By: Derek Hawkins//October 10, 2016//
7th Circuit court of Appeals
Case Name: Jeffrey Brill v. TransUnion LLC
Case No.: 16-1091
Officials: POSNER, MANION, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Focus: Credit Reporting Dispute
Appellant fails to make plausible claim against TransUnion and dismissal is appropriate
“And last, supposing that the signature on the lease extension was determined to be forged (presumably by Pfeifer), what next? Because of the secrecy surrounding Brill’s settlement with Toyota, we know none of its terms, though we can surmise that Brill obtained some money. Toyota has reported that it has treated the $8,795 owed it by Brill under the lease extension (if indeed he was the signatory of that document) as “bad debt,” implying forgiveness. It would not be right to award him damages against TransUnion that duplicated relief he’d obtained from Toyota, but that is something we can’t determine because he will not reveal the terms of the settlement nor, as far as we’re aware, has he asked Toyota to do so.”
Affirmed