Jarek Charvat v. Mutual First Fed. Credit Union
725 F.3d 819
8th Cir.2013Background
- Charvat sued two Nebraska banks (Mutual First and First National) under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (EFTA) alleging notice violations in ATM transactions.
- Charvat completed three ATM transactions with a $2.00 fee charged after receiving on-screen notice, but he alleges no on-machine notice existed.
- The district court dismissed for lack of standing, treating the injury as an injury in law rather than an injury in fact.
- Charvat appealed, and the Eighth Circuit reconsidered whether an informational injury from statutory rights can support standing even absent additional economic harm.
- The court discusses whether statutory damages under the EFTA are sufficiently linked to a concrete injury to satisfy Article III standing.
- The court ultimately holds Charvat had standing based on an informational injury and remands for further proceedings.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does informational injury support standing under EFTA? | Charvat argues informational injury from lack of notice suffices. | Appellees contend injury requires more than statutory violation; no concrete harm. | Yes; informational injury can support standing. |
| Is the injury fairly traceable to the defendant's conduct? | Charvat's injury stems from not receiving notice and the $2.00 fee. | Charvat accepted the fee after on-screen notice, breaking causal link. | Yes; injury is fairly traceable. |
| Is Charvat entitled to statutory damages because of the notice violation? | Statutory damages are recoverable for statutory violations linked to injuries. | Statutory damages are unrelated to injury and cannot create standing alone. | Statutory damages are sufficiently related to injury to support standing. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555 (1992) (standing requires concrete injury)
- Raines v. Byrd, 521 U.S. 811 (1997) (Congress cannot grant standing for non-injurious interests)
- Warth v. Seldin, 422 U.S. 490 (1975) (statutory rights can create standing)
- FEC v. Akins, 524 U.S. 11 (1998) (public disclosure statutes can confer standing)
- Dryden v. Lou Budke’s Arrow Fin. Co., 630 F.2d 641 (8th Cir. 1980) (statutory damages can be recovered without additional actual damages)
- Summers v. Earth Island Inst., 555 U.S. 488 (2009) (no standing for public's nonconcrete interest)
- ABF Freight Sys., Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, 645 F.3d 954 (8th Cir. 2011) (injury can flow from statutory breach even if causation is attenuated)
- Oti Kaga, Inc. v. S. D. Hous. Dev. Auth., 342 F.3d 871 (8th Cir. 2003) (traceability requires causal connection to defendant's conduct)
- Vermont Agency of Natural Resources v. United States, 529 U.S. 765 (2000) (qui tam damages differ from consumer injuries)
- Charvat v. First Nat’l Bank of Wahoo, — (—) (see opinion for statutory damages and informational injury analysis)