Tag Archives: Standing

SCOTUS Opinion: Mere Violation Of A Statutory Right Not Inherently Sufficient To Provide Standing In Class Action

Over 8,000 individuals sued as a class under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, alleging that TransUnion falsely inserted alerts on their credit histories because they happened to have the same first and last name as serious criminals monitored by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), and that TransUnion had formatting errors in its reports. At trial, the ... Read More

SCOTUS Opinion: Beneficiaries Receiving Full Benefits Have No Standing To Challenge ERISA Plan Governance

U.S. Bank maintains a retirement plan for its employees. Two of those beneficiaries, who had retired, were entitled to a fixed payment each month, and received every such payment. Regardless, they sued their former employer under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, arguing that the plan had been mismanaged and should be re-payed about $750 million. The Eighth ... Read More

SCOTUS Opinion: Court Clarifies What “Confidential” Information is not Subject to a Freedom of Information Act Request

In Food Marketing Institute v. Argus Leader Media, a newspaper filed a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to the Department of Agriculture requesting information about retail stores who participate in the national food stamp program. The Department declined to provide store-level data on the basis that it was “confidential” and thus precluded from disclosure under ... Read More

SCOTUS Opinion: Google Class Action Settlement In Danger Of Losing Standing

When a person enters search terms on Google, and then selects a web page that comes up in the search results, Google sends the host of the web page the search terms the person used to locate the page. Certain plaintiffs filed suit as a class, arguing that Google’s practice violated the Stored Communications Act. The parties settled, with ... Read More

Plaintiffs Lacked Standing To Bring Gerrymandering Claims

In Gill v. Whitford, twelve Democratic voters brought claims arguing that the redrawing of Wisconsin’s districts after the 2010 census was an unconstitutional gerrymandering that made it harder for Democratic candidates to get elected. Specifically, the redrawing allegedly “cracked” Democratic voters into other districts where they could not reap a majority, and “packed” Democratic voters into a few districts ... Read More