For More Information















Past Successes

Past Successes

Sanders v. Global Radar Acquisition – $3.6 million settlement

CLA resolved the FCRA claims of a class of consumers on whom Global Radar provided background checks without obtaining the appropriate certifications from the users of those reports. The case resulted in a settlement fund of $3.6 million, from which class members received cash payments.

Gibbs v. Rees and TCV – $50 million settlement

CLA represented a national class of consumers who borrowed money at what they believed were legal rates because of the lenders’ supposed alignment with American Indian Tribes. CLA and its co-counsel were successful in challenging the legality of the loans, resulting in the Defendants paying $50 million in cash to reimburse class members, voiding the illegal loans, and agreeing not to try to collect on the illegal loans.

Berry v. LexisNexis Risk Management, Inc. – groundbreaking settlement

CLA represented a class of consumers against a company that claimed the FCRA did not apply to it, so it would not comply with any of the FCRA’s requirements. The resulting settlement paid money to class members who had inaccurate reports and, in the most-significant aspect of the settlement, had LexisNexis revamp one of its key businesses so that it complied with the FCRA and create an entirely new business that also provided FCRA-like rights to consumers.

Brim v. Midland Credit Management – $723,000 FCRA jury verdict

A federal jury returned a verdict for CLA’s client Mr. Brim against debt buyer Midland Credit Management in a case where Midland attempted to collect a debt that Mr. Brim had paid, but the original creditor applied his payment to another account and claimed he never paid. Since Mr. Brim won at trial, Midland also paid his attorneys’ fees under the FCRA.

Domonoske/Rivera v. Bank of America – $10 million settlement

CLA negotiated an eight-figure settlement for a class of consumers alleging Bank of America failed to meet the FCRA’s requirement that it provide certain credit disclosures to consumers in a timely manner. Eligible class members received cash payments as part of the settlement.

Hargrett v. Amazon.com – $5 million settlement

CLA resolved the FCRA claims of approximately 454,000 consumers that led to one of the country’s largest employers revising its background-check procedures so they would comply with the FCRA. Class members also had the ability to claim a share of up to $5 million in gift-card or cash settlement benefits.

Thomas v. Equifax Information Services, LLC – watershed settlement

CLA represented a class against Equifax for violations of the FCRA relating to its reporting of public records like liens and judgments. The result was a groundbreaking, nationwide settlement in which Equifax stopped reporting such information for a period of several years, and could only commence reporting them again if it met certain requirements designed to make that reporting as accurate as possible. Equifax also agreed to the creation of a no-fault remedy for recovery of significant money damages for any consumer that was harmed by the reporting of inaccurate civil judgments or tax liens.

Moody v. Ascenda USA, Inc. – $2.5 million settlement

CLA resolved claims of nearly 50,000 consumers nationwide, and leading to both defendants revising their procedures so that they would comply with the FCRA. The settlement allowed class members to receive shares of two settlement pools, $1.1 million from Ascenda and $1.4 million from Verified Credentials.

Ridenour v. Sterling Infosystems, Inc. – $5.9 million settlement

CLA represented a nationwide class of 36,002 consumers on whom Sterling sold background checks to employers. All told, a national class and a subclass of Virginians were eligible for shares of the $5.9 million settlement.

Gibbs v. Plain Green, LLC and Great Plains Lending, LLC – $55 million groundbreaking settlement

CLA represented classes against lenders Plain Green, LLC and Great Plains Lending, LLC for violations of federal and various state laws by (a) making and collecting loans with annual interest rates in excess of the amount allowed by state law; (b) lending to consumers when these entities were required to have a license from a state to lend and did not have that license; (c) servicing or collecting activities on the illegal loans; and (d) their involvement in and support of other parties’ conduct. The case resulted in a watershed settlement the defendants refunded consumers’ money, cancelled loans, agreed to cease attempting to collect them and agreed not to sell, transfer, or assign the loans. They also agreed not to sell borrowers’ personal information. The consumer refunds alone totaled approximately $55,750,000.

Clark v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. – watershed settlement

CLA represented a national class against Experian for violations of the FCRA relating to how accurately Experian reported public records like civil judgments and tax liens. This second groundbreaking settlement provided relief to every consumer that suffered some type of adverse action as a result of Experian’s inaccurate reporting of a judgment or lien. Experian also agreed to not include any civil judgment or tax lien on any consumer report unless the underlying public records, as well as the disposition, are available to Experian with sufficient personal identifying information to conclusively match the record to a consumer file.

Campos-Carranza v. Credit Plus, Inc. – $750,000 settlement

CLA resolved the FCRA claims of approximately 18,500 consumers, alleging Credit Plus failed to establish or follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the information contained on MERS reports, some of the most commonly used reports in home-buying transactions.

Kelly v. Business Information Group, Inc. – $3.3 million settlement

CLA represented a national class of consumers on whom the defendant sold reports to potential employers without meeting FCRA requirements for notifying consumers about the reports or ensuring their contents were complete and up-to-date. The settlement provided practice changes and a cash settlement fund of $3,300,000 from which class members received cash payments.

Clark v. TransUnion, LLC – groundbreaking settlement

CLA represented a class of approximately 20 million consumers against TransUnion for violations of the FCRA. In yet another first-of-its-kind settlement, TransUnion agreed to that all existing public records (like tax liens and civil judgments) will be removed from consumer’s reports. Class members were also eligible for cash payments due to Trans Union’s misreporting of these records.

Witt v. Corelogic National Background Data, LLC – groundbreaking settlement

CLA’s dogged investigation and skill allowed it to resolve the FCRA claims of over 200,000 consumers against defendants who steadfastly claimed the FCRA did not apply to them, so they owed consumers no FCRA protections. The settlement paid cash to class members and also required defendants to agree the FCRA applied to their business and implement FCRA-compliant procedures.

Manuel v. Wells Fargo Bank – $12 million settlement

CLA represented a class against Wells Fargo Bank for violations of the FCRA relating to the obtaining and use of background checks for employees and applicants. The case resulted in a nationwide settlement of $12,000,000, from which class members obtained shares.

Henderson v. AlliedBarton Security Services, LLC – $2.4 million settlement

CLA resolved the FCRA claims of approximately 20,926 against AlliedBarton Security Services for failure to provide notice to individuals about whom it ran employment background checks and did not provide appropriate notice in doing so. Class members received shares of a $2,400,000 settlement pool.

Ryals v. Strategic Screening Solutions, Inc. – $1.6 million settlement

CLA represented a class of consumers against Strategic Screening for failure to provide notice to individuals about whom it ran employment background checks and did not provide appropriate notice. Class members received shares of a $1,600,000 settlement fund.

Thomas v. Backgroundchecks.com – $18 million settlement

CLA resolved FCRA claims for a class of about 430,000 consumers who Backgroundchecks.com failed to properly notify when it sold employment background checks about them. The settlement resulted in Backgroundchecks.com paying $18 million from which class members received a portion.

Thomas v. FTS USA, LLC – $1.3 million settlement

CLA represented a class of applicants and employees against FTS USA for FCRA violations when it obtained and used background checks. The case went to trial before a jury and resulted in a class settlement of $1,300,000 during trial.

Ellis v. Swift Transportation – $5.5 million settlement

CLA represented two separate classes of employees and applicants of Swift Transportation for failures in its obtaining background checks on those individuals. The resulting settlement provided $5,053,500 to benefit class members.

Henderson v. Acxiom – $20.8 million settlement

In a groundbreaking settlement against one of the largest data aggregators in the United States, CLA represented a class of consumers on whom Acxiom ran employment background checks without giving them proper notice. The case resulted in a class settlement of $20,800,000, from which class members obtained shares.

Milbourne v. JRK Residential – $375,000 settlement

CLA represented a class of approximately 1,105 employees and applicants challenging JRK’s obtaining and using of background checks. The case went to trial before a jury and resulted in a class settlement of $375,000 during trial.

Henderson v. Corelogic National Background Data, LLC – $7.54 million settlement

CLA represented a class of approximately 75,400 consumers that Corelogic falsely reported were sex offenders, largely because Corelogic pretended the FCRA did not apply to its business and so it had no duty, and therefore no process, to accurately report such information. The case resulted in a settlement of $7,540,000 from which class members received shares.

Marcum v. Dolgencorp – $4.08 million settlement

CLA represented a class of applicants and employees challenging Dollar General’s obtaining and use of background checks as part of its hiring process. The settlement resulted in Dollar General changing its application procedures nationally as well as paying $4,080,000 into a settlement fund from which class members obtained cash benefits.

Henderson v. Verifications, Inc. – $3.6 million settlement

CLA resolved the FCRA claims of approximately 41,049 individuals alleging Verifications failed to properly notify them when reporting certain information to employers and for failing to properly investigate consumers’ disputes of inaccurate reporting. The two-part settlement paid one group from a $2.84 million fund for failing to provide notice and those who were able to show actual damages, shares of a separate $750,000 fund.

Bell v. U.S. Express – $2.75 million settlement

CLA represented a class of approximately 85,362 applicants against U.S. Express for failing to properly notify them when using the contents of background checks to make adverse hiring decisions. U.S. Express paid $2,750,000 into a settlement fund from which class members received cash payments.

Goode v. First Advantage LNS Screening Solutions, Inc. – $2.365 million settlement

CLA represented a class of job applicants against First Advantage for its failure to provide notice before using the contents of background checks against those applicants and its failure to provide to those who asked all information First Advantage possessed about them. The case resulted in a settlement fund of $2,365,000, from which class members received shares.

Soutter v. Equifax – $3 million settlement

In another first-of-its kind settlement, CLA represented a class of approximately 88,573 members on whom Equifax inaccurately reported public records like tax liens and civil judgments. In addition to paying $3 million from which class members received benefits, Equifax agreed to stop reporting, for five years, all Virginia General District Court judgments for all consumers.

Beverly v. Choicepoint, Inc. – $6.89 million settlement

CLA resolved the FCRA claims of approximately 81,971 individuals on whom ChoicePoint ran background checks for employers. Two separate settlement classes shared in settlement funds of $2,890,000 and $4,000,000.

Ryals v. Hireright Solutions, Inc. – $28.375 million settlement

In one of the largest FCRA class settlements to date, CLA represented a class against HireRight for failure to provide notice to consumers on whom HireRight reported negative information and, when consumers disputed inaccuracies, HireRight failed to properly investigate. The case resulted in a nationwide settlement of $28,375,000 from which class members received benefits.

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.