Cassidy v. Drake

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiff did not state a claim under Section 1681s–2(b) where he “failed to plausibly allege that Ridgewood received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute from a consumer reporting agency”
• holding that plaintiff did not state a claim under Section 1681s–2(b) where he “failed to plausibly allege that Ridgewood received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute from a consumer reporting agency”
• holding that the plaintiff did not state a claim under Section 1681s–2(b) where he “failed to plausibly allege that Ridgewood received notice of Plaintiff’s dispute from a consumer reporting agency”
• collecting cases holding that courts recognize a private right of action for willful or negligent non-compliance with Section 1681s-2(b)
• rejecting Section 1983 claim premised on the “vague invocation of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• rejecting Section 1983 claim premised on the “vague invocation of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).