In a 7-4 split decision, the Eleventh Circuit declined to rehear en banc a panel decision issued in September 2020, holding a class settlement that included an incentive award to the class representative was improper. The en banc majority did not issue an opinion, but the four dissenting judges criticized the panel decision as wrongly
On June 28, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) issued an interpretive rule, encouraging states to enact more laws regulating consumer reporting, arguing that states’ powers are only constrained in limited ways by the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
The CFPB believes that states have the ability to enact state-level laws that are stricter
On May 26, California Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) “Holder Rule” does not limit the award of attorneys’ fees where a consumer seeks fees from a holder under a state prevailing party statute.
The Holder Rule and Previous California Precedent
The FTC’s Holder Rule permits consumers to bring any legal claims
On May 3, Judge Grimm of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland issued a class certification decision in a consumer data breach multidistrict litigation case against an international hotel and resort management company, becoming one of the few district courts to certify Rule 23(b)(3) classes in this type of case. The litigation
On April 7, the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB or Bureau) filed an amicus brief in an appeal, pending before the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit in which the Bureau argued that the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) does not exempt furnishers from investigating disputes based on legal questions as opposed to factual
On March 22, California’s Fifth Appellate District Court of Appeals issued a decision on the availability of attorneys’ fees under the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Holder Rule. This case follows recent FTC guidance and two decisions from California’s Second Appellate District Court of Appeals holding that the Holder Rule does not bar recovery of attorneys’
On March 1, the Supreme Court of California held oral arguments in Pulliam v. HNL Automotive, Inc., No. S267576 (2021). The appeal may decide (at least under California state law) whether the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) “Holder Rule” permits a consumer to recover amounts beyond what he or she has paid to the holder,
Thursday, March 3 • 4:00 – 5:00 p.m. ET
FCRA litigation continues to increase. 2021 was a busy year, and 2022 seems poised for a further increase in litigation and regulatory actions. Please join us for a complimentary webinar to discuss the significant FCRA cases from 2021 and what is on the horizon for 2022.
On February 10, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a Central District of California decision, finding that a consumer reporting agency (CRA) did not violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) when it reported a criminal record with a charge date that antedated the report by more than seven years. The case is Moran v. Screening Pros
On January 24, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California took the unusual step of declining to sign off — for the fourth time — on a proposed settlement, resulting from a putative class-action lawsuit against Five Guys Enterprises LLC and its parent Encore FGBF LLC. The lawsuit alleges the popular burger