The Risks in Background Checks
Current Trends in FCRA Litigation - The Consumer Finance Podcast
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Ban the Box and Fair Chance Hiring Laws: The Year in Review
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts Update, Breaking News from California
AGG Talks: Background Screening - Redaction of Identifiers by the Courts in Michigan and California Pose Challenges for Background Checks
Employee Who Wanted To Donate/Freeze Her Eggs Was Not Protected By Pregnancy Statute - Paleny v. Fireplace Products U.S., Inc., 103 Cal. App. 5th 199 (2024) - Erika Paleny alleged harassment, discrimination and...more
The Federal Circuit has affirmed a lower court’s decision that the claims of a patent for software that manages pre-employment background checks weren’t patent-eligible. The case is In Miller Mendel, Inc. v. City of...more
A coalition of 20 Democratic AGs has filed an amicus brief with the United States Supreme Court in support of the federal government’s request for review of the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision in Garland v...more
On April 4, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit joined the Ninth Circuit in holding that a plaintiff lacked Article III standing to prosecute her statutory claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)...more
It’s hard to keep up with the news these days. It sometimes feels like you can’t step away from your phone, computer, or TV for more than an hour or so without a barrage of new information hitting the headlines—and you’re...more
In Landry v. Thomson Reuters Corp., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 162741 (D. N.H. Sept. 24, 2018), a putative class action, a key issue was whether the Plaintiff’s amended complaint–which alleged Thomson Reuters Corporation (“TRC”)...more
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in Spokeo II. As we previously reported, Spokeo II asked the Court to determine, in light of conflicting circuit court decisions, whether...more
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied the petition for certiorari seeking review of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit's most recent decision in Spokeo v. Robins (Spokeo II), foregoing an opportunity to clarify...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In deciding to deny certiorari to review Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 17-806 (U.S. 2017), the U.S. Supreme Court has declined to reconsider the standing principles it announced in its landmark 2016 Spokeo...more
The Spokeo standing saga, which began in 2010, continues with a second cert petition to the Supreme Court. The case began when plaintiff filed a putative class action, alleging that defendant Spokeo violated the Fair Credit...more
On November 13, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the appeal of one of 2017’s more significant Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) opinions, Syed v. M-I, LLC. (9th Cir. Jan. 20, 2017). In Syed, the Ninth Circuit...more
Earlier this month, in a case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Home Depot avoided a class action suit under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The lawsuit accused the company of...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: In Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a plaintiff must have a concrete injury to sue for FCRA violations. Following Spokeo’s remand, courts have held that consumers have standing to...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that allegations that Spokeo Inc. published an inaccurate consumer report in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act established a concrete injury sufficient to confer...more
This week the Ninth Circuit offered plaintiffs who wish to bring both individual and class actions a potentially broad path to establish Article III standing based on mere allegations of procedural statutory violations. In...more
While some defendants will view the Spokeo II decision as lowering the bar for standing, the recognition in Spokeo II and Groshek that a statutory violation alone does not automatically satisfy the concrete injury requirement...more
The six-year fight over the type of harm a plaintiff must allege to satisfy the “injury in fact” requirement for lawsuits alleging false reporting of credit information took its latest turn this week. On Tuesday, August 15,...more
On May 16, the Supreme Court issued its Spokeo v. Robins decision. Spokeo was a closely-watched case, as it had the potential to substantially limit federal court jurisdiction in cases where plaintiffs sued for violations of...more
In an important victory for employers, the Supreme Court in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins held that a plaintiff does not have Article III standing to sue in federal court under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and other federal...more
The Court holds that allegation of a statutory violation is not solely sufficient to satisfy the “concrete harm” requirement for purposes of Article III standing in federal court....more
On May 16, 2016, in a 6-2 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court remanded the closely watched Spokeo Inc. v. Robins case back to the Ninth Circuit for further analysis. The issue is whether the plaintiff, Robins, has standing to...more
On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States decided a case, Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, (No. 13–1339), involving standing to maintain an action in federal court. In the Spokeo case, an individual claimed that a search...more
Spokeo Inc. v. Thomas Robins et al., No. 13-1339 (2016) - On May 16, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court, by a vote of 6-2, set aside a lower court decision on whether what might be a technical statutory violation gives a...more
On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Robins v. Spokeo, No. 13–1339, 578 U. S. ____ (2016), putting to rest months of speculation as to whether the Court could come to a meaningful...more
On May 16, 2016, the United States Supreme Court issued its opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, a case that the background screening community has watched with great interest, as the Supreme Court has been asked to decide...more