Scott Merritt v. Experian
560 F. App'x 525
6th Cir.2014Background
- Elan accessed Merritt's credit report on June 11, 2012 in connection with a KeyBank business Mastercard application filed for Merritt Ventures, Inc., with Merritt as president/CEO.
- The application authorized Elan to obtain consumer and business credit reports for assessing personal creditworthiness related to the business application.
- Elan denied the business-card application on June 28, 2012; Merritt later claimed the application was unauthorized and fraudulent.
- Merritt, proceeding pro se, sued Experian, Wanda Williams, and Elan for FCRA violations; the district court dismissed with prejudice after summary judgment for Elan.
- Merritt asserted identity-theft concerns and alleged Elan violated multiple FCRA sections, but the court held the record showed no unauthorized purpose and no proper basis to impose liability on Elan.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was Elan's access to Merritt's report for an authorized purpose under the FCRA? | Merritt asserts the application was unauthorized/fraudulent. | Elan's use was for a credit-transaction related to the consumer; authorized. | No unauthorized purpose shown; claim fails. |
| Does Merritt's claim about Elan's failure to investigate an unauthorized inquiry survive under the FCRA? | Elan failed to investigate the disputed inquiry. | Elan is not a CRA; investigation duties arise only after a CRA dispute; and no proper dispute notice existed. | Claim fails; not applicable to Elan. |
| Are furnisher duties under the FCRA triggered, and did Elan furnish information to Experian or fail to investigate? | Elan violated FCRA by improper handling of the inquiry and reporting. | Furnisher duties apply after CRA involvement; there is no evidence Elan furnished disputed information to Experian or failed to investigate. | No liability; no evidence of furnishers' failure. |
| Does Merritt state a cognizable FCRA claim against Experian or Williams given the record? | Identity-theft and improper inquiries violated FCRA. | Experian/Williams dismissal proper; Experian remains responsible for the report, not Elan. | Affirmed district court; no state FCRA claim against Elan. |
Key Cases Cited
- Boggio v. USAA Fed. Sav. Bank, 696 F.3d 611 (6th Cir. 2012) (furnisher duties depend on a CRA dispute notice)
- Brown v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 507 F. App’x 543 (6th Cir. 2012) (private FCRA claim against furnishers requires CRA dispute notice)
- Frazier v. Honda of Am. Mfg., Inc., 431 F.3d 563 (6th Cir. 2005) (district court must apply de novo standard for summary judgment in FCRA context)
- Emp’rs Ins. Of Wausau v. Petroleum Specialties, Inc., 69 F.3d 98 (6th Cir. 1995) (consideration of sworn discovery responses can affect summary-judgment outcome)