Amicus Briefs

September 10, 2010 | Filed under: Credit Reporting
Court:
Supreme Court of California

The issues presented in this case implicate the interests of millions of American consumers whose sensitive personal information is regularly shared, often without their knowledge, among financial firms, insurance companies, landlords, employers and others. The question presented here is whether the Fair Credit Reporting Act (15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq.) (“FCRA”) preempts the CMIA in instances in which a health care provider improperly discloses confidential medical information to a third party, where that third party happens to be a consumer reporting agency as defined by the FCRA.
 

January 9, 2009 | Filed under: Credit Reporting | Tagged with: FCRA
Court:
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

Congress’s findings and statement of purpose when it enacted the FCRA, its ongoing oversight, and its recent amendments demonstrate the significance it rightly placed on the integrity and confidentiality of the nation’s consumer reporting system. Congress also recognized that public enforcement agencies do not have the capability to enforce the FCRA by themselves. Congress instead gave primary responsibility to the persons with the greatest interest in accomplishing such a task – individual consumers policing their own files, protecting their own privacy and financial interests, and when necessary, enforcing the FCRA’s private statutory remedies. Affirming the opinion would seriously undermine these objectives.
 

December 18, 2006 | Filed under: Credit Reporting | Tagged with: FCRA
Court:
US Supreme Court

NACA's amicus brief in Safeco v. Burr and Geico v. Edo Fair Credit Reporting cases before the United States Supreme Court.
 

March 27, 2006 | Filed under: Credit Reporting | Tagged with: FCRA
Court:
Fourth District Court

The District Court erroneously accepted Experian's "accuracy only" argument and improperly dismissed the claim regarding its reinventigation duties. Because the District Court was misled by Experian regarding both the statutory scheme and this Court's case law, the court erred by not discussing the difference in the duties that Congress has required. The District Court's omission is shown by the absence of any citation to § 1681i and the lack of any discussion regarding the law and facts of this reinvestigation claim.
 

September 8, 2004 | Filed under: Credit Reporting | Tagged with: FCRA
Court:
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

NACA, together with AARP, ACLU of Northern California, California Public Interest Research Group, Consumer Federation of California, Consumers Union, Electronic Privacy Information Center, Evan Hendricks, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, and US PIRG, filed this amicus brief in the Ninth Circuit, supporting the California Financial Information Privacy Act, Cal. Fin. Code § 4050 et seq. (2004), popularly known as "SB1." This brief was written by Chris Hoofnagle of Electronic Privacy Information Center.
 

| Filed under: Credit Reporting
Court:
California Supreme Court

Amicus Curiae Brief Requesting a Republish of Connor vs First Student. 

Pages