< Back
Post on March 20th, 2018

In a recent decision, Hagy v. Demers & Adams, 882 F.3d 616 (6th Cir. Feb. 16, 2018), the Sixth Circuit, applying Spokeo v. Robins, reversed the district court’s finding of subject matter jurisdiction and vacated the order of summary judgment rendered against the creditor’s attorney finding FDCPA violations.

The Sixth Circuit found no Article III standing because the plaintiff failed to identify a cognizable injury. This Opinion was written by Judge Sutton on an appeal from a decision issued by the Southern District of Ohio, heard in Columbus. Discussing Spokeo, the Court notes, “We know of no circuit court decision since Spokeo that endorses an anything-hurts-so-long-as Congress-says-it-hurts theory of Article III injury.”

This decision is one of the most recent to apply Spokeo to dismiss a case for lack of standing based on a finding that the plaintiff did not show actual harm. The opinion provides a thorough discussion of this issue.

If you have any questions about this, please feel free to contact us at OBLIC.

Gretchen Koehler Mote, Esq.,
Director of Loss Prevention
Ohio Bar Liability Insurance Company