Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc.
464 Mass. 492
| Mass. | 2013Background
- Tyler, a Michaels customer, sued in the District of Massachusetts on behalf of a putative class for allegedly writing customers’ ZIP codes on credit card forms in violation of G. L. c. 93, § 105(a).
- District Court certified three questions about (1) whether ZIP codes are personal identification information under § 105(a), (2) whether a § 105(a) claim requires identity fraud, (3) whether “credit card transaction form” includes electronic forms.
- Statute § 105(a) prohibits writing or requiring personal identification information not required by the issuer, with a privacy-focused purpose reflected in the title and legislative history as protecting consumer privacy in commercial transactions.
- § 105(d) makes violations unfair and deceptive practices under c. 93A, § 2; thus § 105(a) claims can support a § 9 action if injury is shown.
- Massachusetts legislative history and the statute’s title suggest dual concerns: privacy protection and fraud prevention; the court ultimately emphasizes privacy rights.
- The district court found ZIP codes can be PDIs and that the claim could proceed under § 93A, but allowed only a privacy-injury theory to be pursued.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Is ZIP code personal identification information under §105(a) | Tyler argues ZIP codes can be PDIs when combined with name to identify address/phone. | Michaels contends ZIP codes are not necessarily PDIs under §105(a) in ordinary credit card processing. | Yes; ZIP codes can qualify as personal identification information under §105(a). |
| May a §105(a) claim proceed without identity fraud | Leardi-inspired view that §105(a) injury can arise from privacy invasion without fraud. | §105(a) should require fraud or a direct loss to proceed. | Yes; a §105(a) claim may be brought without identity fraud; injury must be shown under §93A §9(1). |
| Does "credit card transaction form" include electronic forms | §105(a) applies to all transactions; electronic forms fall within the term. | Argues for a narrower, perhaps paper-only interpretation. | Includes both electronic and paper credit card transaction forms. |
Key Cases Cited
- Leardi v. Brown, 394 Mass. 151 (Mass. 1985) (injury under §9 must be proved; prior interpretation of ‘injury’ clarified)
- Rhodes v. AIG Domestic Claims, Inc., 461 Mass. 486 (Mass. 2012) (causation required; injury must arise from the unfair or deceptive act)
- Casavant v. Norwegian Cruise Line Ltd., 460 Mass. 500 (Mass. 2011) (injury and causation in §9 context clarified)
- Hershenow v. Enterprise Rent-A-Car Co. of Boston, 445 Mass. 790 (Mass. 2006) (established causation requirement for §9 claims)
- Iannacchino v. Ford Motor Co., 451 Mass. 623 (Mass. 2008) (causation and injury requirements in 93A claims)
- Terra Nova Ins. Co. v. Fray-Witzer, 449 Mass. 406 (Mass. 2007) (privacy/information injury considerations in §93A context)
- Adamowicz v. Ipswich, 395 Mass. 757 (Mass. 1985) (injury definition and statutory interpretation guidance)
- Commonwealth v. Welch, 444 Mass. 80 (Mass. 2005) (legislative history guiding statutory interpretation)
- Pineda v. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc., 51 Cal.4th 524 (Cal. 2011) (California privacy statute interpreted to treat ZIP as PDIs; used for comparative context)