Legal Opinion
ALFORD v. TRANSUNION LLC
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided March 17, 2025No. 1:25-cv-01569Unknown
1Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY CAMDEN VICINAGE CHARLES ALFORD, Plaintiff, Civil No. 25-1569 (RMB-MJS) v. OPINION TRANSUNION LLC, Defendant. THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon pro se Plaintiff Charles Alford’s Complaint and Application to Proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”). [Docket Nos. 1 (“Compl.”), 1-2.] Plaintiff’s IFP application establishes his financial eligibility to proceed without pre-payment of fees and costs and will be granted. 28 U.S.C. § 1915. When a person files a complaint and is granted IFP status, 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) requires…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Erickson v. PardusSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Sandra Cortez v. Trans UnionCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
- Norma J. Nesbit v. Gears Unlimited, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2003
- Marissa Bibbs v. Trans Union LLCCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2022
- Shaunfield v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.District Court, N.D. Texas · 2014
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.