All Things Newz
Law \ Legal

TransUnion And Concrete Harm: One Year Later – Personal Injury

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2021 ruling
in TransUnion LLC v. Ramirez  resolved
fundamental constitutional questions about what a plaintiff must do
to establish standing to bring a federal lawsuit. The Court held
that to do so, a plaintiff must have suffered a
“concrete” injury, and it clarified the standard for
determining whether an alleged injury is sufficiently concrete.

With this decision, the Court did much to untangle the complex
knot of interpretation and precedent that sprang up following its
earlier, 2016 decision in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins.
This white paper features a deep dive into
the Spokeo  and TransUnion 
decisions, the Supreme Court’s reasoning in each case, its
roots in the Anglo-American legal tradition and the American
Founding, and the implications of TransUnion 
for civil litigation generally.

Originally Published by US Chamber of Commerce Institute for
Legal Reform

Visit us at

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider
comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the
“Mayer Brown Practices”). The Mayer Brown Practices are:
Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited
liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown
International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in
England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors
Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC
303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown
JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia;
and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with
which Mayer Brown is associated. “Mayer Brown” and the
Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in
their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2020. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights

Mayer Brown
article provides information and comments on legal
issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a
comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not
intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific
legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters
discussed herein.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration from United States

It’s “Show Cause” Time In Delaware

RPX Corporation

In mid-April, District of Delaware Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly posted two new standing orders related to that courtroom’s disclosure requirements: one requiring litigants to disclose details…

A First Sighting Of Zuckerberg Decision In California

Allen Matkins Leck Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP

Last year, the Delaware Supreme Court adopted a tripartite test for assessing demand futility allegations in derivative actions. United Food & Commercial Workers Union v. Zuckerberg…

Judicial Review Of An Arbitrator’s Privilege Rulings

Morvillo Abramowitz Grand Iason & Anello

When parties agree to arbitrate their disputes, they consent to have an arbitrator, rather than a court, resolve disputes about whether particular documents are discoverable, including whether the documents are privileged.

Source link

Related posts

Protection From Eviction In Bahrain – Landlord & Tenant – Leases

NY Dept. Of Financial Services’ First Enforcement Action Against A Crypto Company, And What It Means For Crypto Trading – Fin Tech

Top Tips To Protect A Company’s Confidential Information When Sharing With Others – Trade Secrets