Supreme Court Hears Argument On What Constitutes "Injury" For Standing Purposes And Its Decision Could Have A Profound Effect On TCPA Litigation

On November 2, 2015, the United States Supreme Court heard oral argument in Spokeo v. Robins, which raises the question of what constitutes requisite injury to support a claim for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. In Spokeo, Plaintiff filed a class action Complaint against Defendant, accusing Defendant of violating the FCRA by publishing false information about him. The trial court dismissed Plaintiff's claim, concluding Plaintiff had not experienced the requisite harm to sustain a claim. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, holding that violation of the Act was sufficient to support a finding of the requisite harm. While the law at issue involved the FCRA, implications of the Court's decision could also prove profound in class action litigation as well as other claims brought under federal statutes, including the TCPA.

About The TCPA Blog

Email/Comment Policy


Jump to Page
Arrow icon Top

Contact Us

We use cookies to improve your website experience, provide additional security, and remember you when you return to the website. This website does not respond to "Do Not Track" signals. By clicking "Accept," you agree to our use of cookies. To learn more about how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

Necessary Cookies

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. These cookies may only be disabled by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Analytical Cookies

Analytical cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.