6th Circuit Says No to Noerr-Penning Doctrine Defense to FDCPA

In Hartman v. Great Seneca Financial Corp., — F.3d — 2009 WL 1852930 (6th Cir. 2009), the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit refused to apply the Noerr-Pennington doctrine defense to the FDCPA, explaining:

Great Seneca and Javitch argue that they are immune from suit based on statements made during judicial proceedings and that permitting such suits as brought here under the FDCPA would violate their constitutional right to petition granted in the First Amendment. Similarly, Great Seneca and Javitch urge us to use the Noerr-Pennington doctrine to limit the application of the FDCPA. The Ninth Circuit has explained that “[u]nder the Noerr-Pennington rule of statutory construction, we must construe federal stat-utes so as to avoid burdening conduct that implicates the protections afforded by the Petition Clause unless the statute clearly provides otherwise.” Sosa v. DIRECTV, Inc., 437 F.3d 923, 931 (9th Cir.2006). However, there are various indications that the First Amendment and any common-law privilege that applied to statements made during judicial proceedings do not foreclose the current actions.