Cook v. ACS State & Local Solutions, Inc.
2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123344
| W.D. Mo. | 2010Background
- Plaintiffs filed a putative class action on Feb. 25, 2010, amended Apr. 29, 2010, alleging DPPA violations by obtainment of motor vehicle records.
- Defendants include ACS State & Local Solutions, Listco West, Samba Holdings, Aristotle International, E-Infodata.com, Insurance Information Exchange, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Worldwide Information.
- Plaintiffs allege Defendants obtained the Missouri driver records’ entire database of names, addresses, and personal information at various times.
- Defendants move to dismiss for lack of standing and failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).
- Court addresses standing first, applying DPPA provisions for civil actions and damages; ultimately grants/denies motions in part and dismisses for failure to state a claim.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Do plaintiffs have standing under the DPPA to sue? | Plaintiffs argue DPPA injury is conferred by violation of privacy and statutory damages. | Defendants contend no injury-in-fact beyond conjecture; standing not established. | Yes, plaintiffs have standing; Congress may define injuries; standing found. |
| Do alleged impermissible uses state a valid DPPA claim? | Stockpiling, bulk obtainment, and resale are impermissible uses under DPPA. | Taylor supports bulk obtainment and resale as permissible; no unlawful use shown. | Stockpiling/bulk obtainment claims fail; resale allowed; DPPA claims dismissed. |
| Does resale or redisclosure constitute a DPPA violation? | Defendants’ resale to third parties constitutes impermissible use. | Resale is expressly permitted for authorized recipients under DPPA. | Resale does not state a DPPA claim; not impermissible use under §2721(c). |
Key Cases Cited
- Kehoe v. Fidelity Fed. Bank & Trust, 421 F.3d 1209 (11th Cir. 2005) (DPPA damages standing discussion (actual damages not required for liquidated damages))
- Doe v. Chao, 540 U.S. 614 (U.S. 2004) (statutory damages language; suggested actual damages rule for Privacy Act analogies)
- Taylor v. Acxiom Corp., 612 F.3d 325 (5th Cir. 2010) (bulk obtainment/stockpiling not proscribed; resale permissible with DPPA)
- Pichler v. UNITE, 542 F.3d 380 (3d Cir. 2008) (DPPA protects privacy interests in motor vehicle records)
- Parus v. Cator, 2005 WL 2240955 (W.D. Wis. 2005) (insufficient injury from improper obtainment can still be injury for standing)
- Young v. West Pub. Corp., 724 F. Supp. 2d 1268 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (relevance to DPPA injury and standing discussions)