Document: 534 U.S. 19122 S.Ct. 441151 L.Ed.2d 339 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of United States Reports. Readers are requested notify Reporter Decisions, Supreme Court States, Washington, D. C. 20543, any typographical or other errors, order that corrections may be made goes press.TRW INC., PETITIONERv.ADELAIDE ANDREWS No. 00-1045. SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES Argued October 9, 2001Decided November 13, 2001 Syllabus The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA Act) requires credit reporting agencies, inter alia, maintain "reasonable procedures" avoid improper disclosures consumer information. 15 U.S.C. § 1681e (a). Act's limitations provision prescribes an action enforce liability created under must brought "within two years from date on which arises, except where a defendant has willfully misrepresented information required [the Act] disclosed plaintiff] and material [a claim Act], at time within after plaintiff's] discovery misrepresentation." §1681p. Plaintiff-respondent Adelaide Andrews visited doctor's office Santa Monica, California there filled out form listing her name, Social Security number, basic An receptionist named Andrea (the Impostor) copied data moved Las Vegas, she attempted open accounts using Andrews' number own last name address. On July 25, September 27, 28, 1994, January 3, 1995, defendant-petitioner TRW Inc. furnished copies report companies Impostor sought credit. did not learn these until May 31, when refinance home process received copy reflecting Impostor's activity. She sued for injunctive monetary relief 21, 1996, alleging had violated by failing verify, predisclosure third parties, Monica initiated applications was otherwise involved underlying transactions. partial summary judgment, arguing, FCRA's statute expired claims stemming TRW's first because both occurred more than suit. countered period those commence discovered disclosures. District held barred, reasoning §1681p's explicit exception, covers only misrepresentation claims, precludes judicial attribution broader rule FCRA. Ninth Circuit reversed, applying what it considered "general federal rule" starts running party knows reason know injured, unless Congress expressly legislates otherwise. Held: 1. A general does govern That section explicitly delineates exceptional case triggers two-year limitation, fall category. Pp. 6-13. (a) Even if correctly identified presumption favor rule, issue this oblige decide, Appeals significantly overstated scope force such presumption. court placed undue weight Holmberg v. Armbrecht, 327 392 , 397, stands proposition equity tolls cases fraud concealment, but establish across all contexts. recognized prevailing moreover, were decided contexts, latent disease medical malpractice, "where cry [such a] loudest," Rotella Wood, 528 549 555. See Kubrick, 444 111 ; Urie Thompson, 337 163 . also observed lower courts generally apply silent issue, adopted as its own. Further, beyond doubt, never endorsed Circuit's view can convey refusal adopt command, rather implication particular statute's structure text. Thus, even exists, would FCRA, area law cries application begins run. 6-7. (b) Section 1681p's text evince Congress' intent preclude rule. Where enumerates certain exceptions prohibition, additional implied, absence evidence contrary legislative intent. Andrus Glover Constr. Co., 446 608 616-617. 1681p provides limitation runs "liability arises," single exception involving defendant's willful It distort convert into Leatherman Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence Coordination Unit, 507 168. 7-8. (c) At least equally telling, reading §1681p practical effect render express superfluous most unusual circumstances. In paradigmatic setting plaintiff requests agency responds concealing wrongdoing, do no work performed rejects Government's attempt give some independent characterizing codification doctrine equitable estoppel. scenario constructed Government support characterization unlikely occur reality. event, concede function one could attribute their theory arise rare egregious cases. Adopting position therefore insignificant, wholly superfluous, cardinal principle statutory construction. 8-11. (d) arguments defense decision below unconvincing. First, contention expressed words framing "date arises" compelled dictionary definition "arise" unsupported Court's precedent. Second, reliance history fails convince intended sub silentio addition limited provided. 11-13. 2. Because raised briefed below, reach alternative argument that, incorporate "liability" FCRA violation occurs, sometimes later "actual damages" materialize. notes join advancing here. doubtful argument, valid, aid case. 13-15. 225 F.3d 1063, reversed remanded. ON WRIT CERTIORARI TO OFAPPEALS FOR NINTH CIRCUIT Ginsburg, J., delivered Court, Rehnquist, Stevens, O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, Breyer, JJ., joined. Opinion Justice Ginsburg Court. 1 concerns governing suits based Act), added, 84 Stat. 1127, amended, 1681 et seq. (1994 ed. Supp. V).1 prescription appears §1681p, sets exception. Generally, arises." "any plaintiff]": representation Act, suit 2 case; complaint allege "require[s] plaintiff]." nevertheless contends, held, applicable commenced run upon Inc.'s alleged violations Act. 3 We hold limitation. liberty make well. 4 * 5 enacted 1970 promote efficiency Nation's banking system protect privacy. ed.). As relevant here, seeks accomplish goals requiring agencies designed "to assure maximum possible accuracy information" contained reports, §1681e(b), "limit furnishing reports] to" statutorily enumerated purposes, §1681e(a); 1681b V). creates private right allowing injured consumers recover actual caused negligent punitive damages noncompliance. 1681n 1681o ed.).2 B 6 facts part undisputed. June 17, 1993, radiologist's California. new patient information, including birth date, number. handed receptionist, Impostor), who thereafter Nevada. Once there, numerous occasions 7 four occasions, company TRW. Each time, computers registered match between initial responded file. thus request bank 1994; cable television department store another provider 1995. All recipients rejected 8 mortgage concedes promptly corrected file learning mistake. alleges, however, blemishes inconvenience emotional distress, they forced abandon refinancing efforts settle line less favorable terms. 9 almost 17 months fraudulent conduct disclosures, filed Central Her stated categories against TRW, here.3 App. 15-17. Those response failed predisclosure, asserted processing matched profile correspond key identifiers, notably address, facilitated identity theft. According Andrews, verification failure constituted §1681e(a), relief, damages, compensation "expenditure money, commercial impairment, inconvenience, embarrassment, humiliation distress" allegedly inflicted her. 15-16. 10 25 timely learned wrongdoing. agreeing with 1994 barred. Trans Union Corp., F. 2d 1056, 1066-1067 (CD Cal. 1998).4 11 ruling, injured." 1066 (2000). conclusion set forth section, precluded "[U]nless legislated otherwise," declared, "the read every limitations." Id., 1067 (internal quotation marks omitted). Finding directive, "none [Andrews'] injuries stale brought." 1066. Accordingly, reinstated disclosure remanded them trial. 12 holding incorporates parted Circuits; have concluded Clark State Farm Fire & Casualty Ins. 54 669 (CA10 1995); Rylewicz Beaton Servs., Ltd., 888 F.2d 1175 (CA7 1989); Houghton Insurance Crime Prevention Institute, 795 322 (CA3 1986); Clay Equifax, Inc., 762 952 (CA11 1985). granted certiorari resolve conflict, 532 902 (2001), now reverse. II 13 rested premise statutes limitations, regardless context, "unless otherwise." F.3d, 1067. To extent matter us conspicuously force. 14 principally relied our (1946). case, we instructed particularity been remains ignorance without fault want diligence care his part, bar begin discovered." Holmberg, U.S., 397 concealment; 555 (1979); (1949). "generally accrual issue." Rotella, 555; see Klehr A. O. Smith 521 179 191 (1997) (citing Connors Hallmark Son Coal 935 336, 342 (CADC 1991), "federal [a] [the] call different rule"). But And, statute. 16 erred applied controls nor "silent issue" addresses precise question; reads: "An materially individual so establishment 18 conclude 19 "Where intent." 616-617 (1980). provided natural implicitly excluded one. 168 (1993) ("Expressio unius est exclusio alterius."). converting Cf. Brockamp, 519 347 352 ("explicit exceptions" indicative "courts [from] read[ing] unmentioned, open-ended, 'equitable' statute"). 20 incorporating merely supplement apparent intent; entirely will discover tortious here potential user agency. If offending disclosure, operate toll concealment revealed. triggered, either date. setting, then, do. 21 Both Government, appearing amicus support, generate role They conceive judge-made estoppel, which, argue, operates triggered period, preventing benefiting tolling uncovered. 22 illustrate supposed separate application, frame following scenario: injures disclosing purpose. suspect year later, applies denied result agency's point, asserts, presumably put inquiry notice violation, start normal period." Brief al. Amici Curiae (emphasis omitted); Tr. Oral Arg. 35-36 (argument accord counsel). Some days follows up suspicions requesting report, disclosure. then already-commenced reveals 23 reject several reasons. matter, persuaded effort distinguish doubt supporting likely outside realm theory. fatal weakness narrative assumption charged constructive denial application. habitually paid bills might well lead prior error. place "inquiry notice," trigger reasonable person injury exercise due diligence. Stone Williams, 970 1043, 1049 (CA2 1992) ("The duty having arisen, whatever knowledge revealed."); Corman, Limitation Actions §11.1.6, p. 164 (1991) ("It obviously unreasonable charge search missing element cause revealed search."). 24 usual circumstance, gain exercised delay, fact conceal it. uncovering remain triggering event scenario, one, superfluous. "rare case[s]." Respondent 32-33; (implied "vast majority" cases). nowhere bulk provision's work, while proviso accounting half lie dormant situations. 26 "a construction" ought, whole, construed prevented, clause, sentence, word shall void, insignificant." Duncan Walker, 533 ___, ___ (2001) (slip op., 6) Menasche, 348 538-539 (1955) 'to effect, possible, clause statute.' " (quoting Montclair Ramsdell, 107 147 152 (1883))). "[W]ere construction statute," rendered "insignificant, superfluous." Duncan, 5). "reluctant treat terms surplusage setting," id., alteration omitted), decline here.5 27 advances neither find convincing. first, phrase used "literally expres[s]" "present[s] itself" comes attention plaintiff. 13. compel reading; contrary, party's position. Webster's Third New International Dictionary 117 (1966) (arise defined come being"; about"; become way demand attention"); Black's Law 138 (rev. 4th 1968) ("to being notice"). And offers strong imply avoid. Petitioner 16-20 (citing, McMahon (1951) (statute "cause injury-occurrence rule)). balance, conclude, particularly instructive, much dispositive 28 Similarly unhelpful, view, observes early versions provision, introduced House Senate, keyed occurrence violation." S. 823, 91st Cong., 1st Sess., §618 (1969); H. R. 16340, 2d. §27 (1970); 14765, §617 (1969). From disappearance language final version infers congressional deleted plainly established. 29 notes, heard testimony urging enact discovered" declined so. Hearings Subcommittee Consumer Affairs Committee Banking Currency, 188 (1970). addition, very change relies refute added same changed violation" Compare (1969), Rep. 91-1587, Congress, inserted carefully worded main simultaneously create sum, incarnations like ultimately settled, III 30 presents 22-25. contends necessarily occurs. Noting substantive provisions tie presence damages," §§1681n, 1681o, means existence," concludes Not maintains, essential elements coalesce: "duty, breach, causation, injury." 23; Hyde Hibernia Nat. Bank, 861 446, 449 (CA5 1988) requirement sustain suggests should issues erroneous institution dealing."). 31 timely: disputed suffered missed opportunities, cataloged complaint; "she bring," Bay Area Laundry Dry Cleaning Pension Trust Fund Ferbar Corp. Cal., 522 192 200-201 (rejecting existed "standard earlier obtain ").6 32 below. Reply 18-19. note, embraced ("Liability [Act] arises comply §1681e."), 33 §1681e(a) governed §1681n. events question, stated: "Any imposed respect liable amount equal sum "such allow." Punitive awarded moment accrue time. theory, arose occurred, began point. 34 35 For reasons stated, judgment further proceedings consistent opinion. 36 ordered. 37 Scalia, concurring Thomas, Notes revised extensively since altered Under 1996 amendments §1681n, $100 $1,000 violations. (a)(1)(A) ed., second collected about activities inaccurately attributed activity obligation §1681e(b) "follow procedures concerning whom relates." jury resolved Corporation, conduct. state-law each defendant. resolution remaining maintained adequate permissible purpose §1681b. 2d, 1068-1071. ruling. 1067-1068 Such questions, "needed determination judge." 1068. Similarly, agreed estoppel doctrines comfortably coexist free explained, supra, 7-8, license others, intentional rejection codify. rips 201 (1997), berth, post, 1, 3; record straight. question presented whether day sue ripened day. answered "no," indicates Laundry, 200-201. Continuing concurrence leaves off, clarified: "Unless told legislation 'complete present' purposes relief. Reiter Cooper, 258 267 ("While theoretically accrues calculating run, bringing suit, infer odd indication statute.")." 201. 38 Thomas joins, judgment. 39 ante, 5, 6, called injured," (CA9 2000). declines say expression correct. ("To decide "). There my little not, reluctance today inexplicable, given mere ago, says arose," 1451 (f)(1) ed.), "incorporates standard commences complete present action," internal omitted).1 40 quoted approvingly statement Iowa City, Wall. 583, 589 (1875), "[a]ll ." unquestionably traditional rule: absent indication, "has §122a, 684 (4th 1916). "That entitled sue, postpone limitation." §276c(1), 1411. 41 injury-discovery bad wine recent vintage. Other recognition historical fraud, e.g., Bailey Glover, 342, 347-350 deviated imputed occasion. 169-171 (1949).2 imagine "humane" Federal Employers' Liability recovery injuries. 170. repeated sentiment (2000), saying "cry loudest" context medical-malpractice suits; repeat again assertion involve "an rule," 7. These cries, properly directed us, whose job how (to point tendentiously) strike balance remediation policy repose. Amy Watertown (No. 2), 130 320 323-324 (1889) ("[T]he suspended causes mentioned itself] character, admitted great caution; instead administering it"). 42 operating background long When wanted said See, 1030 (g) V).3 also, 77m V);4 9612 (d)(2) ed.).5 previously reverse judgments; display uncertainty regarding current makes unspecifying roll dice. Today's opinion, clarifying meaning casts innumerable periods doubt. 43 nothing contradict complete, I concur analysis 14, n. "ri[p] berth." recharacterizes it, generalized "whether day," ibid., (as somewhat abbreviated petitioner Laundry's merits brief) "When Multiemployer Plan Amendments 1381 seq., collect overdue employer withdrawal payments? 96-370, O.T. 1997, i. (Framing respondent Corporation's brief virtually identical.) discussion follows: "[T]he conflicts Columbia [which] misses scheduled payment, withdrawal. Seventh Circuits payment conflicts." 200. answer presented, wrong action, circuits implausible. owed plan," 202, "complete accurately 6-7, simply (without endorsement) Courts substituted actions Tort Claims 120, (1979), apply" (2000); (1997). "No subsection begun act complained damage." 77k 77l(a)(2) title untrue omission, diligence, or, 77l(a)(1) title, based." [t]he loss connection release question."

Category: 7