Burrell v. DFS Services, LLC

753 F. Supp. 2d 438 (2010)

From our private database of 46,000+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Burrell v. DFS Services, LLC

United States District Court for the District of New Jersey
753 F. Supp. 2d 438 (2010)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

Robert Burrell (plaintiff) was a victim of identity theft. Between April 2008 and June 2009, the thief charged $10,000 on Burrell’s credit card administered by DFS Services, LLC (Discover) (defendant) and incurred $1,000 worth of charges under Burrell’s identity from Helio, LLC (defendant). After discovering the identity theft, Burrell disputed the charges by submitting written complaints to both Discover and Helio. Despite Burrell’s disputes, Discover and Helio sent information to credit-reporting agencies indicating that Burrell was delinquent on his bills. In March 2010, Burrell filed a complaint with the three major credit-reporting agencies disputing the debts incurred by the theft. In May 2010, Burrell filed a lawsuit in federal court against Discover and Helio, arguing that the companies violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by reporting that he was delinquent on bills that the companies should have known were fraudulent. Specifically, Burrell claimed that Discover and Helio violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681s-2(a) and 1681s-2(b) by failing to ensure the accuracy of information they sent to the credit-reporting agencies and by failing to investigate and correct inaccurate information previously sent. Discover and Helio moved to dismiss Burrell’s claims, arguing that Burrell had no private right of action under § 1681s-2(a). Further, Discover and Helio argued that Burrell failed to fulfill procedural requirements imposed by § 1681s-2(b), which requires a consumer to file a complaint with a credit-reporting agency before filing a lawsuit against the creditor that failed to investigate or correct inaccurate information.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Debevoise, J.)

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 743,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead 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.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 743,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,000 briefs, keyed to 986 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 743,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,000 briefs - keyed to 986 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership