Korotki v. Attorney Services Corp. 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 the plaintiff “bears the burden of going forward to show lack of a proper purpose” in an FCRA case
• holding that § 1681b permitted initiating a credit inquiry for the sole purpose of determining an address at which personal service could be effected, so long as the underlying litigation involved the collection of a consumer debt
• “[S]o long as a user has reason to believe that a permissible purpose exists, that user may obtain a consumer report without violating the FCRA.”
• “[S]o long as a user has reason to believe that a permissible purpose exists, that user may obtain a consumer report without violating the FCRA.”
• violation of FCRA is proven by showing a lack of permissible purpose

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).