United States:
Supreme Court Holds That Plaintiffs Must Allege Concrete And Particularized Injury To Have Standing To Assert FCRA Claim
23 May 2016
BakerHostetler
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., which addressed
the question of whether a plaintiff has satisfied Article III's
injury-in-fact standing requirement by alleging a statutory
violation but no concrete injury. Our sister blog, the
Data Privacy Monitor, provides initial coverage
here. Stay tuned as we analyze this important ruling which
could have broad-ranging implications for class actions arising
under statutory causes of action.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration from United States
Defenses To Contract Damages In New York
KI Legal
Defendants who face breach of contract damages claims can assert several defenses to mitigate, or altogether eliminate, a potential award of damages against them.
Is Premises Liability The Same As Negligence?
Ward and Smith, P.A.
In today's world, we travel all the time. We shop at grocery stores and department stores, we take walks on the sidewalks in our neighborhoods, and we go to large events, such as concerts or weddings, at various venues.
Defamation vs. Free Speech
Buckingham, Doolittle & Burroughs
The concepts of defamation and free speech often collide, raising questions about where the line should be drawn between the right to express oneself and the responsibility...
