In Practice Management Support Services v. Cirque Du Soleil, Inc., the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment that followed a Rule 67 motion to deposit $15,000 to moot the plaintiff’s claim for relief under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The plaintiff seeks, on
Lyft Avoids FCRA Class Action on Spokeo Grounds
Lyft Inc. avoided a putative background screening class action over alleged privacy violations on Spokeo grounds last week.
In the putative class action, the plaintiff driver alleged that Lyft failed to comply with the Fair Credit Reporting Act when it included “extraneous information” in its FCRA disclosure. In addition, the plaintiff claimed that Lyft failed
Illinois Appellate Court Reverses Ruling in Favor of Neiman Marcus in Background Check Case
On September 27, the Illinois Court of Appeals reversed a ruling in favor of Neiman Marcus, finding that the department store violated the Illinois Employee Credit Privacy Act, 820 ILCS 70/1 et seq., when it ran background checks on potential employees. The Act prohibits an employer from inquiring into a potential employee’s credit history,
Court Certified FCRA Class Over Spokeo Objections
A federal judge in the Northern District of California certified a class of job applicants in a lawsuit claiming a background check firm violated the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act. The Court certified the class over the arguments of the defendant that the members of the putative class lacked Article III standing under the standard
DISH Network Agrees to Settle Fair Credit Reporting Act Claims
DISH Network, LLC and DISH Network Service, LLC have agreed to pay $1.75 million to settle class action claims that they violated certain provisions of the Fair Credit Reporting Act related to ordering consumer reports for employment purposes. The December 4, 2012 complaint alleged that DISH required companies contracted to install DISH products to obtain
Florida Federal Court Denies Motion to Dismiss FACTA Class Action Under Spokeo
On August 29, a Florida federal court rejected a motion to dismiss filed by Doctor’s Associates, Inc., doing business as Subway, which relied on the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Spokeo v. Robins in a Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACTA”) putative class action. Plaintiff Shane Flaum claimed that Subway violated FACTA by
Recent CFPB Supervisory Highlights Address FCRA Compliance Issues
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has continued to address FCRA-related compliance issues in its most recent Supervisory Highlights publications from March and June 2016. The Supervisory Highlights once again reiterate the importance of FCRA compliance for a broad spectrum of FCRA-regulated entities, including mortgage originators, furnishers of consumer information, and nationwide specialty consumer reporting agencies
Join Us at the National Association of Professional Background Screeners Annual Conference
We are pleased to announce that Troutman Sanders partners David Anthony, Cindy Hanson, and Ron Raether will be featured speakers at the upcoming National Association of Professional Background Screeners (NAPBS) Annual Conference, to be held in Palm Desert, California on September 18-20.
On Monday, September 19, David and Ron will speak on a
Northern District of Illinois Holds Third-Party Disclosure Required for FCRA Claim Under § 1681e(b)
Earlier this month, a federal court in the Northern District of Illinois granted a motion to dismiss a claim under 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b), finding that a credit score purchased by the plaintiff was not a consumer report under the Fair Credit Reporting Act because it was not disclosed to any third
Sprint Agrees to Individual Settlement in Proposed Background Screening Class Action
Earlier this month, Sprint settled, on an individual basis, a proposed FCRA class action accusing the telecommunications provider of asking consumers to waive privacy rights in its consumer disclosure forms.
Specifically, the plaintiff claimed that the disclosure form Sprint used was not in a document that “consists solely of the disclosure” as required under 15