White v. Seaton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an improper disclosure under 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(b)(2)(A) causes “a concrete injury sufficient to confer standing”
• holding plaintiff established a concrete injury resulting from defendant’s failure to provide the “clear and conspicuous” disclosure required by the FCRA
• observing that judicial estoppel is an “‘extraordinary remed[y] to be invoked when a party’s inconsistent behavior will otherwise result in a miscarriage of justice’”
• finding that plaintiff’s allegation “that Defendants invaded the statutory right to confidentiality of [plaintiff’s] personal information by obtaining his consumer report without first providing the required disclosure or obtaining his written consent” was sufficient for concrete injury
• “Congress intended that the FCRA be construed to promote the credit industry’s responsible dissemination of accurate and relevant information and to maintain the confidentiality of consumer reports.”
• “an unauthorized dissemination of one’s personal information, even without a showing of actual damages, is an invasion of one’s privacy that constitutes a concrete injury sufficient to confer standing to sue”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).