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.
NACA's
Practice Areas
Browse Our
Attorney Directory
Press Inquiries
For press inquiries, contact Ira Rheingold.
To be added to our press/media mailing list, please contact Christine Hines.
Request Amicus Support
To request amicus support, please complete the amicus brief consideration form.