Scott Dahlstrom v. Sun-Times Media, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that whether particular use of information fit within a statutory exception is \mixed question of law and fact unsuitable for interlocutory review\
• finding that here, \there is no intervening illegal actor: [the] Sun-Times itself unlawfully sought and acquired the Officers' personal information from the Secretary ... and proceeded to publish it\
• finding that here, “there is no intervening illegal actor: [the] Sun-Times itself unlawfully sought and acquired the Officers’ personal information from the Secretary . . . and proceeded to publish it”
• noting the term “including,” used to introduce seven items in the statute evaluated, is “typically ‘illustrative and not limitative” and the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit does not favor the expressio unius canon
• “Congress also enacted the DPPA to protect against the States’ common practice of selling personal information to businesses engaged in direct marketing and solicitation.”
• “Interpretation of a word or phrase depends upon reading the whole statutory text, considering the purpose and context of the statute.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).