Skip to main content

Search

Truth in Lending: 11.2.3.1 The Factual Background of Ramirez

In 2021, the Supreme Court issued a second major decision, TransUnion L.L.C. v. Ramirez,37 about the application of Article III to claims under federal consumer protection laws. The case arose when TransUnion, one of the “Big Three” nationwide consumer reporting agencies, issued a report identifying a car buyer, Sergio Ramirez, as a potential terrorist.

Truth in Lending: 11.2.3.4 When Does Harm Have a Close Relationship to Harm Traditionally Recognized As a Basis for a Lawsuit?

Ramirez provides more detail about one of the two alternative tests for Article III standing articulated in Spokeo: that the harm the plaintiff suffered has a “close relationship” to a harm traditionally recognized as providing a basis for a lawsuit in American courts.52 In practice, this will most often mean looking for a “common-law analogue.”53 But this does not mean a plaintiff must match every element of a common law cause of action: Ramirez states that Ar

Consumer Banking and Payments Law: 6.5.2.1a Exemptions from Regulation E Protections for Remittances

The CFPB’s original regulations for remittances, adopted in 2013, excluded from the definition of “remittance transfer provider” those providers who, in the normal course of business, provided 100 or fewer remittance transfers in both the previous and the current calendar year.166 The 2020 amendments to these regulations increased the threshold to 500 or fewer remittance transfers in both the previous and current calendar year.167