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

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

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.