Federal Trade Commission v. Keith H. Gill Richard Murkey

Good Law
2001 Daily Journal DAR 9911·265 F.3d 944·2001 WL 1044631·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8048·2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 20319
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitSeptember 12, 200100-55122, 00-55123California5,971 words

Opinion

Opinion

Paez, J.

It has been said that bad credit is like a “Scarlet Letter.” As Americans’ reliance on credit has increased, so-called “credit repair climes” have emerged, preying on individuals desperate to improve their credit records. These organizations typically promise they can have any negative information removed permanently from any credit report ... for a fee. On September 30, 1996, Congress enacted the Credit Repair Organizations Act (“CRO Act”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1679 — 1679j, to ensure that the clinics provide potential customers with the information needed to decide whether to employ the services of such an organization and “to protect the public from unfair or deceptive advertising and business practices by credit repair organizations.” 15 U.S.C. § 1679 (b).

The Federal Trade Commission (“FTC” or “Commission”) filed the instant action for injunctive and other equitable relief on March 2, 1998, against Defendants Keith H. Gill and Richard Murkey for alleged violations of the CRO Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45 (a). Defendants have, since 1995, offered services to remove any type of negative information from consumers’ credit reports. Defendants promised a “free…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.