Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 23 APRIL 2013

Georgia Puts Up Another Hurdle For Class Certification

In a recent case, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia denied a plaintiff's motion to certify a class action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act consisting of all individuals who had been the subject of an adverse criminal background report, whether accurate or inaccurate, generated by the defendant.

United StatesEmployment and HR

In Farmer v. The Phillips Agency, 285 F.R.D. 685 (N.D. Ga. 2012), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia denied a plaintiff's motion to certify a class action under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) consisting of all individuals who had been the subject of an adverse criminal background report, whether accurate or inaccurate, generated by the defendant, The Phillips Agency.

In doing so, the Northern District of Georgia became the first court to explicitly state that a plaintiff bringing claims under Section 1681k(a)(2) of the FCRA must establish that the underlying consumer report was not "complete and up to date." The court's decision not only clarifies the essential elements of a cause of action under Section 1681k(a)(2), but it also makes it considerably more difficult for plaintiffs to certify class actions under the provision going forward.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from