Rush v. Fieldcrest Cannon, 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 social security numbers were not embarrassing private facts
• holding that social security numbers were not embarrassing private facts
• finding that the “drafting of documents necessary to effectuate the settlement 12 may have been a condition of the performance but it was not an act necessary to acceptance of the offer to settle”
• enforcing an unsigned settlement agreement where the essential terms had been agreed to via email
• rejecting invasion of privacy claim where plaintiff alleged “that the publication of their social security numbers could result in identify theft, credit card fraud, and other offenses that might damage them personally and financially”
• publishing social security numbers does not constitute “disclos[ure of] embarrassing private facts”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).