UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

 

GRACE LAWRENCE ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiff, ) 

 vs. ) 

 ) Civil Action No. 02-CV-4440 

TRANS UNION, LLC ) 

 ) 

 and ) 

CITY OF PHILADELPHIA ) 

 ) 

 Defendants. ) 

 )

PLAINTIFF GRACE LAWRENCE’S PROPOSED 

POINTS FOR CHARGE & JURY VERDICT FORM 

Plaintiff Grace Lawrence, by and through her undersigned counsel, respectfully submits 

the following Proposed Points of Charge and Jury Verdict Form. 

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C. 

BY: ___________________________ 

JAMES A. FRANCIS, ESQUIRE 

MARK D. MAILMAN, ESQUIRE 

JOHN SOUMILAS, ESQUIRE 

Land Title Building, 19th Floor 

100 South Broad Street 

Philadelphia, PA 19110 

(215) 735-8600 

Dated: June 16, 2003 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 1 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-1

 The plaintiff has brought a claim under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which is a 

federal statute intended to regulate credit reporting agencies’ handling of consumers’ personal 

information with regard to confidentiality, accuracy, and the proper use of such information. 

The purpose of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, in the words of the law, is as 

follows: 

It is the purpose of the Act to require that consumer reporting agencies adopt 

reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit, 

personnel, insurance and other information in a manner which is fair and 

equitable to the consumer, with regard to the confidentiality, accuracy, relevancy 

and proper utilization of such information. 

15 U.S.C. §1681a; Philbin v. Trans Union Corp., 101 F.3d 957, 962 (3d. Cir. 1996). The FCRA 

was prompted by “congressional concern over abuses in the credit reporting industry.” Philbin, 

101 F.3d at 962; see also Guimond v. Trans Union Credit Info. Co., 45 F.3d 1329 (9th Cir. 1995). 

Further, it is fashioned so as to protect the credit worthiness and reputation of every consumer. 

Ackerly v. Credit Bureau of Sheridan, Inc., 385 F. Supp. 658 (D. Wyo. 1974). The FCRA was 

crafted to protect consumers from the transmission of inaccurate information about them. Kates

v. Croker National Bank, 776 F.2d 1396, 1397 (9th Cir. 1995). Like the other portions of the 

Consumer Credit Protection Act of 1968, the FCRA is to be liberally construed in favor of the 

consumer. See Guimond v. Trans Union Credit Info. Co., 45 F.3d 1329 (9th Cir. 1995). 

 Congress enacted the FCRA to protect consumers against “the trend toward . . . 

the establishment of all sorts of computerized data banks [that placed a consumer] in great 

danger of having her life and character reduced to impersonal ‘blips’ and key punch holes in a 

stolid and unthinking machine which can literally ruin her reputation without cause, and make 

2 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 2 of 21
him unemployable.” Dalton v. Capital Associated Industries, Inc., 257 F. 3d 409 (4th Cir. 2000), 

(citing 116 Cong. Rec. 36570). As a result, the FCRA imposes grave responsibilities on credit 

reporting agencies to ensure the accuracy of the information that they report. Cushman v. Trans 

Union Corp., 115 F. 3d 220, 225 (3d. Cir. 1997)

See Devitt, Blackmar and Wolff, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, § 92.02; 15 U.S.C. § 

1681; Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F. 3d 220, 225 (3d. Cir. 1997) 

3 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 3 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-2

For the purpose of this case: 

The plaintiff, Grace Lawrence, is a “consumer” entitled to protection and benefit 

of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The consumer reports admitted into evidence are “consumer 

reports” governed by the Act. The defendant, Trans Union LLC (“Trans Union”) is a “consumer 

reporting agency.” 

See Devitt, Blackmar and Wolff, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, § 92.03; 15 U.S.C. § 

1681a 

4 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 4 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-3

The plaintiff claims that the defendant Trans Union negligently and willfully 

violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by failing to employ reasonable procedures to assure the 

maximum possible accuracy of the plaintiff’s consumer report. The plaintiff claims that Trans 

Union allowed inaccurate derogatory credit information – namely a civil judgment in the amount 

of $2951 – to remain on her credit report. The plaintiff claims that despite her numerous requests 

to Trans Union to cease reporting and remove the inaccurate and negative information from her 

credit file, Trans Union has negligently and/or willfully refused to correct the inaccuracies which 

have caused great injury to the plaintiff and her good name. 

Specifically, the plaintiff claims the defendant failed to employ reasonable 

procedures to assure the maximum possible accuracy of the information it reported on the 

plaintiff because: (1) Trans Union permits credit information it knows to be false that is reported 

by other companies to be communicated to its customers who pay Trans Union for the 

information; and (2) Trans Union’s reinvestigation procedure consists of simply verifying the 

information with the entity that provided the information to Trans Union that the data is accurate 

without otherwise independently verifying the accuracy of the disputed information. 

5 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 5 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-4

Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, whenever a consumer reporting agency 

prepares a consumer report, it must follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible 

accuracy of the information concerning the individual about whom the report relates. The law is 

not directed at a company’s policy but at the actual procedure, method or steps followed by a 

company, its employees or agents, in obtaining information, and in preparing and disclosing a 

report. 

The plaintiff claims that the defendant negligently failed to comply with the Act 

in failing to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum possible accuracy of the 

information in the reports concerning him. To proceed with a claim, a plaintiff need only show 

that there is a genuine issue of material fact that Trans Union issued credit reports about the 

Plaintiff that were inaccurate. Philbin v. Trans Union Corporation, 101 F. 3d 957 (3d. Cir. 

1996). 

The plaintiff has the burden of proof and so must persuade you by a 

preponderance of the evidence on each of the following propositions: 

(1) that the defendant negligently violated the Fair Credit Reporting 

Act by reporting false or inaccurate information about the plaintiff 

and failing to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum

possible accuracy of information about the plaintiff; 

(2) that the plaintiff was injured; and 

(3) that the negligence of the defendant in not only reporting 

inaccurate Information but also in failing to correct the inaccurate 

information, was the proximate cause of injury to the plaintiff. 

Your verdict must be for the plaintiff if you find that the defendant negligently 

violated the Act, that plaintiff was injured, and that the negligent violation of the Act was the 

6 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 6 of 21
proximate cause of plaintiff’s injuries. 

 

See Devitt, Blackmar and Wolff, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, § 92.04; Colletti v.

Credit Bureau Services, Inc., 644 F.2d 1148 (5th Cir. 1981); Philbin v. Trans Union Corporation, 

101 F. 3d 957 (3d. Cir. 1996). 

7 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 7 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-5

The word “negligence” as used in these instructions means the failure to do 

something which a reasonably prudent person would do or the doing of something which a 

reasonably prudent person would not do under the circumstances which you find existed in this 

case. In other words, the standard of conduct by which you must judge the adequacy of the 

defendant’s procedures in this case is what a reasonably prudent person would do under these 

circumstances. 

The defendant cannot be found negligent if, in fact, the information it reported 

about the plaintiff is accurate. However, a consumer reporting agency does not necessarily 

discharge its statutory duty simply by reporting exactly what information it receives from a third 

party. The question is whether the defendant used reasonable procedures to assure maximum

possible accuracy of the information it reports about the plaintiff. 

See Devitt, Blackmar and Wolff, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, § 92.05; Philbin v. Trans

Union Corporation, 101 F. 3d 957 (3d. Cir. 1996). 

8 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 8 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-6

For actions brought under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, injury or damage is 

considered caused by an act, or a failure to act, whenever it appears from the evidence that the 

act or omission was a substantial part or factor in bringing about or actually causing the injury or 

damage. It is not necessary that the act was the sole or primary cause of the harm. 

The term “proximate cause” as used in these instructions means that there must be 

a connection between the conduct of the defendant which the plaintiff claims was negligent and 

the injury complained of by the plaintiff, and that the act which is claimed to have produced the 

injury was a natural and probable result of the conduct of the defendant. 

See Devitt, Blackmar and Wolff, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, §§ 80.18 and 92.06; See

Philbin v. Trans Union Corporation, 101 F. 3d 957 (3d. Cir. 1996).

9 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 9 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-7

The Fair Credit Reporting Act also requires that a consumer reporting agency 

conduct an investigation of information if the accuracy of that information is disputed by the 

consumer. 

In order to prove Trans Union’s liability for failure to conduct a reasonable 

investigation into her dispute, the plaintiff must show that she disputed an item of inaccurate 

information in her credit file and that any reinvestigation conducted by Trans Union did not 

correct the inaccuracy. 

If the completeness or accuracy of any item of information contained in a 

consumer’s credit file is disputed by the consumer, and the consumer notifies the agency of the 

dispute, the agency shall: 

(1) reinvestigate the disputed information free of charge; 

(2) provide notice of the dispute to the person who provided the information, 

along with all relevant information regarding the dispute received by the consumer; and 

(3) review and consider all relevant information submitted by the consumer in 

connection with the dispute. 

If, after the reinvestigation, an item of information is found to be inaccurate or 

incomplete or cannot be verified, the consumer reporting agency shall promptly delete the item

of information from the consumer’s credit file or modify that item of information as appropriate 

based upon the results of the reinvestigation. 15 U.S.C. §1681i; Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 

115 F. 3d 220, 225 (3d. Cir. 1997) 

Further, if a credit reporting agency reinserts any item of information that was 

10 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 10 of 21
previously disputed and deleted on a consumer’s credit file, you may infer that it acted 

negligently. Cousin v. Trans Union, 246 F.3d 359 (5th Cir. 2001) 

11 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 11 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-8

As a matter of law, the burden of conducting an investigation into a consumer’s 

dispute lies solely on the consumer reporting agency, not the entity that originally reported the 

disputed information. In conducting an investigation of a consumer’s credit dispute, the credit 

reporting agency cannot simply mimic or “parrot” information from the sources of information 

in performing investigations. 

 Congress intended that consumer reporting agencies, having the opportunity to 

reap profits through the collection and dissemination of credit information, bear grave 

responsibilities to ensure the accuracy of that information. The duty of investigation imposed on 

credit reporting agencies by the FCRA consists of more than merely parroting information 

received from other sources. A reinvestigation that merely shifts the burden back to the 

consumer and the credit grantor does not fulfill the obligations contemplated by the statute. 

Cushman v. Trans Union Corporation, 115 F.3d 220, 226 (3rd Cir. 1997); Stevenson v. TRW,

Inc., 987 F.2d 288, 293 (5th Cir. 1993) 

12 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 12 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-9

The issue to be determined by you on the claim that the defendant was negligent 

is this: Did the defendant negligently fail to comply with any of the provisions of the Fair 

Credit Reporting Act? 

If your unanimous answer to this questions is no, you will return a verdict for the 

defendant. But, if your unanimous answer to this questions is yes, then you have a second issue 

to determine, namely: Did the defendant, through its actions and/or inactions, proximately 

cause any injury or damage to the plaintiff? 

If your unanimous answer to this second questions is no, you will return a verdict 

for the defendant. But, if your unanimous answer to this questions is yes, then you must find for 

the plaintiff and answer a third question, namely: What is the amount of damage or injury 

sustained by the plaintiff as a proximate cause of the defendant’s negligence?

See Bryant v. TRW, Inc., 689 F.2d 72 (6th Cir. 1982). 

13 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 13 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-10

If you find that Trans Union negligently failed to comply with the Act, then your 

duty is to determine the amount of money that reasonably, fairly, and adequately compensates 

the plaintiff for the damages which you decide resulted from the defendant’s failure to comply. 

 If the evidence present at trial warrants such a finding, you must award to plaintiff 

each of the following elements of damage from the time the wrong was committed up to the 

present time: 

Humiliation. Casella v. Trans Union Credit Information Serv., 56 F.3d 469 (2nd Cir. 

1995); Guimond v. Trans Union Credit Corporation, 45 F.3d 1329, 1333 (9th Cir. 1995); 

Mental Distress. Guimond v. Trans Union Credit Corporation, 45 F.3d 1329, 1333 (9th

Cir. 1995); Fischl v. GMAC, 708 F.2d 143 (5th Cir. 1983) 

Emotional Distress. Casella v. Trans Union Credit Information Serv., 56 F.3d 469 (2nd

Cir. 1995); Dalton v. Capital Assoc., 257 F.3d 409, 418019 (4th Cir. 2001) 

Injury to Plaintiff’s Reputation. Dalton v. Capital Assoc., 257 F.3d 409, 418019 (4th

Cir. 2001) Jones v. Credit Bureau of Huntington, Inc., 399 S.E.2d 694 (W.Va. 1990); Fischl v. 

GMAC, 708 F.2d 143 (5th Cir. 1983) 

Injury to Plaintiff’s Credit Rating. Jones v. Credit Bureau of Huntington, Inc., 399 

S.E.2d 694 (W.Va. 1990); Fischl v. GMAC, 708 F.2d 143 (5th Cir. 1983) 

Anxiety. Bryant v. TRW, Inc. 689 F.2d 72 (6th Cir. 1982). 

Embarrassment. Bryant v. TRW, Inc. 689 F.2d 72 (6th Cir. 1982). 

Frustration. Millstone v. O’ Hanlon Reports, Inc., 529 F.2d 829, 834-35 (8th Cir. 1976). 

The denial of credit is not necessary in order for you to award actual or punitive damages 

14 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 14 of 21
under the Act. Casella v. Trans Union Credit Information Serv., 56 F.3d 469 (2nd Cir. 1995); 

Guimond v. Trans Union Credit Corporation, 45 F.3d 1329, 1333 (9th Cir. 1995). 

If any element of damage is of a continuing nature, you shall decide how long it 

may continue and award plaintiff compensation for reasonably calculated future damages. 

There is no fixed standard or measure in the case of intangible items such as 

anxiety, humiliation, embarrassment, mental anguish, and emotional distress. You must 

determine a fair and adequate award of these items, both the distress and embarrassment to date 

and any continuing distress, using your judgment and experience in the affairs of the world after 

considering all the facts and circumstances presented during the trial of this case. 

A person may recover for emotional distress based on her own subjective 

testimony about her feelings. She does not have to introduce medical or other testimony. Smith 

v. Law Office of Mitchell N. Kay, 124 B.R. 182, 185 (D. Del. 1990); Johnson v. Dept. of

Treasury, I.R.S., 700 F.2d 971, 985 fn. 39 (5th Cir. 1983). Thompson v. San Antonio Retail 

Merchants Ass’n, 682 F.2d 509 (5th Cir. 1982). 

 

15 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 15 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-11

Damages recoverable for willful noncompliance with the Fair Credit Reporting 

Act are of two kinds. First are the damages which are actually suffered by reason of the wrong 

complained of; and second, punitive damages, which means damages over an above the actual 

damages, if any, suffered by the plaintiff. Punitive damages may be awarded by you in your 

discretion for the purpose of making an example of and punishing the defendant for the wrong 

done and to serve as an example to others not to engage in such conduct. 

 I have already instructed you on the law regarding actual damages. 

If you, as jurors, find from a preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff is 

entitled to a verdict for actual damages, and you further find that the acts or omissions of the 

defendant which proximately caused the actual injury or damage to the plaintiff were willfully 

done, then you may, in the exercise of discretion if you unanimously choose to do so, add to the 

award of actual damages such an amount as you shall unanimously agree to be proper as punitive 

damages. 

Whether or not to make an award of punitive damages, in addition to actual 

damages, is a matter exclusively within your province. You should bear in mind the requirement 

of the law that the amount of such punitive damages must be fixed with calm discretion and 

sound reason and must never by either awarded, or fixed in amount, because of any sympathy or 

bias, or prejudice with respect to any party to the case. 

See Devitt, Blackmar and Wolff, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, § 92.10. 

 

16 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 16 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-12

If you find that Trans Union’s policies were in contravention of consumers’ rights 

to a complete and accurate credit report, or in conscious disregard of its duty to investigate a 

consumer’s credit disputes, you must find that Trans Union acted willfully and you may award 

punitive damages. Cushman v. Trans Union Corp., 115 F.3d 220, 227, (3d Cir. 1997); Yohay v.

City of Alexandria Employees Credit Union, Inc., 827 F.2d 967 (4th Cir. 1987). 

 

17 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 17 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-13

Upon finding that Trans Union willfully failed to follow reasonable procedures in 

dissemination of plaintiff’s credit report or in its investigation of her disputes, you are to award 

her any actual damages as discussed above. In awarding punitive damages under the Fair Credit 

Reporting Act, you may award punitive damages even if you believe Plaintiff proved no actual 

damages or just nominal actual damages. 15 U.S.C. § 168ln; Cush-Crawford v. Adchem

Corp.,___F.3d____ (2d Cir. Nov. 16, 2001); Casella v. Trans Union Credit Information Serv., 56 

F.3d 469 (2d Cir. 1995) 

 

 

18 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 18 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-14

In order to award punitive damages you need not find malice or evil motive on 

part of the defendant, Trans Union. Punitive damages are awarded not to compensate the 

plaintiff for her injury, but rather, to punish reprehensive conduct and to deter its future 

occurrence. 

 Some of the factors you may consider in assessing punitive damages include: 

(a) the remedial purpose of the Fair Credit Reporting Act; 

(b) the harm to the consumer intended to be avoided or corrected by the Act; 

(c) the manner in which the defendant conducted its business with regards to its 

reinvestigation procedures and the preventing inaccuracies in credit files; and 

(d) the defendant’s net worth; 

See Gertzv. Welch, 418 U.S. 323, 350 (1974); Kaplan v. Harco Nat. Ins. Co., 708 So.2d 89, 95 

(Miss.App.1998); Jones v. Credit Bureau of Huntington, Inc., 399 S.E.2d 694 (W.Va. 1990). 

In awarding punitive damages under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, you should 

consider an award that would be adequate to deter defendant’s similar conduct in the future. 

Pinner v. Schmidt, 805 F.2d 1258 (5th Cir. 1986)

 

19 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 19 of 21
PLAINTIFF’S JURY INSTRUCTION NO. P-15

As a separate matter, plaintiff claims that Trans Union provided false information 

about her to other companies which made her look bad. The law refers to this as “Defamation.” 

You can award damages to Plaintiff for defamation under the same “reckless disregard” 

standards I instructed you about earlier. When Trans Union confirmed that the delinquent credit 

information belonged to plaintiff, did it act with reckless disregard of whether that information 

about Plaintiff was true or false? If you find that Trans Union acted with reckless disregard of 

whether the information was true or false, and the information was false, you may award actual 

damages and punitive damages for defamation. 

20 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 20 of 21
21 

JURY VERDICT FORM 

PART I. (CHECK ONLY ONE LINE) 

 We find in favor of the plaintiff, Grace Lawrence. 

 (GO TO PART II AND COMPLETE A & B, AS APPROPRIATE) 

 We find in favor of the defendant, Trans Union. 

 (TELL THE CLERK THAT YOU ARE DONE) 

PART II. (FILL IN ALL LINES, AS SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE) 

A. If you find in favor of the plaintiff, you must fill in below all damages amounts 

that are supported by the evidence: 

(1) We assess damages for financial losses and lost time in the amount of: 

$_________________________ (Fill in amount). 

(2) We assess damages for loss of credit opportunities in the amount of: 

$__________________________(Fill in amount). 

(3) We assess damages for harm to credit rating in the amount of: 

$__________________________(Fill in amount). 

(4) We assess damages for humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety, emotional 

distress and/or mental anguish in the amount of: 

$__________________________(Fill in amount). 

(5) We assess damages for harm to name and reputation in the amount of: 

$__________________________(Fill in amount). 

B. If you find that Trans Union acted with reckless disregard in reporting credit 

information about Ms. Lawrence, you must also determine what amount of punitive 

damages are appropriate under the facts of this case. 

 We assess punitive damages in the amount of $____________________(Fill in amount). 

 

 

Case 2:02-cv-04440-AB Document 22 Filed 06/16/2003 Page 21 of 21