Legal Opinion

Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'N

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

Decided May 21, 2010No. 04-17485, 04-17558PublishedCited by 2,034 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Dissent to Order by

Chief Judge KOZINSKI;

Dissent to Order by Judge GOULD; Opinion by Judge CLIFTON; Dissent by Judge BEA.

ORDER

This court’s opinion, filed April 30, 2009, is amended by adding additional language to footnote 2 (565 F.3d at 1114). The existing text in footnote 2 will become the first paragraph of the footnote and the new language follows, such that the entire footnote reads:

In this appeal of a summary judgment, PCA and Experian argued only that § 1681b(a)(3)(A) authorized PCA to obtain Pintos’s credit report. Thus, we need not determine whether PCA had a permissible purpose under…

2Cited by2,034 opinions

  1. Rearden LLC v. Rearden Commerce, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2012
  2. Ervine v. Warden, San Quentin State PrisonDistrict Court, E.D. California · 2016
  3. Pintos v. PACIFIC CREDITORS ASS'NCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2010
  4. Center for Auto Safety v. Chrysler Group, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2016
  5. Goodman v. Las Vegas Metropolitan Police DepartmentDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 2013

2,029 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API