Jennifer Cushman v. Trans Union Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “absent any indication that the information is inaccurate, the statute does not mandate [an investigation beyond the original source of information]”
• recognizing that a CRA need not include a consumer statement in a credit file unless “a reasonable reinvestigation has already been completed and the dispute nonetheless remains unresolved”
• recognizing that, be- cause § 1681i(a)’s reinvestigation requirement mandates a 22 No. 21-2632 more thorough investigation than § 1681e(b), a CRA’s liability under the two sections may diverge depending on the facts
• stating that, as a general rule of statutory construction, “[w]e strive to avoid a result that would render statutory language superfluous, meaningless, or irrelevant”
• characterizing Millstone as a case involving misrepresentation and concealment and saying that willfulness must be \on the same order.\
• denying defendant’s motion for summary judgment in claim for failure to reinvestigate where it merely verified negative information with credit grantors despite consumer’s warning that information was inaccurate

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).