California Appellate Courts Split on FCRA State Court Standing Rules
In-house counsel overseeing California-facing consumer credit, background screening, and FCRA compliance programs must monitor the appellate split, as divergent state court standing rules will increase FCRA litigation risk and create inconsistent defense obligations across the state.
On June 4, 2026, California’s First District Court of Appeal held in Askins v. CRST Expedited that state standing rules do not require plaintiffs to prove a concrete injury to pursue Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claims in state court, a lower threshold than the federal standing requirement. The ruling deepens an existing split between California appellate districts on the issue, so the applicable standing standard for FCRA state court claims varies by jurisdiction. In-house counsel should review FCRA compliance protocols for California operations, update state court defense strategies to account for divergent rules, and track further appellate developments that may resolve the split.