Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Firm Profile

CEB Prac. Guide § 2A.62 -- Defenses -- Litigation Privilege

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.

California Court of Appeal Rejects Application of Litigation Privilege to Rosenthal Act Claims, Adopts Continuing Violation Theory to Statute of Limitations Defense

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Komarova v. National Credit Acceptance, Inc. 2009 WL 1803263 (2009), the California Court of Appeal held that the litigation privilege does not provide a defense to a Rosenthal Act claim, and applied the “continuing violation” doctrine to allow recovery for violations of the Act that occurred beyond the statute of limitations.    As to the litigation privilege, the Court… Read More

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

by Scott J. Hyman |

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… Read More

Severson & Werson Publish Article on the Applicability of the Litigation Privilege to Rosenthal Act Claims

by Scott J. Hyman |

On May 27, 2009, the Consumer Financial Services Law Report published our article entitled, "Does the Litigation Privilege Protect against Suits Filed under California's Rosenthal FDCPA?" at 13 Con. Fin. Serv. L. Rep. 3 (May 27, 2009).   The publisher allowed us to reproduce it here. Source:  Consumer Financial Services Law Report. Copyright 2009 by LRP Publications, P.O. Box 24668, West Palm Beach, FL… Read More

Eastern District follows Sial decision, says “no” to Norr-Pennington doctrine and Litigation Privilege

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Gerber v. Citigroup, Inc. 2009 WL 248094 (E.D.Cal.2009), District Judge Moulds followed the Southern District's opinion in Sial v. Unifund CCR Partners, 2008 WL 4079281 (S.D.Cal.Aug.28, 2008), and rejected both the Norr-Pennington doctrine and the litigation privilege as defenses to a Rosenthal Act claim. This court is unpersuaded that the Noerr-Pennington doctrine bars actions under the FDCPA. Rather, this court finds… Read More

District Court denies Noerr-Pennington Doctrine, but Allows Litigation Privilege

by Scott J. Hyman |

In Cassaday v. Union Adjustment Company, Inc. 2008 WL 4773976 (N.D.Cal. 2008), Judge Illston followed the decision in Sial v. Unifund CCR Partners, 2008 WL 4079281, *3-5 (S.D.Cal. Aug.28, 2008) by refusing to apply the Noerr-Pennington doctrine to bar FDCPA claims.  However, Judge Illston did not follow Sial's holding that the litigation privilege does not provide a defense to FDCPA… Read More

Southern District Rejects Noerr-Pennington and Litigation Privilege Defenses to FDCPA Claims

by Scott J. Hyman |

After favorable treatment of the Noerr-Pennington Doctrine by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Sosa v. DirectTV, 437 F.3d 923, 929 (9th Cir. 2006), many saw analogy to FDCPA claims.  In Sial v. Unifund CCR Partners, 2008 WL 4079281 (S.D.Cal. 2008), Judge Miller refused to apply the defense to litigation-related debt collection conduct.  The Noerr-Pennington doctrine derives… Read More

1 2