United States v. Landsverk

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that UNITE “could not have violated [their] own DPPA-protected privacy interests because the motor vehicle abstracts contain no information about them”
• stating that UNITE \could not have violated [their] own DPPA-protected privacy interests because the motor vehicle abstracts contain no information about them\
• stating that UNITE “could not have violated [their] own DPPA-protected privacy interests because the motor vehicle abstracts contain no information about them”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).