Campbell v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.

Background

Virgil Campbell sued Experian Information Solutions, Inc., Equifax Information Services, LLC, and Trans Union LLC under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). He alleged that the agencies inaccurately reported a truck lease as still open and carrying a balance after his Chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge. Campbell sought damages for lost credit opportunities, other financial harm, credit-related injury, and emotional distress. His claims against Equifax and Trans Union were later settled, leaving Experian as the remaining defendant.

Experian moved for summary judgment and to exclude Campbell’s expert witness. Summary judgment is a decision entered without a trial when the evidence shows that no genuine dispute over an important fact requires a jury’s decision and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law.

Actual Damages

The court explained that an FCRA claim based on inaccurate reporting required Campbell to provide evidence that Experian failed to use reasonable procedures, reported inaccurate information, caused harm, and caused the claimed harm through that failure.

The court held that the issue of damages was dispositive. Although Campbell alleged several credit denials, discovery showed that only Credit One sought information from Experian after Campbell applied for pre-approval. Experian provided Credit One only with Campbell’s credit score, not his credit report or the lease information. The evidence also showed that Credit One denied credit because of Campbell’s recent bankruptcy, limited credit history, recently opened accounts, and low credit limits—not because of inaccurate information from Experian. The court found no evidence tying any other creditor’s decision to the Experian report. It also stated that harm consisting only of a reduced credit score was too abstract to support actual damages.

The court separately rejected Campbell’s emotional-distress damages. Campbell described stress, embarrassment, anger, frustration, and difficulty sleeping after viewing post-bankruptcy credit reports. But he did not testify that he experienced additional distress after receiving the Experian report, did not seek medical or psychological treatment, and described no physical symptoms beyond difficulty sleeping for the first few nights. The court found that the testimony from other witnesses largely connected Campbell’s later distress to the lawsuit and Experian’s refusal to settle, rather than to the credit report. The court also found that a declaration describing additional symptoms contradicted Campbell’s deposition testimony and did not create a genuine factual dispute.

Statutory and Punitive Damages

Campbell also sought statutory and punitive damages based on an alleged willful FCRA violation. The court explained that willfulness requires knowingly or recklessly violating the law, including acting with conscious disregard for another person’s rights.

The court found that Campbell’s evidence showed, at most, negligent reporting. It concluded that the evidence did not support a finding that Experian knowingly and intentionally disregarded Campbell’s rights. The court noted that Experian had relied on procedures approved in an earlier class-action settlement, although it expressly declined to decide the broader question of whether that settlement fully precluded Campbell’s claim. Because Campbell offered no evidence of willful or reckless conduct, the court held that he could not recover statutory or punitive damages.

Disposition

Judge David S. Doty granted Experian’s motion for summary judgment. The court denied Experian’s motion to exclude Campbell’s expert witness as moot, meaning the court did not need to decide that motion after granting summary judgment. The court dismissed the case with prejudice and directed that judgment be entered.