In Dalessandro v. Mitchel, No. BC293472, 2019 Cal.App.LEXIS 1309 (Ct.App. Dec. 17, 2019), the Court of Appeal said that service is ineffective by proof of mailing unless there is proof that the mailing was properly paid for. We conclude the trial court did not err in denying the motion to compel. The trial court found service of the demand to… Read More
In Smith v. LoanMe, Inc., No. E069752, 2019 Cal. App. LEXIS 1282, at *2-4 (Ct. App. Dec. 20, 2019), the California Court of Appeal addressed the scope of a cause of action under Penal Code 632.7. The facts were as follows: LoanMe is in the business of providing personal and small business loans. Smith's wife is the borrower on a… Read More
Here's our article on the CCPA's 30-day right to cure, published in the American Bar Association Consumer Financial Services Newsletter last month: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/business_law/publications/committee_newsletters/consumer/2019/201911/consumer/ Are you compliant and ready? Read More
Our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use (i.e "About Consumer Weblog" and "About Appellate Tracker") have changed. Please visit the links on the Firm's landing page to review those changes. Read More
In Rotkiske v. Klemm, 28 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S. 8 (U.S. 2019), the Supreme Court rejected the application of a discovery rule in FDCPA cases. Rotkiske does not contest the plain meaning of §1692k(d)’s text or claim that he brought suit within one year of the alleged FDCPA violation. Instead, he suggests that we should interpret §1692k(d) to include… Read More
In Lima v. United States Dep't of Educ., No. 17-16299, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 37472, at *9 (9th Cir. Dec. 18, 2019), the Court of Appeals explained: The FDCPA exempts from the definition of debt collector "any person collecting or attempting to collect any debt . . . owed or due another to the extent such activity . . .… Read More
In Stimpson v. Midland Credit Mgmt., No. 18-35833, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 37470, at *8 (9th Cir. Dec. 18, 2019), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a debt collector did not violate the FDCPA in its dunning letter collecting on a stale debt. Stimpson first identifies the letter's statute-of-limitations disclosure as a primary example of misleading… Read More
Beginning on Monday, December 2, 2019, the California Attorney General began holding a series of four public comment hearings to receive comments on the draft regulations issued by the Attorney General in October 2019 regarding the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”). Severson & Werson attorneys Joseph W. Guzzetta and Evelina Manukyan attended the San Francisco public comment hearing… Read More
In Reyes v. IC Sys., No. 3:19-cv-01206 (JAM), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 207563, at *1-5 (D. Conn. Dec. 3, 2019), the District Court held that simultaneously debt collectors' consumer reporting on the same debt did not violate the FDCPA. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) provides in relevant part that a debt collector may not use false, misleading, or… Read More
In Adkins v. Facebook, Inc., No. C 18-05982-WHA, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206271 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 26, 2019), Judge Alsup granted in part and denied in part a data breach class. This is a putative class action by plaintiff Stephen Adkins against defendant Facebook, Inc. Plaintiff asserts a claim for negligence based on Facebook's alleged faulty security practices in collecting… Read More
A Superior Court judge ruled on the applicability of Civil Code 1459.5 to an attorney fee motion brought against a Holder. The Superior Court held: The Court is unwilling to apply pending Civil Code 1459.5. It does not take effect until January 1, 2020 and is pre-empted by the Federal Trade Commission's May 2, 2019 ruling on the issue of… Read More
In Steven v. Carlos Lopez & Assocs., No. 18-CV-6500 (JMF), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 203621 (S.D.N.Y. Nov. 22, 2019), Judge Furman declined to approve settlement of a data breach class due to the absence of Art. III standing. In June 2018, an employee of Defendant Carlos Lopez & Associates, LLC ("CLA"), a provider of mental and behavioral health services to… Read More
In Burt v. Chase Auto Fin. Corp., No. 19-C-739, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 202056 (E.D. Wis. Nov. 21, 2019), Judge Griesbach permitted tort claims arising out of an allegedly wrongful repossession of a vehicle to proceed despite the economic loss rule. Chase asserts that the court should dismiss Burt's invasion of privacy, trespass to land and chattel, and conversion claims… Read More
In Lobel Fin. Corp. v. Guiam, No. H044095, 2019 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 7717, at *8 (Nov. 20, 2019), the Court of Appeal found that an automobile finance company's NOI withstood an ASFA challenge. In this case, respondent sent appellant an NOI pursuant to the ASFA. The terms of the NOI are not in dispute. What is in dispute is… Read More
In Cordoba v. DIRECTV, LLC, No. 18-12077, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 34146 (11th Cir. Nov. 15, 2019), the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit renewed the bite of Lujan’s ‘fairly traceable’ component of Article III standing, remanding to the District Court for it to re-do it’s analysis certifying a TCPA class against DIRECT TV. DIRECTV's second argument -- that class… Read More
The House Financial Services Committee passed 8 bills, according to an announcement from Rep. Maxine Waters today: The Ending Debt Collection Harassment Act of 2019 (H.R. 5021), a bill by Representative Ayanna Pressley (D-MA), to amend the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) to prohibit a debt collector from contacting a consumer by email or text message without a consumer’s… Read More
In Sullivan v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 19-0234-WS-M, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 196114 (S.D. Ala. Nov. 12, 2019), Judge Steele allowed a “permissible purpose’ FCRA case past the pleadings stage despite the commercial nature of the transaction. Entangled with the defendant's [*16] argument that it did not pull a "consumer report" is the argument that "FCRA does not apply to… Read More
In Heredia v. Capital Mgmt. Servs., L.P., No. 19-1296, 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 33444, at *4 (7th Cir. Nov. 8, 2019), the Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit held that a debt collector's reference to the possibility of issuing a 1099-C was materially misleading, at the pleadings stage. The language at the crux of this lawsuit is the part… Read More
In Cowley v. Equifax Info. Servs., No. 2:18-cv-02846-TLP-cgc, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 193522 (W.D. Tenn. Nov. 7, 2019, the District Court refused to allow a scheduled monthly payment issue case to proceed under the FCRA. The only evidence Plaintiff [*9] brings to defeat UCFSC's motion for summary judgment is that the industry guideline, the CRRG, suggests that when a furnisher of… Read More
In Alan v. Equifax, Inc., No. CV 19-6588-DMG (ASx), 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 194161 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2019), the District Court found no jurisdiction over a CCRAA claim. Federal law is not essential to the CCRAA claim under Cal Civ. Code section 1785.25(a). Defendant does not argue that the FCRA is a necessary element of the Section 1785.25(a) CCRAA… Read More
