The Illinois Supreme Court recently issued a significant decision affecting Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) claims brought in Illinois state courts. In Fausett v. Walgreens, the court held that consumers must demonstrate a concrete, actual injury to have standing to pursue claims under the FCRA and FACTA, rather than relying solely on statutory violations.
The decision builds on recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent limiting standing for federal statutory claims and rejects the idea that state courts can hear FCRA cases without a showing of real harm. The court concluded that an alleged increased risk of identity theft—without evidence of misuse or actual damage—was too speculative to support a claim for damages.
Why This Matters
The ruling raises the bar for FCRA litigation in Illinois by requiring plaintiffs to show actual harm, such as identity theft, credit damage, or a lost employment or housing opportunity. It also signals increased scrutiny of no-injury class actions and may influence how Illinois courts—and potentially courts in other states—evaluate standing under federal consumer protection statutes.
About the Author
Mark Mailman is Managing Shareholder of Francis Mailman Soumilas, P.C.
This post summarizes an article originally published in The Legal Intelligencer on January 5, 2026. The full article is available to subscribers.