In Davis v. Nebraska Furniture Mart, plaintiff alleged that defendant violated the FDCPA while attempting to collect a judgment. After the district court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss, plaintiff appealed, arguing that the defendant engaged in unlawful collection practices by obtaining a bench warrant for failure to appear at a hearing on the execution of the judgment in an attempt to pressure plaintiff into paying a debt. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the actions were lawful under state law, and therefore outside the reach of the FDCPA.
In Muhammad v. JP Morgan, the district court dismissed plaintiff’s complaint that alleged that defendant violated the FDCPA by sending a notice of foreclosure. The appellate court affirmed, finding that plaintiff was unable to allege that the defendant, as a security deed assignee, did not have a legal right to foreclose, as would be required to state a viable FDCPA claim.
In Golden v. Prosser, plaintiff alleged that defendant’s collection letter violated the FDCPA by stating that a debt was owed when it was not, and incorrectly identified the creditor. The court granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that an allegation that a debt is not owed, with noting more “cannot form a basis for a false and misleading practices claim under the FDCPA.” The court also found that any technical misstatements identifying the creditor were not material because the letter clearly identified that the debt and advised plaintiff that it related to plaintiff’s vehicle purchase.
► Back to News & Resources
