Consumer-Law Records

Comparable privacy/tracking rulings split: Bayhealth's confidentiality claim survived and Gunnar Optiks' BIPA claim was revived on remand, but Integris shows analogous 'sharing data with third parties' claims remain unresolved (unclear). No wiretap-specific ruling directly tracks Walmart's facts, so outcome is fact-dependent on the tracking technology alleged.

46 Labs is a carrier-level telecom platform, not a direct consumer-facing caller, making liability theory closer to League of Women Voters v. Kramer (carrier facilitating robocalls survived MTD) than typical direct-caller TCPA suits like Hulce or Howard, which were dismissed on technical initiation/solicitation grounds.

Minano v. DLJ Mortgage Capital shows courts frequently dismiss FCRA furnisher claims for lack of private right of action or insufficient pleading, while Askins v. CRST confirms bare statutory violations can still confer standing. TransUnion's $40M Ninth Circuit jury verdict shows real trial exposure once claims survive threshold motions.

Minano v. DLJ shows core FCRA furnisher claims often dismissed for lack of private right of action or insufficient pleading, while Askins v. CRST confirms bare disclosure violations can survive on standing grounds. Clarity Services faces repeated individual FCRA/FDCPA filings suggesting recurring but fact-specific exposure rather than uniform liability.

False-advertising suits against small DTC supplement brands rarely reach the scale of comparables like Western Union or IM Mastery Academy; Guthrie and Citizens of Humanity show CA courts scrutinize individualized reliance/proof issues that could sink certification.

Price v. Diab confirms ADA accessibility claims can succeed via default judgment with injunctive relief, but fee entitlement remains contested even after liability is established. No direct precedent here addresses merits of the specific access barrier alleged against Nextten Stauer.

ADA website-accessibility suits in S.D.N.Y. often survive dismissal when paired with NYC Human Rights Law damages claims, but circuit guidance on website coverage remains unsettled. Price v. Diab shows fee-shifting risk even after default judgment, raising defendant exposure beyond injunctive relief.

Comparable privacy rulings split: Bayhealth and Gunnar Optiks (2nd ruling) survived on confidentiality/BIPA theories, while Integris and LabCorp saw dismissals or removal denials, showing courts scrutinize factual specificity of tracking/disclosure claims before allowing wiretap theories forward.

Comparable privacy/wiretap rulings split: Doe v. Bayhealth allowed confidentiality claims to survive while Integris Health found similar health-data-sharing claims 'unclear' and dismissed removal grounds; Clements v. Gunnar Optiks shows courts often defer dismissal to factual record. No direct wiretap statute ruling in this set raises uncertainty for Bozzuto's CIPA-type claim.

Comparable FCRA/FDCPA rulings split: Askins v. CRST found bare disclosure violations sufficient for standing, while Minano v. DLJ and Soul v. Christiansen dismissed most FCRA/FDCPA counts for insufficient pleading or lack of private right of action. Outcome likely turns on which specific FCRA/FDCPA provision is pled and whether concrete injury is alleged.

TCPA robocall claims split in comparables: Howard, Perrong, and Hulce were dismissed on technical grounds (prerecorded-voice definition, legislator exemption, non-solicitation calls), while League of Women Voters v. Kramer survived a motion to dismiss on similar robocall theory. Outcome likely hinges on specific factual allegations about call content and consent.

No direct precedent on ADA website/facility accessibility merits; Price v. Diab shows courts will award fees/injunctive relief once liability is established via default, but comparables here are largely inapposite (ECOA, fee-shifting procedure).

FCRA furnisher/CRA claims show split outcomes: Minano v. DLJ Mortgage Capital dismissed several FCRA counts for lack of private right of action, while Askins v. CRST Expedited let a bare disclosure violation survive on standing grounds. TransUnion's own $40M Ninth Circuit jury verdict shows real trial exposure if claims survive pleading stage.

Minano v. DLJ shows FCRA furnisher claims routinely dismissed for no private right of action or insufficient pleading, while Askins and Wright show disclosure/procedural FCRA claims can survive if well-pled. Experian faces repeat individual FCRA suits (Harding, Fuller, Butler, etc.), suggesting recurring but fact-specific disputes rather than uniform liability.

Minano v. DLJ shows FCRA furnisher claims often survive only in part, with many counts dismissed for lack of private right of action or insufficient pleading. Askins shows disclosure-based FCRA claims can survive standing challenges, but most other comparables are factually unrelated to FCRA/Experian disputes.