Case and Court Issue at Stake Status
Bartlett v. Portfolio
Recovery Associates,
LLC. (Md.Ct.App.)
ACA supported a lower court’s decision that the rules of evidence do not
apply and/or are relaxed for debt-buyer small-claims trials.
Closed in 2014. Court of Appeals in
Maryland ruled 5-2 in favor of the credit
and collection industry.
Amicus Briefs Filed in the State Courts of Appeals
Case and Court Issue at Stake Status
Ahmedi v.
ChexSystems, Inc.,
Financial Mgmt.
& Assoc. Inc., et
al. (D.Ct.Dallas
County, TX)
ACA supported the member’s defense of an action brought by a consumer
(using a serial filer plaintiff’s attorney whose claims are often deemed
frivolous and meritless) falsely alleging FDCPA violations against the
member because the member, as a data furnishing debt collector, purportedly
failed to conduct a sufficient reinvestigation, failed to verify the accuracy
of the credit file data, failed to accurately update the file, and reported
inaccurate or unverified data in subsequent reports.
Closed in 2014. The court granted the
member’s Motion for Summary Judgment
without opinion.
Altman v. J.C.
Christensen &
Associates, Inc. (2nd
Cir.)
ACA supported a district court’s decision that the FDCPA does not impose
a requirement on debt collectors to disclose potential “tax consequences” of
settling an account for less than the full amount owed.
Ongoing. Briefing is complete. On Feb.
18, 2015, the case was submitted for
determination of appeal.
Monarch Recovery
Mgmt., Inc. v. Lynn
(4th Cir.)
ACA supported an appeal of a district court’s decision that the “call charged”
provision of the TCPA applies when the call is exempt from liability under
the TCPA pursuant to the TCPA’s “residential line” provision.
Closed in 2014. 4th Circuit issued an
unpublished opinion affirming the district
court’s decision in favor of the consumer.
Peak v. Professional
Credit Service
(D.Or.)
ACA supported the member’s defense against a consumer’s FDCPA lawsuit
alleging that the following voicemail message, when overheard by a third-party, constitutes in impermissible third-party disclosure: “Hi, this is Katie
and I have an important message from Professional Credit Service. This is a call
from a debt collector. Please call ###-###-####.”
Ongoing.
Riccio v. Debt
Recovery Solutions,
LLC (D.N.J.)
ACA supported the member’s defense against a consumer’s class action
lawsuit alleging that the member violated the FDCPA by using language and/
or symbols (in this case, a bar code) on envelopes mailed to consumers that
reveal information other than the debt collector’s address.
Ongoing.
Shockey v. Credit
Management, LP
( D.Colo.)
ACA supported the member’s defense of an action brought by a consumer
(using a well-known frequent filer of FDCPA lawsuits in Colorado) falsely
alleging FDCPA violations against the member, which the consumer
attempted to manufacture by using baiting and phishing techniques provided
by the consumer’s attorney in the form of a script.
Closed in 2015. The consumer voluntarily
dismissed the case against the member.
Winter v. Credit
Management, LP
( D.Colo.)
ACA supported the member’s defense of an action brought by a consumer
(using a well-known frequent filer of FDCPA lawsuits in Colorado) falsely
alleging FDCPA violations against the member, which the consumer
attempted to manufacture by using baiting and phishing techniques provided
by the consumer’s attorney in the form of a script.
Closed in 2015. The consumer voluntarily
dismissed the case against the member.
Zente v. Credit
Management, LP
(5th Cir.)
ACA supported the member’s opposition to Sergei Lemberg’s (a prolific
plaintiff’s attorney) appeal of a district court’s order referring him to the
Western District of Texas Admissions Committee.
Ongoing. Briefing is complete.
Industry Advancement Funds Awarded to Help Defray Member Litigation or Appeal Expenses