Recent Trends in Class-Action Consumer Finance Litigation - The Consumer Finance Podcast
Loan servicers and their counsel are often sued by consumers during contested mortgage foreclosure proceedings. The United States Supreme Court’s opinions in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins and TransUnion v. Ramirez continue to be an...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 Supreme Court on Monday signaled to the lower courts that they need to seriously consider the impact of TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez, 594 U.S. ___ (2021) when addressing claims for statutory violations that do not result in...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
Justice Kavanaugh said earlier this summer that “[c]ourts sometimes makes standing law more complicated than its needs to be.” The majority in the Eleventh Circuit took that statement to heart in its en banc opinion in...more
In April of 2019, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision in Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier Inc. that was widely viewed as swinging open the doors of courts in the circuit...more
On July 6, the Eleventh Circuit held that two recipients of debt collection letters lacked Article III standing to pursue claims against a debt collection agency under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”). ...more
On March 13, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected plaintiffs’ claim in a class action under Section 8 of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), which imposes a broad prohibition against referral fees or...more
On December 16, 2019, the Supreme Court denied DISH Network’s petition for certiorari seeking to overturn a $61 million judgment for Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”) violations based on telemarking calls made to...more
Earlier this month, in Buchholz v. Meyer Njus Tanick, P.A., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision that a plaintiff who alleged that the defendant had violated the Fair Debt...more
In Frank v. Gaos, the Supreme Court appeared poised to decide a divisive class action issue: whether settlement awards to third-party charities (known as cy pres awards) are valid. On March 20, however, an 8-1 majority...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
Almost one year ago, we wrote about the impact of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016) on Fair and Accurate Credit Transaction Act (FACTA) class actions and offered practical pointers for defendants confronting...more
• On March 8, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued a precedential opinion upholding dismissal of a putative consumer class action where the plaintiff failed to plead a concrete injury-in-fact stemming from an...more
Last month, the Sixth Circuit in Macy et al v. GC Services Ltd Partnership unanimously upheld certification of a class under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), despite arguments that the named plaintiffs failed...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
We’ve already written about Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S. Ct. 1540 (2016), in which the Supreme Court reaffirmed that all federal plaintiffs, even those alleging a statutory violation, must have suffered a real, concrete...more
On January 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court, quietly and without commentary, declined to review the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals’ recent decision in the storied Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins case. In 2016, the Supreme...more
Class action litigation is a rapidly developing area of the law. Here are the top five trends to keep an eye on as we approach the new year...more
On August 15, 2017, the Ninth Circuit delivered the latest episode in the Robins v. Spokeo saga, reaffirming on remand from the Supreme Court that plaintiff Robins had alleged an injury in fact sufficient for Article III...more
On August 15, 2017, the 9th Circuit, in Thomas Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., reversed the district court’s dismissal of an action alleging willful violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. The 9th...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
In Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, the Supreme Court clarified the requirements necessary for plaintiffs to establish standing. The Court held that an allegation of a statutory violation, without some showing of concrete harm, is...more