Supreme Court declines to hear appeal of previous FCRA ruling
Tags : FCRA Compliance
The appeal sought review of the highly disputed issue of whether/when statutory violations of the FCRA allow workers to sue businesses under the high court’s previous Spokeo decision.
The Supreme Court’s previous Spokeo ruling stated that would-be plaintiffs cannot sue over statutory violations alone, but must also show a violation caused them a “concrete and particularized” injury.
In the case in question – the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Syed v. M-I, LLC – the lower court held that the plaintiff met this requirement as the prospective employer willfully violated the federal Fair Credit Report Act (FCRA) by failing to comply with disclosure requirements before procuring consumer reports for employment purposes.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court denied M-I's petition for certiorari. The Supreme Court provided no explanation for its decision to decline to hear the appeal.
Source: Law360.com, 11/13/2017
We cannot express enough how much we have enjoyed working with BIG! It has really benefitted our processing and ease of doing business!
I enjoy collaborating with BIG, and know that if I have to reach out with a question/concern, a positive attitude with a willingness to find resolve is on the other side of an email or a phone call.
You have been the most professional and most helpful business partner that I have ever been associated with — always there to assist us and with rapid turnaround times.
I am confident whenever we add a product with your company that I will have a good experience.
We have received superior service and we know this is what you and your team strive for. We are grateful for the dedication, level of professionalism and effort shown.