Third Circuit recently held that procedural violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACTA”), absent any showing of concrete harm, do not meet Article III standing requirements. Kamal v. J. Crew...more
Illinois Appellate Court upholds wide-reaching Rosenbach decision in the first appellate decision post-dating Rosenbach. The First District Appellate Court rejected attempts to carve exceptions into Rosenbach when it held...more
In a precedential opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that because the named plaintiff in a class action complaint failed to allege a concrete injury...more
In Frank v. Gaos, plaintiff Paloma Goas brought a class action alleging that Google’s transmission of users’ search terms violated the Stored Communications Act, 18 U.S.C. § 2701, et seq. (“SCA”). The SCA creates a private...more
Almost one year ago, we wrote about the impact of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016) on Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act (FACTA) class actions and offered practical pointers for defendants confronting...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit added its voice to the chorus of circuit courts of appeal that have held that alleged procedural violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA), such as the...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently held, for the first time, that a mere procedural violation of a statute does not present the material risk of harm that a plaintiff must allege to establish Article III...more