Skip to main content
Please enter a legal issue and/or a location
Begin typing to search, use arrow keys to navigate, use enter to select

Find a Lawyer

More Options

Gelman v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 07-3665

By FindLaw Staff on October 05, 2009 | Last updated on March 21, 2019

District court's dismissal of plaintiff's putative class action against State Farm under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FRCA) is affirmed as plaintiff failed to state a claim for his false pretenses and permissible purpose claims because State Farm's mailer constituted an offer of insurance under the FCRA, and that was a permissible purpose for disclosing plaintiff's credit report.   

Read Gelman v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 07-3665

Appellate Information

On Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(Civ. No. 06-cv-05118)  

District Judge: Honorable William H. Yohn

Opinion Filed October 5, 2009

Judges

Before:  Scirica, Chief Judge, McKee and Smith, Circuit Judges

Opinion by McKee, Circuit Judge 

Counsel

Counsel for Appellant:  Patrick J. Loughren, Loughren, Loughren & Loughren, PC; Daniel C. Levin, Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman; Christopher G. Hayes, Law Office of Christopher G. Hayes

Counsel for Appellee: James T. Moughan, Britt, Hankins & Moughan; Michael P. Kenny, Cari K. Dawson, Derin B. Dickerson, Alston & Bird LLP.  

You Don’t Have To Solve This on Your Own – Get a Lawyer’s Help

Meeting with a lawyer can help you understand your options and how to best protect your rights. Visit our attorney directory to find a lawyer near you who can help.

Or contact an attorney near you:
Copied to clipboard