Office of Attorney General Pam Bondi
Appellate Alert
__________________________________________________________________
Date issued: 01/13/2015
Editor: Betsy Stupski
Clicking the icon following the number of each case cited below will link you directly to the cited opinion. In addition, full texts of recent slip opinions are available by clicking "VIEW" at the top of your screen, then "SLIP OPINIONS." AGOs are available in the separate AGO database.
Appellate Alert 2015-1
January 13, 2015
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals
Collins v. Experian Information Solutions 1/5/15
14-11111
Credit reporting company did not have to report inaccurate information to third party in order to be liable under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Collins sued Experian for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, alleging that they failed to make a reasonable investigation of disputed information in his credit file. The district court issued a summary judgment in favor of Experian because no information had been shared with third parties.
Collins appealed and the Eleventh Circuit reversed stating, “ We reverse the district court’s determination that third-party publication is necessary in order for a consumer to be entitled to actual damages under 15 U.S.C.§1681i(a).
14-11111
Fourth District Court of Appeal
Nucci v. Target Corporation 4D14-138
1/7/15
Court found that the privacy interest in Facebook photographs was minimal.
Pre-accident and post-accident Facebook photographs that could lead to relevant evidence were discoverable.
Nucci sued after Target after a slip and fall incident in one of their stores. During discovery Target sought photographs from Nucci’s Facebook page. Nucci objected, claiming that she had a privacy interest in the photos. The trial court ordered production of the photos.
Nucci petitioned for a writ of certiorari with the Fourth District, asking the court to quash the order. The Court found that the photographs sought were reasonably calculated to the discovery of admissible evidence and that Nucci’s privacy interest in the photographs was minimal. The Court said, “We agree with those cases concluding that generally, the photographs posted on a social networking site are neither privileged nor protected by any right of privacy, regardless of any privacy settings that the user may have established.”
4D14-138