In dismissing a plaintiff’s FCRA claims, an Illinois district court asserted that emotional harm was not an injury that the FCRA sought to protect consumers from, thus, such harm “cannot be an injury in fact for standing purposes.”
10/31/2022 4:00 P.M.
4 minute read
Angulo v. Truist Bank, No. 22 C 923, 2022 WL 14632991
Access to this page is restricted.
Please log in.