October

The Ninth Circuit recently issued its decision on remand in Spokeo, reversing and remanding the case to the District Court.
 
The Ninth Circuit issued its decision regarding whether the plaintiff had sufficiently pled a concrete injury required to establish Article III standing. He was found to have standing to pursue his claim of harm, holding" that Congress established the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) provisions at issue to protect consumers' concrete interests."
 
The Court also found that because the plaintiff alleged Spokeo prepared an inaccurate report and published that report on the Internet, his claim implicates his "concrete interests in truthful credit reporting”.
 
The decision is one in a wave of cases discussing the requirement of "concrete harm" in FCRA matters.

When Postmates failed to hire potential candidates based on background checks, the applicants argued the business was in violation of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act.

The plaintiffs claim the company did not provide a copy of background check results or the legally required stand-alone disclosure before requesting the background checks.

Under the settlement terms of a class action lawsuit filed by three denied applicants, Postmates must create a $2.5 million settlement fund to be distributed to Class Members.

The Texas Supreme Court recently rejected the theory holding that an employee's self-publication of defamatory statements cannot satisfy the publication element of a defamation claim. It further confirmed that there is no independent cause of action for compelled self-publication defamation under Texas law.
 
In Exxon Mobil Corp., et al. v. Rincones, Rinecones contended that he did not use drugs and that there must have been some negligence in the way a failed drug test was handled that led to his termination.
 
Moving forward, plaintiffs claiming defamation will be required to show that a defendant actually published a defamatory statement to a third party to maintain a cause of action.