Cotto v. Jenney’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1681 · 15 U.S.C. § 1681A · 15 U.S.C. § 1681B · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Koropoulos v. Credit Bureau, Inc. · Ippolito v. WNS, Inc. · William Douglas Thompson, III v. San Antonio Retail Merchants Association · 381 F. Supp. 473 - Conley v. TRW Credit Data
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Information may be unreasonably reported and misleading even if it is public information. Indeed, in this case, a jury may well determine that defendants’ report ... that an Iris Cotto on Chestnut Street was behind in her rent — even though technically true and information in the public domain — was negligent because it was the wrong Iris Cotto. The manner in which the public information was reported may violate the FCRA.”
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.