On May 16, the Supreme Court in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins found that the Ninth Circuit had not adequately addressed whether the named plaintiff had sufficiently alleged a “concrete” injury in connection with his putative FCRA class action against Spokeo, Inc. In Spokeo, the plaintiff (Robins) sued the “people search engine” for alleged violations of
Sirius XM Settles TCPA Class Action for $35 Million
In one of the largest settlements in history under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”), Sirius XM Radio Inc. agreed to pay $35 million to resolve putative class actions filed throughout the country alleging that it had used an automatic telephone dialing system to engage in telemarketing to trial users of its satellite radio service
City of Brotherly Love has Little Love for Employment Credit Checks
Earlier this month, the Mayor of Philadelphia signed legislation regulating the use of credit checks in employment decisions. By enacting this legislation, Philadelphia joins a growing cast of cities and states throughout the country prohibiting employment credit checks in certain instances. When coupled with recent federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforcement actions against employers based
New Putative Class Action Challenges FCRA Disclosure Form
A new putative class action against Petco Animal Supplies Inc. was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California. The complaint challenges Petco’s form of disclosure for employment background checks.
“By embedding its purported disclosure in an employment application and including extraneous information within and around the disclosure, defendant disregarded
Connecticut Becomes Latest State to “Ban the Box”
On June 1, Connecticut Governor Dan Mallory signed the Fair Chance Employment Act (CT HB 5237) into law. The statute, like other “ban the box” laws nationwide, prohibits covered employers from asking about an applicant’s criminal history on an initial employment application.
Under the Act, “employers” are broadly defined to mean “any person engaged in
Court Finds Plaintiff’s Background Check Disclosure Claim Against Target Misses the Bullseye
In Just v. Target Corporation, the plaintiff alleged that Target willfully violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by providing him with a background check disclosure form that did not consist “solely of the disclosure” that a background check would be obtained. In a victory for employers, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s allegations at the
U.S. Supreme Court Remands Spokeo in Ruling that Mere Technical, Statutory Violation Is Insufficient to Confer Article III Standing
On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its much-anticipated decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. Spokeo considered whether Congress may confer Article III standing by authorizing a private right of action based on the violation of a federal statute alone, despite a plaintiff having suffered no “real world” harm.
Supreme Court Deems Statistical Evidence Admissible in Class Action
In March, the Supreme Court, in a 6-2 decision, held in Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphekeo that the district court did not err in certifying and maintaining a class of employees who alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, notwithstanding the employees’ reliance on “representative evidence” to determine the number of additional hours
Maryland Legislature Passes Bill Preventing Revival or Extension of Statute of Limitations for Debt Collection Based on Consumer Complaint
In April, the Maryland General Assembly approved legislation on consumer debt collection that addresses how statutes of limitation may be calculated against consumers.
Senate Bill 771, which addresses certain “debt buyers” and “debt collectors,” provides that “certain actions may not revive or extend a certain statute of limitations prohibiting a debt buyer or a certain
District Court Denies Motion for Class Certification Under FCRA
In Jones v. Sterling Infosystems, 1:14cv3076 (S.D.N.Y. 2016), the district court recently denied class certification against a background screening company that was alleged to have violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681k(a) by not sending out the notice envisioned under § 1681k(a)(1) at the time that criminal record information was transmitted to employers.
The court denied