Tyler v. Michaels Stores, Inc. - 464 Mass. 492, 984 N.E.2d 737 (2013)

Rule:

The invasion of a consumer's legal right (a right, for example, established by statute or regulation), without more, may be a violation of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, § 2, and even a per se violation of § 2, but the fact that there is such a violation does not necessarily mean the consumer has suffered an injury or a loss entitling her to at least nominal damages and attorney's fees; instead, the violation of the legal right that has created the unfair or deceptive act or practice must cause the consumer some kind of separate, identifiable harm arising from the violation itself.

Facts:

In 2011, Melissa Tyler, a customer of Michaels Stores, Inc. (Michaels), filed an action on behalf of herself and a putative class of Michaels customers in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Tyler's complaint alleged that Michaels unlawfully writes customers' personal identification information on credit card transaction forms in violation of G. L. c. 93, § 105 (a) (§ 105 [a]), when Michaels's employees request and record customers' zip codes in processing credit card transactions. The District of Massachusetts certified questions of law to the court. The first certified question was whether under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93, § 105 (a), a zip code could be personal identification information because the zip code could be necessary to the credit card issuer to identify the card holder in order to complete the transaction.  The second certified question was whether under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93, § 105 (a), a plaintiff could bring an action for a privacy right violation absent identity fraud. The final certified question was whether under Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93, § 105 (a), the words "credit card transaction form" referred equally to an electronic or a paper transaction form.

Issue:

Under [G. L. c.] 93, [§] 105 (a), may a plaintiff bring an action for this privacy right violation absent identity fraud?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The court answered all questions in the affirmative. As to the first certified question, the court responded that a zip code constituted PIN for the purposes of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93, § 105 (a). As to the second certified question, the court responded that a plaintiff could bring an action for violation of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93, § 105 (a), absent identity fraud. As to the third certified question, the court responded that term "credit card transaction form" in Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93, § 105 (a), referred equally to electronic and paper transaction forms.