Judge Tosses Target Employment Background Check Class Action

A Target employment background check class action lawsuit was dismissed by a federal judge in Minnesota who ruled that Target did not willfully violate the law.

Lead plaintiff Thomas Just alleged in his class action lawsuit filed in November of last year that Target violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act when it included information outside of the FCRA requirements. The plaintiff claimed that Target declined to hire him after running a background check and finding several criminal convictions.

According to the complaint, the FCRA requires that prospective job applicants need to be notified that the employer will run a background check on them and authorize that check. In addition, the plaintiff says that the notification and authorization should not contain “extraneous” terms and conditions because these might distract or confuse job applicants.

Target asked the federal court to dismiss the class action lawsuit in December of 2015 because it said that its notice and authorization did not include language that would distract or confuse job applicants. Additionally, Target argued that the alleged “extraneous” language in its notice and authorization only worked to clarify and enhance job applicants’ understanding of the notice.

According to Target’s motion to dismiss the class action, the FCRA itself includes qualifications that indicate it is not a violation of the statute to include additional language and that including supplementary language in a notice and authorization is not a “willful” violation of the statute.

The retailer also noted that previous court decisions were not clear about the requirements under the FCRA regarding supplementary language in background check notice and authorization portions of job applications. Target noted that some cases did go forward, but these cases are “easily distinguishable” from the class action lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge Donovan W. Frank dismissed the case with prejudice, noting a lack of guidance from the Federal Trade Commission and higher courts about the issue. “Even if the court assumes, for the sake of argument, that Target violated the FCRA, it cannot conclude that [the plaintiff] plausibly alleges that such violation was willful,” said the judge in his order.

The plaintiff will not be able to amend the complaint in his class action lawsuit, said Judge Frank, because the evidence doesn’t establish that Target willfully failed to comply with the FCRA regulations. Additionally, the judge cited the “less than clear text” of the FCRA regulation at issue in this class action lawsuit, as well as a “dearth of guidance” from higher courts and the FTC.

The plaintiff was seeking to represent a Class of Target job applicants who were subject to a background check over the past five years, as well as a two-year subclass. The plaintiff also sought statutory damages of $100 to $1000 per violation of the FCRA.

Just is represented by Cassie C. Navarro, Patricia A. Bloodgood and Shawn J. Wanta ofBaillon Thome Jozwiak & Wanta LLP.

The Target Employment Background Check Class Action Lawsuit is Thomas J. Just v. Target Corp., Case No. 0:15-cv-04117, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.