Logourl black
From our private database of 14,000+ case briefs...

Andrews v. TRW

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
225 F.3d 1063 (2000)


Facts

Andrea Andrews obtained the social security number of Adelaide Andrews (plaintiff). Over a two-year period, Andrea applied for credit from companies using Adelaide’s social security number. Each of these credit companies were subscribed to the services of TRW, Inc. (TRW) (defendant), a consumer-credit reporting agency, and requested that TRW provide the credit companies with Adelaide’s credit report. Because Andrea’s last name matched the social security number that TRW had on file, TRW treated the requests from the credit companies as if they involved Adelaide, and furnished Adelaide’s credit report to each company that submitted a request. Adelaide later learned of Andrea’s deception and asked TRW to delete Andrea’s fraudulent activity from Adelaide’s file. TRW complied with this request. Adelaide then filed a complaint against TRW, seeking damages based on TRW’s violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (Act), 15 U.S.C. § 1681. Adelaide alleged that TRW had furnished reports to companies without reasonable grounds for believing she was the consumer whom the credit application involved, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681b and 1681e(a). Adelaide further claimed that TRW had failed to maintain reasonable procedures to ensure the accuracy of the information provided regarding individuals, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1681e(b). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of TRW as to the first claim, and the jury found in favor of TRW as to the second claim. Adelaide appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Noonan, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A “yes” or “no” answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.