IDC Submits Amicus in Fausett v. Walgreen Co.

The IDC filed an amicus brief in Fausett v. Walgreen Co., pending in the Illinois Supreme Court supporting appellant Walgreen Co. and their motion to deny class certification for a class action claim brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The issue addressed on the appeal is whether the court can certify a class of members to bring a FCRA action against Walgreens when, contrary to the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in TransUnion v. Ramirez, none of the class members suffered any “concrete injury” independent of the penalties imposed by the statute. The brief was drafted by Connor Fitch and Edward T. Graham, Jr. of the Springfield office of Brown, Hay + Stephens, LLP.

The Walgreens case involved requirements created by an amendment to the FCRA, the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA). The trial court certified a class of plaintiffs who received receipts from Walgreens that included transaction numbers containing more than the maximum five-digit limit permitted by FACTA and the Second District appellate court affirmed. Walgreens’ Petition for Leave to Appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court was allowed.

The appellant makes four arguments as to why the plaintiff has no actionable claim as a matter of law. First, plaintiff suffered no injury, which the U.S. Supreme Court had already held prevents plaintiff from recovering under the FCRA in the TransUnion decision. Second, plaintiff’s lack of injury also precludes plaintiff from establishing standing under Illinois law. Third, the specific provision of the FCRA that plaintiff alleges was violated, only applies to credit and debit card transactions, which were not involved in this case. Fourth, the facts alleged do not support a finding that defendant willfully violated the statute, which is required for the statutory damages that plaintiff is seeking.

The amicus brief cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s TransUnion decision, as well as precedent concerning Illinois standing requirements, the excessiveness doctrine under the U.S. Constitution’s Due Process Clause, and the authority traditionally reserved for the Executive Branch under Article II.

IDC would like to thank Edward T. Graham, Jr. and Connor Fitch for drafting the brief on our behalf.