32 Cited authorities

Chiang v. Verizon New Eng.
595 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2010) Cited 383 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in suits against furnishers and agencies alike, a plaintiff must "demonstrate some causal relationship between the ... allegedly unreasonable reinvestigation and the failure to discover inaccuracies in his account."
Cahlin v. General Motors Acceptance Corp.
936 F.2d 1151 (11th Cir. 1991) Cited 330 times
Holding that in order to state a claim for a violation of the similarly-worded § 1681e(b), a plaintiff must show that the CRA actually reported inaccurate information and that it failed to follow reasonable procedures
Cushman v. Trans Union Corporation
115 F.3d 220 (3d Cir. 1997) Cited 255 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that because § 1681i's reinvestigation requirement may mandate a more thorough investigation than that contemplated by § 1681e(b), "[j]udgment as a matter of law, even if appropriate on a § 1681e(b) claim, thus may not be warranted on a § 1681i claim"
Westra v. Credit Control of Pinellas
409 F.3d 825 (7th Cir. 2005) Cited 203 times
Holding that a furnisher was entitled to summary judgment on § 1681s-2(b) claim because merely verifying that account information was accurate as reported was reasonable, given "scant information" received from the CRA
Akalwadi v. Risk Management Alternatives, Inc.
336 F. Supp. 2d 492 (D. Md. 2004) Cited 194 times
Holding that a report to a credit reporting agency was a "communication" that "would be covered by FDCPA § 1692e if the communication is false, deceptive, or misleading"
Cousin v. Trans Union Corp.
246 F.3d 359 (5th Cir. 2001) Cited 188 times
Holding that the plaintiff failed to show that Trans Union's credit report was the cause of emotional distress where there were reports from multiple agencies at play
McLean v. GMAC Mortgage Corp.
398 F. App'x 467 (11th Cir. 2010) Cited 117 times
Holding the district court did not err by failing to sua sponte appoint a guardian ad litem where the party requested continuances to allow recovery from psychological stress; “psychological and mental stress is not the equivalent of incompetence to proceed in court”
Akouri v. State of Fla. Dept. of Transp
408 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2005) Cited 131 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the court did not abuse its discretion where "the record show[ed] that the district court exercised reasonable control in managing the flow of the trial by establishing time limits," and the appellant provided no "evidence that the court acted inflexibly or unreasonably with respect to such time restrictions"
Stevenson v. TRW Inc.
987 F.2d 288 (5th Cir. 1993) Cited 155 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that, given the complexity of the consumer dispute, the consumer reporting agency acted unreasonably in relying solely on CDV forms
McLean v. GMAC Mortgage Corp.
595 F. Supp. 2d 1360 (S.D. Fla. 2009) Cited 83 times
Holding that damage to credit is speculative without, for example, allegations of lost financing opportunities
Rule 59 - New Trial; Altering or Amending a Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 Cited 44,615 times 69 Legal Analyses
Providing that a motion to alter or amend judgment must be filed within 28 days after entry of judgment
Rule 50 - Judgment as a Matter of Law in a Jury Trial; Related Motion for a New Trial; Conditional Ruling
Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 Cited 13,853 times 63 Legal Analyses
Allowing "renewed motion"
Section 1681n - Civil liability for willful noncompliance
15 U.S.C. § 1681n Cited 2,385 times 42 Legal Analyses
In §§1681n and 1681o, the Act authorizes consumer suits for money damages against "[a]ny person" who willfully or negligently fails to comply with this directive.
Section 1681a - Definitions; rules of construction
15 U.S.C. § 1681a Cited 1,514 times 60 Legal Analyses
Adopting definition of "credit" and "creditor" as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1691a(d)-(e)

Brim v. Dell Financial Services, LLC et al

32 Cited authorities

Holding that, in suits against furnishers and agencies alike, a plaintiff must "demonstrate some causal relationship between the ... allegedly unreasonable reinvestigation and the failure to discover inaccuracies in his account."

Holding that in order to state a claim for a violation of the similarly-worded § 1681e(b), a plaintiff must show that the CRA actually reported inaccurate information and that it failed to follow reasonable procedures

Holding that because § 1681i's reinvestigation requirement may mandate a more thorough investigation than that contemplated by § 1681e(b), "[j]udgment as a matter of law, even if appropriate on a § 1681e(b) claim, thus may not be warranted on a § 1681i claim"

Holding that a furnisher was entitled to summary judgment on § 1681s-2(b) claim because merely verifying that account information was accurate as reported was reasonable, given "scant information" received from the CRA

Holding that a report to a credit reporting agency was a "communication" that "would be covered by FDCPA § 1692e if the communication is false, deceptive, or misleading"

Holding that the plaintiff failed to show that Trans Union's credit report was the cause of emotional distress where there were reports from multiple agencies at play

Holding the district court did not err by failing to sua sponte appoint a guardian ad litem where the party requested continuances to allow recovery from psychological stress; “psychological and mental stress is not the equivalent of incompetence to proceed in court”

Holding that, given the complexity of the consumer dispute, the consumer reporting agency acted unreasonably in relying solely on CDV forms

Holding that damage to credit is speculative without, for example, allegations of lost financing opportunities

Providing that a motion to alter or amend judgment must be filed within 28 days after entry of judgment

Allowing "renewed motion"

In §§1681n and 1681o, the Act authorizes consumer suits for money damages against "[a]ny person" who willfully or negligently fails to comply with this directive.

Adopting definition of "credit" and "creditor" as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1691a(d)-(e)