CURTIS J. COLLINS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
EQUABLE ASCENT FINANCIAL, LLC, ET AL., DEFENDANTS, EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLEE
PER CURIAM: On January 15, 2015, this Court reversed the district court’s determination that third-party publication is necessary for a consumer to be entitled to actual damages under 15 U.S.C. § 1681i(a) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), which requires a consumer reporting agency (CRA) to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation of disputed information contained in a consumer’s credit file. We remanded to the district court for further proceedings on Curtis J. Collins’ claim alleging a negligent violation of § 1681i(a).
We affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment on Collins’ claim that Experian Information Solutions, Inc., willfully violated its duty to conduct a reasonable reinvestigation under § 1681i(a).
Collins v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc., 775 F. 3d 1330, 1336 (11th Cir.2015).
Collins requests we rehear the willfulness portion of our opinion. Collins asserts Safeco Insurance Co. of America v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47, 70,127 S.Ct. 2201, 2216, 167 L.Ed.2d 1045 (2007), provides that if a CRA had “the benefit of guidance from the courts of appeals ... that might have warned it away from the view [of the FCRA] it took,” a jury question exists regarding whether the CRA willfully violated the FCRA. He contends three courts of appeals have warned CRAs that it is unreasonable to merely contact the creditor to verify the consumer’s debt when there is other information provided by the consumer that calls the creditor’s data into question; therefore a jury question is presented. See Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F. 3d 220, 226-27 (3d Cir.1997); Henson v. CSC Credit Servs., 29 F. 3d 280, 286-87 (7th Cir.1994); Stevenson v. TRW Inc., 987 F. 2d 288, 293-94 (5th Cir.1993).
We deny his petition because Collins did not raise the argument contained in his petition for rehearing in his initial brief on appeal. See United States v. Levy, 379 F. 3d 1241, 1242 (11th Cir.2004).
Collins premises his entire argument on one sentence he did not cite, as interpreted through three circuit court cases he did not cite. We did not decide the issue presented in Collins’ petition for rehearing, and neither do we decide the issue now. . Nor did he raise it in his reply brief.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marchisio v. Carrington Mortg. Servs., LLC, 919 F.3d 1288 (11th Cir. 2019)…uirement imposed under this subchapter is liable to the affected consumer for actual, statutory, or punitive damages. Collins v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., 775 F.3d 1330, 1336 (11th Cir. 2015), on reh❜g sub nom. Collins v. Equable Ascent Fin., LLC, 781 F.3d 1270 (11th Cir. 2015). The Supreme Court 19 Case: 17-10584 Date Filed: 03/25/2019 Page: 20 of 60 has held that "reckless disregard of a requirement of FCRA would qualify as a willful violation within the meaning of § 1681n(a)." Safeco Ins. Co. of Am.…
-
Sokol v. TransUnion, LLC (S.D. Fla. 2022)…this subchapter with respect to any consumer is liable to that consumer for actual, statutory, or punitive damages.” Collins v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., 775 F. 3d 1330, 1336 (11th Cir. 2015), on reh’g sub nom. Collins v. Equable Ascent Fin., LLC, 781 F. 3d 1270 (11th Cir. 2015) (cleaned up). “A violation is ‘willful’ for the purposes of the FCRA if the defendant violates the terms of the Act with knowledge or reckless disregard for the law.” Id. (cleaned up). “A company subject to FCRA does not act in reck…
Authorities Cited
- Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47 (U.S. 2007)
- United States v. Raphael R. Levy, 379 F.3d 1241 (11th Cir. 2004)
- Collins v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc., 775 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 2015)
- Stevenson v. TRW Inc., 987 F.2d 288 (5th Cir. 1993)