In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#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
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Polsinelli Podcasts - Supreme Court Closes Gap on Bankruptcy Issue
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent TransUnion v. Ramirez decision on Article III standing was discussed at length and applied by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals in Lupia v. Medicredit, Inc., --- F. 4th ---, 2021 WL 3627103...more
On May 26, 2021, the Fifth Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal of a Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) putative class action arising from the transmission of a single text message to the plaintiff. The...more
Two different federal appellate panels recently reached diverging conclusions on the question of whether a single phone call or a single text provides a sufficient injury in fact for an individual to establish standing to sue...more
On May 14, 2021, the Seventh Circuit United States Court of Appeals issued a decision reaffirming the rule from “a slew of cases” that, without injury, a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) claim alleging a bare...more
Defense arguments about a plaintiff’s lack of standing in federal court can come back to bite them, as shown by the Southern District of Florida’s recent decision in Guerra v. Newport Beach Auto. Grp. LLC, No. 21-20568, 2021...more
A recent decision from the Northern District of California — Lopez, et al. v. Apple — highlights the continued impact of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins in shaping Article III standing...more
Last Thursday, the Seventh Circuit issued its fourth opinion in two years addressing Article III standing in the context of Illinois’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA). The court handed the plaintiff in Thornley v....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
Takeaway: The Eleventh Circuit has yet to address whether a future risk of identity theft is sufficient to establish standing in a data breach case. In Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier, Inc., 16-16486, 2020 WL 6305084, at *12...more
On October 28, 2020, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a split (7-3) en banc decision applying Spokeo principles to a claim that a vendor issued a receipt that included more digits from the plaintiff’s credit card...more
If you are a typical shopper, the last thing on your mind at the checkout counter is your printed credit card receipt. As you juggle your grocery store bags, you might absentmindedly fold the receipt into your wallet, or...more
TCPA class actions based on the receipt of unsolicited text messages have grown more common in recent years. However, the Eleventh Circuit’s decision in Salcedo v. Hanna, may upend that trend by holding that a single...more
A&B Abstract: Recent cases by the Eleventh Circuit and the D.C. Circuit deepen the divide among the courts on the standing of consumers to sue for violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACTA”). ...more
The active ingredient in popular weed killers, glyphosate, has gotten bad press lately. Thousands of plaintiffs have alleged that exposure to it caused their cancers. Jurors have responded by invoking punitive damages and...more
In 2016, the United States Supreme Court issued a landmark opinion addressing Article III standing under the U.S. Constitution. See Spokeo v. Robins, ––– U.S. ––––, 136 S. Ct. 1540, 194 L.Ed.2d 635 (2016). The “standing to...more
The Third Circuit recently held that procedural violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (“FACTA”), absent any showing of concrete harm, do not meet Article III standing requirements. Kamal v. J. Crew...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
A single missed call from a telemarketer constitutes a concrete injury that gives rise to standing, a federal district court in California has ruled. In Shuckett v. DialAmerica Marketing, Inc., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29598...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
Last month, the Eleventh Circuit revisited the U.S. Supreme Court’s controversial decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, and appears to have set a low bar for plaintiffs to clear in establishing standing....more
On August 29, the Seventh Circuit reentered the multi-front fray that has broken out among lower courts in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Spokeo v Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016). ...more
On May 14, 2018, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals issued a significant jurisdictional decision that further limits defendants’ use of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016). In Collier v. SP Plus Corp., No....more
Spokeo v. Robins – which confirmed that a plaintiff’s allegation of a defendant’s statutory violation without accompanying concrete harm fails to satisfy Article III’s “case or controversy” requirement – has brought the issue...more
On February 16, 2018, the 6th Circuit, in Hagy v. Demers & Adams (882 F.3d 616 (6th Cir. Feb. 16, 2018)), found that a former borrower did not have standing to assert a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act...more
On Monday, February 26, 2018, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California denied defendant Facebook’s motion to dismiss In re Facebook Biometric Information Privacy Litigation, finding plaintiffs...more