Recent Trends in Class-Action Consumer Finance Litigation - The Consumer Finance Podcast
If you are reading this article, you are likely aware that a creditor collecting its own debts in its own name is not a "debt collector" under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA") or its implementing rule,...more
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 U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins was a game-changer. That decision single-handedly raised the bar for a plaintiff alleging a violation of a consumer protection statute such as the Fair Credit...more
Standing is a major issue in nearly all environmental citizen suit cases. A split panel of the US Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court’s award of a $14.25 million Clean Air Act (CAA) penalty against a...more
ARTICLE III STANDING- The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2016 decision in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins was a game-changer. That decision single-handedly raised the bar for a plaintiff alleging a violation of a consumer protection statute...more
The Eighth Circuit reiterated in a decision last month that trial courts must distinguish between FCRA plaintiffs who have suffered concrete harm and plaintiffs who merely seek to collect statutorily allowed damages as a way...more
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (2016), federal courts have continued to examine what is an injury in fact under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”). On April 4, 2022, the...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
A recent case out of the Eastern District of California addressed the split in authority on whether an inaccurate credit report alone is enough to establish a concrete injury in fact for purposes of Article III standing. ...more
On December 28, 2021, the Federal Circuit issued another decision addressing an appellant’s standing to appeal inter partes review (“IPR”) decisions from the PTAB. The patent community has seen several opinions over the last...more
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 June 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court decided TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, revisiting some of the Article III standing principles it had set forth in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578 U.S. 330 (2016), and addressing their...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
On June 25, 2021, the Supreme Court issued a decision in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, a highly anticipated appeal that we previously covered in our March and December issues last year. In a 5–4 opinion, the Supreme Court...more
Recently, we have written about the “entrepreneurial model” of lawyer-driven class actions and how a case’s entrepreneurial features can give rise to various defenses, including lack of standing. As we’ve explained, where...more
On June 25, 2021, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in TransUnion v. Ramirez, holding that consumer class action claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) must allege the actual spread of misleading...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 June 25, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down a 5-4 decision in TransUnion v. Ramirez that clarified the injury-in-fact plaintiffs must show to have standing to assert statutory privacy rights in federal court. This follows...more
The Supreme Court further limited consumer lawsuits in TransUnion, LLC v. Ramirez, siding with credit reporting agency TransUnion in a 5-4 decision holding that thousands of consumers improperly flagged as potential...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
Consumer Law Hinsights is a monthly compilation of nationwide consumer protection cases of interest to financial services and accounts receivable management companies. Eleventh Circuit Delivers Surprising Decision on Use...more
The meteoric rise in class actions over the past decade has been well-documented. Nowadays even mac & cheese is under attack, with two proposed nationwide class actions filed this month alone claiming labels such as “The...more
Since the Supreme Court’s decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), courts have grappled with what constitutes a sufficient injury in fact to satisfy Article III standing requirements. Predominant Issues...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
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