Godiva FACTA Case Alters 11th Circ. View On Standing

Law360 (November 12, 2020, 6:07 PM EST) -- In April of 2019, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued a decision in Muransky v. Godiva Chocolatier Inc. that was widely viewed as swinging open the doors of courts in the circuit to plaintiffs seeking damages for bare procedural violations of consumer protection statutes.[1]

Last month, on Oct. 28, the full Eleventh Circuit sitting en banc reversed the panel's prior decision.

The court's decision in Godiva dramatically altered the circuit's plaintiff-friendly view of standing.[2] In fact, Godiva is the latest in a string of appellate decisions to interpret the standing requirements set forth...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.

  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!


Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!