Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

Anti-SLAPP Motions

Subscribe to Consumer Finance

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Consumer Finance Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

9th Cir. Holds that Walls v. Wells Fargo Decision Does Not Prohibit FDCPA Claim Where the Post-Discharge Violation is Not Dependent on the Issuance or Enforcement of the Discharge Order

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Manikan v. Peters & Freedman, L.L.P., No. 19-55393, 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 37176 (9th Cir. Nov. 25, 2020), the 9th Cir. distinguished its Walls decision to allow an FDCPA claim to proceed because the claim did not depend on the issuance or enforcement of the discharge order. P&F contends that Walls categorically bars a discharged debtor's FDCPA claims brought against… Read More

Court of Appeal (Cal.) Says FDCPA Plaintiff Need Not Dispute Debt to Challenge Amount of Debt in Collection Letters; Stated No TCPA Claim

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Ruiz v. Hunt & Henriques, No. D075286, 2020 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 4847 (July 29, 2020), in the context of an anti-SLAPP motion brought by the debt collection law firm, the Court of Appeal found that a debtor need not dispute the debt to challenge the amount of the debt stated. Hunt alternatively argues that Ruiz cannot recover under… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Says CLRA Might Apply to Debt Collection Claims

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Poghosyan v. First Fin. Asset Mgmt., No. 1:19-cv-01205-DAD-SAB, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14137 (E.D. Cal. Jan. 27, 2020), Judge Drozd found that a plaintiff might be able to state a claim for improper debt collection under the CLRA. Although the California Supreme Court has not yet addressed whether the CLRA applies to certain types of financial transactions such as… Read More

Court of Appeal (Cal.) Says Anti-SLAPP Law Applies to Debt Collection Practices in Anticipation of Litigation; Affirms Dismissal of Rosenthal Act Class Action

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Berry v. Locke, 2018 WL 1958851, at *2–3 (Cal.App. 2 Dist., 2018), the Court of Appeal in an unpublished decision dismissed a Rosenthal Act class action arising from 3-day cure-or-quit notices served by a law firm in anticipation of litigation. A statement or writing made in a judicial proceeding is protected activity. (§ 425.16, subd. (e)(1)-(2).) Further, “ ‘communications… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Says Litigation Privilege Does Not Protect Debt Collector from Alleged Misconduct in UD Collection Action, But Finds that Rent Is Not a “Consumer Credit Transaction” Subjecting Debt Collector to the Rosenthal Act

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Picazo v. Kimball, Tirey, & St. John, LLP, 2018 WL 1583228, at *5 (S.D.Cal., 2018), Judge Miller granted an Anti-SLAPP action filed by a debt collector in a Rosenthal Act claim arising from alleged misconduct in a state court UD action.  Judge Miller first found that the Rosenthal Act prevailed over the litigation privilege under the facts of the… Read More

District Court (Cal) Awards $47k to Debt Buyer Against FDCPA Plaintiff Who Erroneously Argued that Financial Code section 22340 Prohibited Sale of Debt

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Le v. Sunlan Corporation, 2014 WL 296032 (N.D.Cal. 2014), Judge Breyer awarded over $47,000 in attorneys' fees and costs to a Debt Buyer who had to defend an FDCPA claim grounded on a claim that Financial Code section 22340 (which applies to real estate backed loans) prohibited the sale of a CashCall loan.  "The Court will not revisit its holding that section… Read More

District Court (Cal.) Judge Karlton Rules Again: Law Firms Not Exempt from Rosenthal Act; Finds anti-SLAPP Motion Wanting

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Davis v. Hollins Law, 2013 WL 1091221 (E.D.Cal. 2013), Judge Karlton (again) found that that the “attorney” exemption from the definition of “debt collector” under the Rosenthal Act does not extend to “law firms.”  Judge Karlton also found Defendants’ anti-SLAPP motion wanting because the phone calls left were not meaningfully in anticipation of litigation. Defendant argues that it left… Read More