Richardson v. Fleet Bank of Massachusetts

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that at least three prior notices of errors were sufficient to create a factual issue on the reasonableness of the agency’s procedures
• noting Equifax’s concession that the FCRA and MCCRA “are essentially identical” and analyzing the motion for summary judgment under federal law
• requiring showing that erroneous report was a “substantial factor” in the denial of credit
• requiring showing that erroneous report was a “substantial factor” in the denial of credit
• evaluating Section 54(b) and 58(a) claims under the federal standards set forth in 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681e(b) and 1681i, respectively, and noting defendant’s argument that the FCRA and the MCCRA are “essentially identical”
• consumer reporting agency’s reports containing erroneous information did not give rise to intentional infliction of emotional distress claim

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).