Harris v. DATABASE MANAGEMENT & MARKETING, INC.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that production of consumer report without a permissible purpose is requirement for Section 1681b claim
• explaining that written consent provides an independent ground to release a report
• finding “reason to believe” when the record showed an absence of “credible red flags”
• “[If] the consumer reporting agency has reason to believe that the user had a permissible purpose in obtaining the report, there is no FCRA violation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).