Premium Mortgage Corp. v. Equifax, 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 a non-party to a contract lacks standing in a contract proceeding to enforce the agreement unless unequivocal terms clearly evidence an intent to permit such standing
• holding that a non-party to a contract lacks standing in a contract proceeding to enforce the agreement unless unequivocal terms clearly evidence an intent to permit such standing
• finding that a nonparty cannot use a contract for standing unless explicit terms allow the non-party to enforce the contract
• explaining that “[a] non-party to a contract governed by New York law lacks standing” in a contract proceeding “in the absence of terms that clearly evidence an intent to permit” such standing
• explaining that the plaintiff who was not a party to the contract at issue lacked standing; there was an “absence of terms that clearly evidence[ ] an intent to permit enforcement” by the plaintiff
• finding that “[t]he phrase [n]o requirement or prohibition [under Section 1681t(b)] sweeps broadly and suggests no distinction between positive enactments and common law; to the contrary, those words easily encompass obligations that take the form of common law rules”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).