Steven Hammer v. Sam's East, Inc.
754 F.3d 492
8th Cir.2014Background
- Hammer and White allege Sam’s Club violated FACTA by printing more than five digits of card numbers on electronically printed receipts.
- District court granted summary judgment for Sam’s Club but only on willfulness; it found a FACTA violation occurred.
- Sam’s Club Private Label Credit Cards share a 19-digit number with membership numbers, with last twelve digits aligned to the member’s number.
- Receipts displayed the last four digits of the credit card plus the last ten digits of the membership/card pair, exposing more than five digits of the card number.
- Plaintiffs seek statutory damages under the FCRA for willful FACTA violations, plus punitive damages and fees, despite no actual damages being alleged.
- The court addressed standing first, concluding plaintiffs have Article III standing to pursue statutory damages though no actual damages are alleged.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to sue without actual damages | Hammer/White have statutory injury; §1681n(a)(1)(A) creates a right enforceable by them. | Statutory violation without actual harm cannot confer standing. | Appellants have standing. |
| FACTA receipt violation | Receipts disclosed more than five digits via membership/credit card numbering. | Labeling should not trigger violation; only card numbers matter. | Sam’s Club violated FACTA. |
| Willfulness under Safeco | Violation was willful due to knowledge of the rule. | Interpretation was objectively reasonable. | Violation was not willful; interpretation was reasonable. |
| Damages without actual harm under FCRA | Statutory damages available where there is a statutory violation. | Damages require actual harm or a different reading of the statute. | Statutory damages recoverable without actual damages. |
| Recusal of district judge | Judge should recuse due to potential conflict. | Recusal denied; judge acted properly. |
Key Cases Cited
- Safeco Ins. Co. of Am. v. Burr, 551 U.S. 47 (U.S. (2007)) (establishes willfulness includes reckless disregard and objective reasonableness standard)
- Dowell v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 517 F.3d 1024 (8th Cir. 2008) (interpreted statutory damages vs. actual damages under §1681n(a)(1)(A))
- Van Straaten v. Shell Oil Prods. Co., LLC, 678 F.3d 486 (7th Cir. 2012) (discusses card-number interpretation and willfulness considerations)
- Beaudry v. TeleCheck Servs., Inc., 579 F.3d 702 (6th Cir. 2009) (statutory damages available without proving actual damages)
- Murray v. GMAC Mortg. Corp., 434 F.3d 948 (7th Cir. 2006) (supports statutory damages without actual damages for FACTA violations)