Navigating Civil Standing Requirements for Defense Success — RICO Report Podcast
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Universal Injunctions, Associational Standing, and Forum Shopping - Their Effects on Legal Challenges to Regulations
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Eleventh Circuit Grants en banc Review to Resolve Controversial TCPA Standing Ruling
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 313: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 110: Listen and Learn -- The Basics of Justiciability (Con Law)
Let's Talk Child Custody
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Supreme Court’s Rulings On Same-Sex Marriage Spark Many Questions On Employee Benefits
DynCorp's 'Strategic' Defense In Drug Crop Spraying Suit
Bill on Bankruptcy: MF Global Creditors Undeterred by Low Value
Same-Sex Marriage Cases in 90 Seconds
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments on March 30, 2021, in a case that will help clarify when an intangible, nonmonetary injury is sufficiently “concrete and particularized” to give rise to Article III standing. The...more
On March 20, 2019, in Frank v. Gaos, 586 U.S. ___ (2019), the United States Supreme Court sidestepped a novel question regarding a cy pres class action settlement, instead remanding the case back to the lower courts with...more
Following the Supreme Court’s ruling in Spokeo v. Robins, which held that federal plaintiffs alleging a statutory violation must have suffered a real, concrete injury in order to have Article III standing, many defendants...more
On September 14, 2016, defendant JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“Chase”) moved for summary judgment on plaintiff Tina Bellino’s putative class action complaint, which alleges that Chase violated New York state law by presenting...more
The Ninth Circuit has opined, again, on whether a statutory violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681, et seq.-–-by itself––constitutes a concrete injury for Article III standing purposes. Last...more
On August 15, 2017, in a much-anticipated opinion in a case that has drawn national attention in the past three years, the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that an alleged violation of the Fair Credit...more
Dear Retail Clients and Friends, Many of you are likely familiar with the US Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. On the one-year anniversary of Spokeo, data shows that retailers’ chances of success in...more
Federal courts have varied widely in their interpretation of standing for plaintiffs in consumer protection class actions since last year’s U.S. Supreme Court decision in Spokeo v. Robins , __ U.S. __, 136 S.Ct. 1540 (May 16,...more
A common and understandable concern of companies that suffer a data breach is whether the victims can sue the company. It is tempting to assume that the victims won’t sue if they do not suffer identity theft or monetary loss...more
Law360, New York (July 1, 2016, 12:12 PM ET) -- The U.S. Supreme Court made a big splash this year establishing a murky threshold for standing that has already been widely cited by both sides of the bar, while consumers...more
Last month, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13–1339 (May 16, 2016). Spokeo involved a lawsuit brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1970 (FCRA). ...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
Last week, decisions by the United States Supreme Court and the Northern District of Georgia provided further guidance regarding the narrow path required for a class action plaintiff to successfully establish Article III...more
On May 16, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Spokeo v. Robins, which posed the question of whether Article III standing requires a plaintiff to have a concrete injury when alleging a statutory violation under the...more
Plaintiffs must show they suffered from an actual injury, not just a “bare procedural violation,” in order to sue in federal court, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in its long-awaited decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No....more
Earlier this week, by a 6-2 vote, the Supreme Court issued a “no decision” decision on an issue important to employers facing class action litigation. The Court decided that the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals needed to review...more
On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Spokeo v. Robins, holding that a technical violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) would not be enough to confer Article III standing on...more
The Supreme Court issued two interesting decisions recently that will affect the consumer financial industry. In Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the Court held that when it comes to Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) violations,...more
Earlier this week, the Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated decision in Spokeo v. Robins (see our previous posts on the case and oral argument). The United States Supreme Court held that a plaintiff must show that an...more
On May 16, 2016, the United States Supreme Court released its long-awaited opinion in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins. In a 6–2 decision, the Court remanded the case to the Ninth Circuit for further analysis of the plaintiff's...more
The Court’s discussion of concrete injuries likely applies to other statutory consumer class actions based solely on technical violations. On May 16, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated decision in Spokeo,...more
May is usually a busy month on the Supreme Court before the justices head off for some summer R&R. It is historically a time when many opinions are issued, and May 2016 has been no exception. ...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
BREAKING: SCOTUS Rules on Spokeo, Significant Implications for TCPA Cases - The Supreme Court of the United States ruled yesterday in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins that a plaintiff must show an injury in fact before pursuing a...more
In a much-anticipated decision, the United States Supreme Court ruled on Monday in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339, 2016 WL 2842447 (May 16, 2016), that a consumer cannot bring a lawsuit in federal court based only on a...more