In Sessa v Trans Union LLC, 74 F.4th 38 (2d Cir. 2023), the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reviewed the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo.  Ms. Sessa filed a class action lawsuit against the credit reporting agency, Trans Union, alleging violations under § 1681e(b) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) due to incorrect information (a balloon payment that the terms of the lease did not, in fact, require) on her credit report. Hudson Valley Federal Credit Union provided this inaccurate data. The District Court ruled in favor of Trans Union. It granted it summary judgment, reasoning that Ms. Sessa’s credit report couldn’t be deemed “inaccurate” according to section 1681e(b) because the matter of whether she owed a balloon payment was a “legal” dispute rather than a “factual” one. The appellate court reached a different conclusion. The appellate court held that a plaintiff may raise a legal issue in making a threshold showing of inaccuracy required in FCRA cases. The Court vacated the District Court’s order, and the case was remanded for further proceedings.  Other courts may reach other conclusions.

No information in this communication is intended to constitute specific legal advice.  For specific legal advice, please contact an attorney, and if you have any such questions or would like more information about this issue, please contact William “Pat” Huttenbach at 713.752.8616, or email at



William “Pat” Huttenbach | Shareholder | Banking Litigation
Crain Caton & James | Attorneys & Counselors
Five Houston Center | 1401 McKinney St., Suite 1700
Houston, TX 77010
Direct: 713.752.8616 | Fax: 713.658.1921 | Download Vcard

Sessa v Trans Union LLC