Equifax Sued for Leaking Consumer Information to Lexis/Nexis

Equifax Information Services claims LexisNexis slipped up in selling its reports on a civil judgment, prompting a consumer to file a Fair Credit Reporting Act claim against it. Equifax says it was sued by a consumer who claims the credit agency failed "to adopt reasonable procedures to ensure maximum possible accuracy in its reporting of the status of judgments that have been set aside, vacated or dismissed with prejudice." Equifax sued LexisNexis, a "public records vendor," in Federal Court. It says LexisNexis has not responded to its demand for indemnification.

According to the complaint, the two companies have a 2008 agreement that requires "LexisNexis to provide Equifax with the 'status' of judgments." more

ABC Faces Revived Defamation Suit by Rev. Fred Price

Last Tuesday, the United States Court of Appeals overturned a federal judge's controversial ruling that ended Rev. Frederick K. C. Price’s defamation lawsuit against ABC "20/20" and correspondent John Stossel. According to the Court, Judge R. Gary Klausner had erroneously ruled in the matter.

In the lower court's decision, Judge Klausner found that even though Stossel's broadcast took Price’s words out of context, the prominent national television evangelist could not establish that the broadcast was false or misleading, as Price had made similar statements elsewhere.

But a three-member panel at the Federal Ninth Circuit Appeals Court determined that Judge Klausner had overreached. The Court found that Klausner erred both by comparing the statements in the clip with Price's actual wealth and possessions, and by agreeing with the network that the clip was "substantially true" based on that comparison.

"Under controlling Supreme Court precedent on when journalists' misquotations of statements made by public figures are false for purposes of establishing actual malice, there is a substantial likelihood that Price can establish that the publication of the clip was false," Judge Mary Schroeder wrote.

Price’s litigation stems from a heavily edited March 2007 broadcasted clip, wherein he states:

"I live in a 25-room mansion. I have my own $6 million yacht. I have my own private jet and I have my own helicopter and I have seven luxury automobiles."

The clip was edited to conceal that Price was speaking hypothetically about a wealthy person who was spiritually unsatisfied.

It is reported that ABC later apologized. However, the Ninth Circuit has ordered the case reopened.

Paul Weiss and Lowenstein Ordered to Pay $1.96 Million for Filing Frivolous Suit

Bergen County, N.J., Superior Court Judge Ellen Koblitz doesn't seem too worried about sparing the reputations of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison and Lowenstein Sandler. In June, you'll recall, she found that the two firms had filed a frivolous suit on behalf of billionaire Ronald Perelman in a family dispute over hundreds of millions of dollars. On Friday she issued a final opinion (pdf), rejecting the firms' arguments for mercy and ordering them to pay $1.96 million in legal fees to the defendants, Perelman's former father-in-law and brother-in-law.

"Paul Weiss and Lowenstein Sandler argue that since they are both such important, well-regarded law firms, the mere finding that they engaged in frivolous litigation is deterrence enough," Koblitz wrote. "They argue that this court's finding of frivolous litigation has been widely publicized and besmirches their reputation, which will cost them untold, unspecified damages. A monetary sanction, however, is clearly appropriate here." more

EFF Urges Supreme Court to Block NASA's Invasive Background Checks

Washington, D.C. - Earlier this month, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) urged the United States Supreme Court to uphold an appeals court decision that blocks invasive and unnecessary background checks at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), arguing that the over-collection of personal data puts employees' privacy at risk.

The case was originally filed by federal contract employees working at CalTech's Jet Propulsion Lab, which houses NASA's robotic spacecraft laboratory. The workers were low-risk, by NASA's own admission, and did not work on classified projects. Yet the government instituted sweeping background checks, including a requirement to list three references who were then questioned about the employees' general behavior. NASA said it needed the information to assess "suitability" for government employment, and would check factors like "carnal knowledge," "homosexuality," "cohabitation," and "illegitimate children." more