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
"No harm, no foul" is a common saying. As it turns out, that saying is sometimes true in law. An important prerequisite for a lawsuit in federal court is that the plaintiff have standing to sue....more
The Eleventh Circuit has now joined seven other circuits in holding that receipt of unwanted text messages constitutes concrete injury for standing. On July 24, the Eleventh Circuit issued an en banc decision in Drazen v....more
On November 2, 2022, the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida held, sua sponte, that a plaintiff did not have standing to bring a class action suit alleging a TCPA violation. The February 9, 2022 complaint...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
Colloquially known as the ‘‘Rocket Docket,’’ the Eastern District of Virginia (‘‘EDVA’’) has been the speediest federal court for civil trials since 2008, according to the annual data compiled by the Administrative Office of...more
- In a matter of first impression within the 9th Circuit, the court held that each member of a certified class must have Article III standing in order to recover individual monetary damages at trial. - Those class members...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On January 29, 2020, Facebook announced that it had reached a settlement with plaintiffs in a class action brought under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (the “BIPA”) in the U.S. District...more
Does a “call placed in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, without any allegation or showing of injury—even that plaintiffs heard the phone ring—suffice to establish concrete injury for purposes of Article III...more
In a precedential opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit concluded that a plaintiff in a class action complaint had Article III standing and was properly awarded summary judgment when a debt collector sent...more
In an important opinion, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a lower court’s ruling that plaintiffs in the ongoing Facebook biometric privacy class action have alleged a concrete injury-in-fact to confer Article III standing and that...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
Illinois Appellate Court upholds wide-reaching Rosenbach decision in the first appellate decision post-dating Rosenbach. The First District Appellate Court rejected attempts to carve exceptions into Rosenbach when it held...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
On January 25, 2019, the Supreme Court of Illinois held in Rosenbach v. Six Flags Entertainment Corp. that an "aggrieved" person entitled to seek damages and injunctive relief under Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy Act...more
The Illinois’ Biometric Information Privacy Act (740 ILCS 14/1 et seq.) (BIPA) requires that companies obtain written consent and disclose how they collect, retain, disclose and destroy biometric identifiers such as retina or...more
Since the passage of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) in 2008, it has been used by plaintiffs’ attorneys to sue companies that use biometric identification technologies. Many BIPA cases have failed...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: On November 6, 2018, the United States Supreme Court signalled that the Article III standing preconditions to federal court litigation, as described in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S .Ct. 1540 (2016), are...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: Following an opinion by the Illinois Supreme Court, the 9th Circuit will discuss the Illinois Biometric Privacy Act issue — whether the Act requires class plaintiffs to show that they suffered actual harm...more
The Illinois Supreme Court held on January 25, 2019, that plaintiffs filing suit under the Biometric Information Privacy Act—which regulates how private entities disclose and discard biometric identifiers—do not need actual...more
Seyfarth Synopsis: The Illinois Supreme Court has held that a plaintiff may sue for mere violation of BIPA, regardless of injury. ...more
Rivera v. Google, a recent federal court decision from the Northern District of Illinois, highlights how challenges to Article III standing are a versatile and useful tool for corporate defendants in privacy and cybersecurity...more