Document: 540 U.S. 614 DOEv.CHAO, SECRETARY OF LABOR. No. 02-1377. Supreme Court of United States. Argued December 3, 2003. Decided February 24, 2004. After petitioner Doe filed a black lung benefits claim with the Department Labor, agency used his Social Security number to identify on official documents, including multicaptioned hearing notice that was sent group claimants, their employers, and lawyers. other claimants sued Department, claiming such disclosures violated Privacy Act 1974. The Government stipulated an order prohibiting future publication numbers notices, parties moved for summary judgment. District entered judgment against all plaintiffs but Doe, finding they had raised no issues cognizable harm. However, court accepted Doe's uncontroverted testimony about distress learning improper disclosure, granted him judgment, awarded $1,000, minimum statutory damages award under 5 U. S. C. § 552a(g)(4). Fourth Circuit reversed claim, holding $1,000 is available only who suffer actual damages, not triable issue fact having submitted corroboration emotional claim. Held: Plaintiffs must prove some qualify award. Pp. 618-627. (a) gives agencies detailed instructions managing records provides various sorts civil relief persons aggrieved by Government's failure comply Act's requirements. falls within catchall category someone suffers "adverse effect" from otherwise specified in remedial section Act. 552a(g)(1)(D). If determines subsection (g)(1)(D) suit acted "intentional or willful" manner, liable "actual sustained individual ..., case shall person entitled recovery receive less than ... $1,000." 552a(g)(4)(A). 618-619. (b) A straightforward textual analysis supports position guarantee goes victims damages. By time statute guarantees minimum, it has confined eligibility adverse effects caused intentional willful actions, provided expressly liability sustained." When next clause sentence containing explicit provision "person recovery," obvious referent immediately preceding recovering sole anything. theory requires nothing more proof violation questionable ignoring damages" language so directly at hand instead looking "a recovery" separate part devoid any mention what might be recovered. ignores reading speak freestanding, unqualified way, when actually speaks limited referencing enumerated His also odds traditional understanding tort both wrongful act plus causation harm which can reasonably assessed. And uncodified demonstrates Congress left another day question whether authorize general i. e., calculated without reference specific In fact, drafting history shows cut out very bill would have authorized Finally, leaves entitlement job do. As he treats text, could accomplished its object simply providing $1,000. 620-623. (c) argument suggests been illogical create cause action anyone suffering effect action, then deny But (g)(1)(D)'s recognition meant provide complete action. subsequent intent willfulness addition effect, if state mind proven additionally, consistent logic require as well. peculiar offer guaranteed form presumed requiring amount, demonstrate this approach parallels common-law scheme certain defamation claims recover actual, quantifiable pecuniary loss. points subsequently enacted statutes provisions similar text one too far different serve sound basis analogy; even provisions, said repeatedly legislative will rarely override reasonable interpretation gleaned prior enactment. 624-627. 306 F. 3d 170, affirmed. SOUTER, J., delivered opinion Court, REHNQUIST, O'CONNOR, KENNEDY, THOMAS, JJ., joined, SCALIA, joined except penultimate paragraph Part III footnote 8. GINSBURG, dissenting opinion, STEVENS BREYER, post, p. 627. 641. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT APPEALS FOR FOURTH CIRCUIT. Jack W. Campbell IV argued petitioner. With briefs were Donald B. Ayer, Dominick V. Freda, Joseph E. Wolfe. Malcolm L. Stewart respondent. brief Solicitor General Olson, Assistant Attorney Keisler, Deputy Kneedler, Patricia A. Millett, Leonard Schaitman, Anthony Yang, Howard M. Radzely, Allen H. Feldman, Nathaniel I. Spiller, Michael P. Doyle.* JUSTICE SOUTER Court. 1 States subject benefit least individuals adversely affected federal agency's before us We hold must. 2 * Petitioner Buck Black Lung Benefits Act, 83 Stat. 792, 30 901 et seq., Office Workers' Compensation Programs, division Labor responsible adjudicating it. application called number, applicant's documents like "multicaptioned" notices dates, groups lawyers involved cases. concedes following practice led disclosing beyond limits set See 552a(b). 3 six sue alleging repeated violations seeking certification class "`all since passage Act.'" Pet. Cert. 6a. Early on, applicants' cross-motions denied submissions evidence 4 divided panel affirmed across board. 170 (2002). treated suffered because violation, id., 176-179, found distress, physical symptoms, medical treatment, loss income, impact behavior. indication affliction conclusory allegations "`torn . pieces'" "`greatly concerned worried'" disclosure potentially "`devastating'" consequences. Id., 181. petitioned review plaintiff may Because Circuit's decision conflicted views Circuits, see, e.g., Orekoya v. Mooney, 330 1, 7-8 (CA1 2003); Wilborn Health Human Servs., 49 597, 603 (CA9 1995); Waters Thornburgh, 888 2d 870, 872 (CADC 1989); Johnson Treasury, IRS, 700 971, 977, n. 12 (CA5 1983); Fitzpatrick 665 327, 330-331 (CA11 1982), we certiorari. 539 957 (2003). now affirm. II 6 "[I]n protect privacy identified information systems maintained Federal agencies, necessary regulate collection, maintenance, use, dissemination agencies." 1974, 2(a)(5), 88 1896. failures 7 Subsection (g)(1) recognizes misconduct fitting four categories (the fourth, here, being catchall), §§ 552a(g)(1)(A)-(D), makes redress each. first two cover deficient management records: (g)(1)(A) correction inaccurate material record, (g)(1)(B) right access refusing allow inspect record kept him. each instance, further specify things de novo nature (as distinct deferential review), 552a(g)(2)(A), (g)(3)(A), mechanisms exercising judicial equity jurisdiction (by camera inspection, example), 552a(g)(3)(A). 8 remaining deal derelictions consequences per se. (g)(1)(C) describes maintain adequate individual, result determination "adverse" person. hew terms Like inspection infractions, breaches are addressed governing relief: 9 "In brought (D) manner willful, amount equal sum — 10 "(A) refusal failure, $1,000; 11 "(B) costs together attorney fees determined court." 552a(g)(4).1 argues (g)(4)(A) entitles violation: consequence recovery. think better side argument. 13 To begin with, supported analysis. gets point guaranteeing It made provision, words, victim recover. simplest phrase looks back anything equitable relief). sustains damages," either 14 Nor strong say does ignore language. reads mean more, last make "liable," thus able describe whom guarantee. way pays attention (and consequent recovery) damages.2 15 "entitle[ment] satisfied tension however. reaching plaintiff, See, e. g., Keeton, D. Dobbs, R. & Owen, Prosser Keeton Law Torts (5th ed. 1984). instead, identifies otherwise. respond sense analogous common law show particular items injury dollar Traditionally, "general" torts damages: monetary harm.3 16 Such rejoinder pass muster however, previously mentioned indicates serious doubt violation. An established Protection Study Commission, charged, among jobs, consider "whether should incurred sections 552a(g)(1)(C) title 5."4 5(c)(2)(B)(iii), 1907. is, day. therefore clearly unavailable, business treating just recovery, something more. 17 This inference Commission's mandate underscored showing damages.5 Senate person," followed "in 3418, 93d Cong., Sess., 303(c)(1) (1974). Although covered see supra, trimmed final statute, later revision recommended Commission. deletion "general fairly seen, then, deliberate elimination possibility imputing awarding damages.6 precludes hope damages.7 18 open objection purpose served conditioning person's "but $1,000" costs. do, accordingly accomplishes nothing.8 19 There three loose ends. assumes recognizing "civil action" meant, course so. equally our view deprive independent readily understood function: 552a(g)(1)(D) acts term art identifying potential satisfies injury-in-fact requirements Article standing, consequently bring dismissal want standing sue. Director, Programs Newport News Shipbuilding Dry Dock Co., 514 122, 126 (1995) ("The `person aggrieved' many designate those challenge appeal decision, courts"); 702 (providing Administrative Procedure "adversely aggrieved"). That subjected enough courthouse door, Act.9 20 Next, there offering drafters probably known about. At law, redressed proved "special harm," "harm generally nature." Restatement 575, Comments b (1938) (discussing "not actionable se"); (Second) (1976) (same). these cases supplemental compensation harm, hardly unprecedented contingent upon thereby avoiding giveaways "abstract injuries," Los Angeles Lyons, 461 95, 101-102 (1983).10 21 effort save pair worded similarly Tax Reform 1976, 1201(i)(2)(A), 90 1665-1666, 26 6110(j)(2)(A); 1202(e)(1), 1687, 7217(c) (1976 ed., Supp. V) (repealed 1982); Electronic Communications 1986, 201, 100 1866, 2707(c). He contends enactments sometimes 552a(g)(4) authorizing true liquidated remedies. Rep. 94-938, 348 1202(e)(1) Act); 99-541, 43 (1986) 201 Act). problems First, 1201(i)(2)(A) include critical limiting "entitled recovery." trouble reliance histories completely passed well after Those look wary expecting find reliable interpretive help outside construed, "`subsequent enactment,'" Solid Waste Agency Northern Cook Cty. Army Corps Engineers, 531 159, (2001) (quoting Consumer Product Safety Comm'n GTE Sylvania, Inc., 447 102, 118, (1980)).11 V 22 shown merely producing effect. damages.12 23 ordered. Notes: David K. Colapinto, Stephen Kohn, Kohn Linda Tripp al. amici curiae urging reversal. Briefs Information Center Marc Rotenberg Sobel; Reporters Committee Freedom Press Lucy Dalglish. says standards determinations effects, although inattention explained (APA), 706. Indeed, relied APA determining enforce using multiparty captionsDoe Herman, Civ. Action 97-0043-B, 1998 WL 34194937, *5-*7 (DC Va., Mar. 18, 1998). alone conditioned entire applying That, course, wrote. before, entitled-to-recovery guarantee, spoke referring individual's indicating touchstone 621, Commenta ("It [who defamation] reputation thereby"); 867, Comment d (1939) (noting same given defamation," "pecuniary [or] harm"); (1976). Commission ultimately "permit special $10,000 excess damages." Personal Society: Report (July 1977) On point, do understand GINSBURG's dissent take conclusion explicitly rejected proposal violations. Instead, GINSBURG appears argue wanted nonpecuniary (g)(4)(A)Post, 635, (plaintiff "`that proves him'" Torts, 402, b)). issue, today. 12, infra. While theoretically third category, "nominal implausible intended tacitly recognize nominal remedy eliminating SCALIA join responds criticism: "Congress rationally [c]ould written: `actual [in amount] $1,000.'"Post, 630. Congress's use contained history. 622 page. discussing refer sort amendment general, apparently thought delete inclusive entitlement. remove old did affect original pair, general." convinced Appeals, attorney's 552a(g)(4)(B), reason (g)(4)(A). 188-189 (CA4 2002). Instead entitling fees, see,e. 42 1988(b) (allowing fee" "prevailing party" rights statutes); Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. Wilderness Society, 421 240, 247-258 (1975) American courts' power prevailing plaintiffs), treat damages; get cart horse. reject related suggestion exceeding small render meaningless reading. easy imagine expenses turn fall short $1,000: associated running credit report, example, charge Valium prescription. Since address definition today, 12,infra, speculative overcome statute's plain support position, cites item extratextual material, published Management Budget 1975 guideline ActPost, 633. deference due interpretation, unelaborated persuasive. Courts Appeals precise CompareFitzpatrick 331 1982) (actual restricted loss), 972-974 1983) adequately demonstrated mental anxiety out-of-pocket loss). us, petition certiorari raise review. assume deciding correct complaints rise level suggest minimum; suffice 24 BREYER join, dissenting. 25 552a(g)(1)(D), alleged Court's Labor) manner. Tr. Oral Arg. 35; Brief Respondent (I). here contest cleanly presents resolution: Does claimant typically, anguish psychological meaning 552a(g)(4)(A)? accord Judge Michael, disagreed majority need I answer yes. Section 552a(g)(4)(A) affords safeguarded (D). words 552a(g)(4)(A)'s prescription, most sensibly read experiencing commission kind described structure, warrant construction, current loss, sort, 27 provides: 28 29 opening prescribes conditions depends. claimant's lie (D); claimant. authorizes "fails [a] concerning [an] [the] accuracy, relevance, timeliness, completeness" needed determine "the qualifications, character, rights, opportunities of, individual," lapse yields "determination individual." (Emphasis added.) allows [§ 552a], rule promulgated thereunder, Second, triggering willful." liability-determining (suit conduct), specifies consequences: "[T]he of" allowed 552a(g)(4)(B). 31 appear describing attendant dereliction; turns. Most read, wend add element. Davis Michigan Dept. 489 803, 809 (1989) fundamental canon construction context place overall scheme."). 32 Nor, individual" ordinarily equate phrases. Had urged expected instruction does: Cf. Barnhart Sigmon Coal 534 438, 454 (2002) ("`We refrain concluding differing subsections presume ascribe difference simple mistake draftsmanship.'" Russello States, 464 16, (1983))). Just greater breadth "individual sustained] "recovery" encompasses "`get[ting] win[ning] back,'" Webster's Third New International Dictionary 1898 (1966)). "Recovery" embraces "[t]he obtain[ing] (esp. damages) decree" "[a]n collected decree." Black's 1280 (7th 1999). So comprehended, yield 33 "It `a cardinal principle construction' ought, whole, construed that, prevented, clause, sentence, word superfluous, void, insignificant.'" TRW Inc. Andrews, 19, Duncan Walker, 533 167, 174 (internal quotation marks omitted)). full harmony principle. Under office, ante, 623, 8, element becomes swallowed up requirement.1 Further, renders synonym turns "shall liable" into "may liable." fails "`give every word'" wrote, Menasche, 528, 538-539 (1955) Montclair Ramsdell, 107 147, 152 (1883)), Circuits. 34 adhere key advanced courts appeals. interpreted courts, hinged 2003) (§ "[b]oth individual' $1,000"); 1995) ("statutory "with `no provable damages' incentive sue" 1982))); 1989) (If establishes she 552a(e)(2), omitted)); (Even [under 552a(g)(4)(A)], recoverable."); Fitzpatrick, 2d, ("Because [the plaintiff] costs, attorneys' 552a(g)(4)]."); cf. Quinn Stone, 978 126, 131 (CA3 1992) ("adverse "necessary" "to catch-all 552a(g)(1)(D)" Parks 618 677, 680, 683 (CA10 1980) (plaintiffs fees" intentionally willfully illegally disclosed protected information, causing "psychological damage harm"). Hudson Reno, 130 1193, 1207 (CA6 1997) ("A affirming respect plaintiff]'s her damages,' required 552a(g)(4)]."), overruled grounds, Pollard du Pont Nemours 532 843 (2001); Molerio FBI, 749 815, 826 1984) ("This [§§ (g)(4)(A)] requires, accurate records, sustained' failure."). 35 Circuits sync (OMB) 1975, year adoption. instructed OMB "develop guidelines regulations implementing Act]." 6, 1909. over months adoption, Guidelines. 40 Fed. Reg. 28949 (1975). Guidelines presented case. They interpret 552a(g)(1)(C), (D), (g)(4) convey: 36 "When finds pay 37 "Actual whichever 38 "Court fees." 28970. 39 amended several times OMB's remained unchanged. 56741; 44 23138 (1979); 47 21656 (1982); 48 15556 (1983); 12338 (1984); 50 52738 (1985); 52 12990 (1987); 54 25821 (1989); 58 36075 (1993); 59 37914 (1994); 61 6435 (1996).2 designed statutes, judges sound. sought afford "any resulting "willful intentional" th[e] Act." 2(b)(6), 1896 (emphasis added). commonly fear, anxiety, parlance, effects." Harm character must, genuine.3 Doe's, suffers, identity theft apprehended never materializes.4 41 bears emphasis injunctive Injunctive relief, counsel cases: suits amend 552a(g)(2), 552a(g)(3). 629, available. Hence, view, sues "he ("[T]he permits `reasonable' fees. factor reasonableness fee degree success obtained. For enjoys prosecuting `the fee' all.'" Farrar Hobby, 506 103, 115 (1992)) (citations however small, gain ironically, invites arrange manufacture colloquy oral illustrative. Court: "Suppose said, `I'm my rating, I'm going [pay] $10 reporting company there's identity, $10.' Would damages?" Counsel respondent Secretary Chao: "[T]here response threat, theory, expense and, thus, 45 itself "fees report" prescription" Ante, 626, 10. dubious insist created essential Nevertheless, examples indicate disagreement 631-632, ethereal. 46 Government, slender generate, fears depletion fisc adopt 22-23, 5. Experience fears. candidly acknowledged argument: "[W]e problem enormous recoveries point." 35. No mindful endorse massive recoveries, class-action certification, App. 65a, refused certify actions. Schmidt Veterans Affairs, 218 619, 637 (ED Wis. (denying ground "suffered [agency]'s Act]"); Lyon 94 69, 76 (WD Okla. ("In questions affecting members greatly outweigh class."). Furthermore, disallowed runaway ensue count single discrete Tomasello Rubin, 167 612, 1999) (holding 4,500 "more-or-less contemporaneous transmissions record" facsimile constituted "act," 552a(g)(4), undisputed, accommodates concerns. give teeth deterring remedies occur. time, saddle disproportionate liability. former concern; House cost conscious. bill, reported Operations House, provided: (C) arbitrary, capricious, failure; 16373, 552a(g)(3) (1974), reprinted Legislative History 1974: Source Book Privacy, 288 (Joint Comm. Print compiled Committees Operations) (hereinafter Book). 51 passed, "The actions omissions officer employee violates rule, regulation, issued thereunder extent private circumstances "(1) 53 "(2) successful section, 303(c) 371. enacted, represented compromise between versions. bill's culpability standard ("willful, capricious"), present accounts 552a(g)(4)'s imposition requirement insulation excessive liability.5 hand, adds allowance only, specification ." earlier developed, 634, enables genuine, albeit nonpocketbook Act.6 55 statutes. 2707(c);7 6110(j)(2);8 V).9 These permit despite absence 99-647, 74 ("Damages 2707(c)] lost profits $1,000."); ("[D]amages [18 includ[e] violator litigation costs."); Conf. 94-1515, 475 (Title 6110(j)(2) "creates IRS deletions follow procedures difficulty establishing taxpayer invasion unlawful returns return [26 7217(c)] would, event, disclosure."). Sawyer, 120 1307, 1313 ("Pursuant C.] 7217, unauthorized (including punitive grossly negligent disclosures) greater, action."); Rorex Traynor, 771 383, 387-388 (CA8 1985) ("We hurt feelings constitute compensable 7217(c)]. Accordingly, jury's $30,000 vacated. taxpayers $1,000."). disposition trenchantly observed: feature legislation. contrast, am aware provide[d] 195 (opinion concurring part) omitted). 56 57 sue, agrees, based "allegations `torn pieces' `greatly worried' `devastating' consequences." 617-618 (some internal Standing succeed, holds, unless easily arranged expense. 10.10 gave suitors trier credits reasons stated track expressed Circuit, reverse Appeals. interprets `adverse effect'. sue."Ante, 624. reading, "open[s] door" affected" 624-625, while bars additionally infra, 635-636. door illusion: opens, shuts. briefing case, noted communication unnamed conveying "interpret Guideline payment $1000 47-48. informal cannot contemporaneous, long-published 552a(g)(4); cfBowen Georgetown Univ. Hospital, 488 204, 212 (1988) applied [deference] litigating positions wholly unsupported regulations, rulings, administrative practice."); INS Cardoza-Fonseca, 480 421, 446, (1987) ("An relevant conflicts `entitled considerably deference,' consistently held view." Watt Alaska, 451 259, 273 (1981))). dissented agreed colleagues noted: "[A]dverse rather presumed.. 187 part). declared affidavit "no money compensate [him] worry fear knowing [his] name establish credit, new change address, checking account cards." 15. co-plaintiffs, unanimously appeal, declaration asserts "is assessed."Ante, 621. applies negligence 165 (cited 621), letter 652H, 401 ("One normally results ."); personal humiliation him, [of privacy] normal extent."). `intentional willful' formidable barrier." 29; Reply ("Congress commentators agree qualification] obstacle Act."). noted,supra, 627-628, Labor's 96a-97a (Characterizing willful," Magistrate undisputed took little, any, complied Several Judges sending multi-captioned testified received training conduct positioned consideration dispute. places great weight Congress' establishment consider, things, (D)]."Ante, crystalline unaltered embracive sensible. 623-624, 2707(c), electronic communications, assess intentional, (1)(A) Internal Revenue failed accordance (c), subparagraph (1)(B) (g) (i)(4)(B), Court." 7217(c), repealed 1982, (a), defendant, defendant gross negligence, instance disclosure; action." Cfante, 627, (suggesting nonpecuniary, somehow heightened ("demonstrated anxiety") do). opinion. emphasize it) likely produce "massive recoveries" endorse." 636 (dissenting opinion). concede lead whenever 1974 pointed 60 "`intentional lower essentially art, test akin prevail Bivens action[:] `[C]ould believed doing legal?'" 33-34 say, restrictively, where bad faith. Albright 732 181, 189 means "without grounds believing [an action] lawful, flagrantly disregarding others' Act"); also, Scrimgeour 149 318, 326 1998) (same); Wisdom Housing Urban Development, 713 422, 424-435 Pippinger 129 519, 530 1205 (similar), 843, 848 Moskiewicz Agriculture, 791 561, 564 (CA7 1986) (similar); 602 (similar). Covert Harrington, 876 751, 757 (apparently broader standard). 62 Given technical, accidental, good-faith provisions. Hence risk public fisc. basic purposes majority's restrictive provision.

Category: 4