DiGianni v. Stern's
Decision Date | 14 June 1994 |
Docket Number | 1452,Nos. 1448,D,s. 1448 |
Citation | 26 F.3d 346 |
Parties | Lois M. DiGIANNI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STERN'S, Defendant-Appellee. Lois M. DiGIANNI, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BLOOMINGDALES, INC., Defendant-Appellee. ockets 93-9218, 93-9222. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit |
Lois M. DiGianni, Brooklyn, NY, pro se.
Jo Ellen Silberstein, New York City (Suzanne E. Hyer, Hinckley & Silbert, New York City, of counsel), for defendants-appellees.
Before: MESKILL, MINER and MAHONEY, Circuit Judges.
I.
Plaintiff-appellant Lois M. DiGianni, pro se, appeals from two judgments entered on October 21, 1993 in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Dearie, J.) dismissing her complaints in separate actions against defendants-appellees Stern's Department Stores, Inc. and Bloomingdale's, Inc. to recover damages under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. Secs. 1681-1681t ("FCRA"). The district court concluded that neither Stern's nor Bloomingdale's was a "consumer reporting agency" within the meaning of the FCRA and that the allegedly inaccurate information disseminated by them did not constitute "consumer reports" within the meaning of the FCRA.
DiGianni filed complaints in these actions against Stern's and Bloomingdale's on February 10, 1993. She also has filed related lawsuits against TRW, Saks Fifth Avenue, Sears, Roebuck & Co., Macy's Northeast, J.C. Penny, United Retail Stores and Abraham and Strauss. The underlying facts of these cases were clarified to some extent at a July 23, 1993 pre-motion hearing before the district court. Apparently, an acquaintance of DiGianni obtained her social security number and opened a number of credit accounts at various department stores. Different names and addresses were used on the accounts, but the social security number on each was DiGianni's. The accounts became delinquent and appeared on credit reports issued by TRW and Transunion, companies engaged in the business of credit reporting.
In the original complaints filed against Stern's and Bloomingdale's, DiGianni alleged that the department stores were consumer reporting agencies within the meaning of the FCRA and that they disseminated inaccurate information bearing on her credit worthiness. She alleged that the department stores were responsible for causing inaccurate information to appear on TRW and Transunion credit reports. As a result, DiGianni had trouble obtaining credit and also suffered emotional harm and a variety of other adverse consequences. Each complaint includes eight claims alleging violations of the FCRA and two pendent state law claims.
On June 24, 1993, DiGianni filed an amended complaint in the district court in the Stern's case, alleging the same facts, but changing the description of the defendant from "consumer reporting agency" to "agent for and of consumer reporting agencies." On July 23, 1993, DiGianni submitted an amended complaint to the district court that included similar changes in her complaint against Bloomingdale's. DiGianni contends that she served Bloomingdale's with the amended complaint at the July 23 conference. Bloomingdale's denies having been served with the amended complaint, however, and it is not clear from the record that proper service was effected. Inasmuch as we conclude that DiGianni's amended complaints do not state a cause of action under the FCRA, no useful purpose would be furthered by remanding the case to ascertain whether proper service of the amended complaint was made.
II.
The FCRA regulates "consumer reporting agencies" in their preparation and dissemination of "consumer reports," see, e.g., 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1681b ( ); id. Sec. 1681c ( ); id. Sec. 1681e ( ); id. Sec. 1681i ( ), and also imposes certain obligations on "users" of consumer reports that deny credit or increase the charge for credit to consumers based on information contained in consumer reports issued by consumer reporting agencies, id. Sec. 1681m. The FCRA imposes civil liability upon users and consumer reporting agencies that willfully or negligently violate the statute. Id. Secs. 1681n, 1681o.
While DiGianni suggests on appeal that Stern's and Bloomingdale's are liable under the FCRA as users, she does not allege that either of them denied credit or increased the charge for credit to her on the basis of information supplied by reporting agencies. Accordingly, the only remaining issue is whether the appellees can be held liable under the provisions of the FCRA governing consumer reporting agencies. We conclude that they cannot.
As defined by the statute, "consumer reporting agency"
means any person which, for monetary fees, dues, or on a cooperative nonprofit basis, regularly engages in whole or in part in the practice of assembling or evaluating consumer credit information or other information on consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports to third parties....
15 U.S.C. Sec. 1681a(f). The term "consumer report"
means any written, oral, or other communication of any information by a consumer reporting agency bearing on a consumer's credit worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is used or expected to be used...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cook v. Unisys Fed. Gov't, Grp., Div. of Unisys Corp.
...credit reporting agencies." Jolly v. Acad. Collection Serv., Inc., 400 F. Supp. 2d 851, 858 (M.D.N.C. 2005) (citing DiGianni v. Stern's, 26 F.3d 346, 348-349 (2d Cir. 1994)). Cook does not argue that Unisys reported information about her to the credit reporting agencies; she only contends t......
-
Pine v. Dep't of Educ.
...Harris v. Pennsylvania Higher Educ. Assistance Agency/Am. Educ. Servs., 696 F. App'x 87, 90 (3d Cir. 2017) (quoting DiGianni v. Stern's, 26 F.3d 346, 348-49 (2d Cir. 1994)) ("As used in the statute the term refers to firms that are in the business of assembling and evaluating consumer credi......
-
Thomas v. Carvel
...status is a pertinent consideration in assessing whether to impose monetary sanctions and in what amount. See, e.g., DiGianni v. Stern's, 26 F.3d 346, 349 (2d Cir.1994); Sassower v. Field, 973 F.2d 75, 80-81 (2d Cir.1992);PSG Poker, LLC v. DeRosa-Grund, 2009 WL 2474683, *3-4 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. ......
-
Nguyen v. Ridgewood Sav. Bank
...with whom plaintiff had an outstanding loan, was a furnisher of information and not a consumer reporting agency); DiGianni v. Stern's, 26 F.3d 346, 348–49 (2d Cir.1994) (holding retail stores that merely provide information on consumer's creditworthiness are not consumer reporting agencies)......