We recently reported that on July 18 the CFPB, upon remand from the Fifth Circuit, re-filed its notice of supplemental authority in support of its motion to dismiss or transfer the case, motion to dissolve the preliminary...more
7/24/2024
/ Consumer Financial Products ,
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) ,
Consumer Lenders ,
Credit Cards ,
Debt Collection ,
Final Rules ,
Financial Institutions ,
Financial Regulatory Reform ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Late Fees ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Motion to Dissolve ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
Proposed Rules ,
Regulatory Agenda ,
Standing
In its 2016 decision in Spokeo v. Robins, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff alleging a Fair Credit Reporting Act violation does not have standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to sue for statutory...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
In a precedential opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that a plaintiff in a class action complaint had Article III standing and was properly awarded summary judgment when a debt collector sent...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
4/2/2019
/ Appeals ,
Article III ,
Class Action ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Debit and Credit Card Transactions ,
FACTA ,
Identity Theft ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
J Crew ,
Retailers ,
Spokeo v Robins ,
Standing ,
Statutory Violations
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
After the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robbins last year, many defendants have perceived the assertion of a standing argument as a potential panacea when confronted with federal statutory claims in which...more
3/2/2017
/ Article III ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Class Action ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Dismissal With Prejudice ,
FACTA ,
Financial Institutions ,
Financial Services Industry ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Motion to Remand ,
Removal ,
Spokeo v Robins ,
Standing
In a long-anticipated and significant decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled 6-2 that a plaintiff alleging a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) does not have standing under Article III of the U.S....more
In the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's holding in Campbell-Ewald Company v. Gomez that an unaccepted Rule 68 offer of complete relief does not moot a plaintiff's individual claims, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third...more
4/8/2016
/ Article III ,
Campbell Ewald v Gomez ,
Class Action ,
Class Representatives ,
Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk ,
Mootness ,
Rule 68 ,
SCOTUS ,
Settlement Offer ,
Standing ,
TCPA
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that an unaccepted Rule 68 settlement offer does not moot a class action even when the offer would provide the named plaintiff with complete individual relief. The decision in Campbell-Ewald...more
In a case of first impression in the Third Circuit, the Court of Appeals held that unnamed, putative class members are not required to establish standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution. Rather, the Court held that...more
7/27/2015
/ Antitrust Litigation ,
Appeals ,
Article III ,
Class Action ,
Comcast ,
Comcast v. Behrend ,
Design Defects ,
FRCP 23(b)(3) ,
Prudential Insurance ,
Putative Class Actions ,
SCOTUS ,
Standing ,
Tyson Foods ,
Tyson Foods v Bouaphakeo ,
Volvo
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear an important case that will decide whether a plaintiff who cannot show any actual harm from a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) nevertheless has standing under Article...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit recently addressed an important issue that the U.S. Supreme Court avoided last year concerning whether a consumer must suffer actual economic harm to have standing to sue for...more