Supreme Court’s Spokeo Decision Strengthens Standing Defense for Employers in FCRA and Other Statutory Class Actions
In an important victory for employers, the Supreme Court in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins held that a plaintiff does not have Article III standing to sue in federal court under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) and other federal statutes absent a sufficient allegation of the existence of a concrete injury.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Spokeo decision may lead to more careful scrutiny of whether ADA Title III plaintiffs have a sufficiently “concrete” injury to confer jurisdiction in federal court.
The FTC has released new guidance aimed at helping companies that conduct background screenings for employment purposes to determine whether they are “consumer reporting agencies” within the meaning of the federal FCRA.
Employers regularly turn to background screening companies in order to obtain information/reports about applicants and employees.
The U.S. Supreme Court held Monday that the Ninth Circuit erred when it ruled consumers can sue companies without alleging actual injury.
On May 16, 2016, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins that consumers who bring claims under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) must do more than allege a technical statutory violation to have standing to maintain an action in federal court.
On May 10, 2016, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released new guidelines for employment background screening companies for compliance with certain consumer reporting agency requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA).
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) just issued guidance for companies providing employment screening services.
If you haven’t done so recently, now is a good time to review your company’s use of background checks and credit reports.