By Arthur A. Ebbs Comcast has a policy in its Chicago region that permits a prospective customer to make a $50 deposit for internet service in lieu of a requirement to submit to a credit check. In Santangelo v. Comcast Corporation, 2018 WL 4404679 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 17, 2018), […]
Well this is going to be fun. Not so long ago I converted a simple WordPress blog into a living breathing community of TCPA nerds and telecom wonks–forging a platform for true TCPA thought leadership and education in the process. A place that made it easy for subscribers […]
The Tassel is Worth the Hassle: Putative Class Action Dismissed after Court Finds that Accurately Reported College Enrollment Dates and Degree-Conferral Status Are Not Adverse Information
15 U.S.C. 1681c of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) governs the requirements for information contained in consumer reports. Section 1681c(a) provides that there are six categories of information that are generally precluded from reporting unless they fall under an exception described in section 1681c(b). The six categories […]
When Technicalities Are (and are not) Associated with Concrete Harm: The Spokeo Analysis as Applied in Long v. SEPTA, 2018 WL 4290046 (3rd Cir. 2018).
In the latest application of the Supreme Court’s 2016 Spokeo decision, the Third Circuit analyzed two alleged technical violations of FCRA and reached different conclusions with respect to the plaintiffs’ right to bring claims. After conducting a fact-intensive inquiry into the specific allegations made by prospective employees, the […]
By Thomas Cull With the passage of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act earlier this year, Congress amended the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The Act amends both consumer rights under FCRA and imposes important new disclosure requirements. By way of background for those unfamiliar, […]
The Northern District of California recently granted preliminary approval of a class action settlement in Esomonu v. Omnicare, Inc., No. 15-cv-02003-HSG, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142110 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2018). In this case, plaintiff was employed by defendant. Like many employers, defendant required the plaintiff, and other […]