|
|
FDCPA: Summary Judgment/Motions to Dismiss
-
Nakao v. International Data Services (D. Hi. 03-00225
SPK/BMK - October 18, 2004) Various issues FDCPA theories
discussed including vicarious liability of collection employee
and collection of disputed amounts. More analysis to
follow.
-
Freyermuth v. Credit Bureau
Services. Inc..
248 F.3d 767
(8th Cir. 2001). The Defendant's attempt to collect
commercially reasonable service fees, which were otherwise
allowable under the Nebraska UCC, did did not violate the FDCPA.
Collection on a time-barred debt not a violation of the FDCPA so
long as there was no actual or implied threat of litigation.
-
Larson v. Jon R. Hawks, Ltd. - MOTION TO DISMISS ORDER - USDC
Minn. CV-00-2713 DWF/AJB June 21, 2001
- The federal court denies Defendant's motion to
dismiss. “...the Court finds no merit whatsoever to the
[Defendant's] contention that violation of the FDCPA is
conditioned upon the existence of a private cause of action
under Minn. Stat. § 332.50. A federal cause of action based
upon 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) may arise out of '[t]he threat to take
any action that cannot legally be taken.' Picht v. John R.
Hawks, Ltd. 236 F.3d 446, 448 (8th Cir. 2001). The
availability of a private cause of action under state law is not
a condition, in addition to the illegality of the action, that
is imposed by the federal statute.”
-
Sonmore v. Checkrite - SUMMARY JUDGMENT ORDER - USDC Minn. -
CV-99-2039 DDA-FLN - District Court denies summary judgment
to debt collector who sent allegedly deceptive collection
letters.
|
|
|
