Guarisma v. Microsoft Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1681 · 15 U.S.C. § 1681C · 15 U.S.C. § 1681E · 15 U.S.C. § 1681N
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Havens Realty Corp. v. Coleman · Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he "FACTA arose from a desire to prevent identity theft that can occur when card holders' private financial information, such as a card holder's complete credit card number, is exposed on electronically printed payment card receipts." Creative Hosp. Ventures, Inc. v. U.S. Liab. Ins. Co. , 655 F.Supp.2d 1316 , 1333 (S.D. Fla. 2009), rev'd in part , 444 Fed. Appx. 370 (11th Cir. 2011) ; see also 149 Cong. Rec. H8122-02 (statement of Rep. Shadegg) ("[T]he bill requires that anytime a transaction is made and information is transmitted using a credit card number, that number has to be truncated so that someone who wants to steal your identity by grabbing a hold of your credit card number will not have the full number " (alteration added) ); 149 Cong. Rec. H8122-02 (statement of Rep. Jackson-Lee) ("This bill ...will include comprehensive identity theft...provisions." (alterations added) ); H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 396, 108th Cong., 1st Sess. (2003) (statement of Rep. Oxley) (" One of the central elements of [the FACTA bill] was to make the new fraud prevention...contained in the legislation the new uniform national standards on those subject matters. The bill was drafted in this way because identity theft is a national concern ." (alterations added) ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“In other words, the Supreme Court recognized where Congress has endowed plaintiffs with a substantive legal right, as opposed to creating a procedural requirement, the plaintiffs may sue to enforce such a right without establishing additional harm.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(1) in enacting the FDCPA, Congress created a substantive right to receive the required disclosures in relevant communications; and (2) the defendant violated this substantive right by failing to provide such disclosures.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.