Effective, Experienced, Exceptional.

Discovery

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.

In Mrvich v. Midland Funding, LLC, 2017 WL 5999058, at *2–4 (S.D.Cal., 2017), Magistrate Judge Porter denied production of an FDCPA Plaintiff's tax returns to test whether the debt was consumer or commercial in nature. Defendant moves to compel production of Plaintiff's federal and state income tax returns for the years 2010 to 2012, and her federal and state income… Read More

In Nall v. Allied Interstate, LLC, 2015 WL 6529233, at *1-2 (S.D.Ind. 2015), Judge Baker allowed net worth discovery in an FDCPA class action as relevant towards the propriety of class certification. The cases cited by Plaintiff support the requested discovery. See Green, 997 F.Supp.2d at 935–36 (finding net worth helpful in deciding class certification). Net worth is helpful in… Read More

In Hallmark v. Cohen & Slamowitz, Midland Funding LLC, --- F.R.D. ----, 2014 WL 5017859 (W.D.N.Y. 2014), Judge Froschio did not require an FDCPA class action defendant to prepare audited financial statements where there were none, but, mere production of financial statements did not preclude plaintiff's inquiry into defendants raw data to allow Plaintiff to challenge defendant's valuation of its own business.… Read More

In Hill v. Asset Acceptance, LLC, 2014 WL 3014945 (S.D.Cal. 2014), Magistrate Judge Major granted in part and denied in part Rosenthal Act discovery in a class action, some rulings for which are highlighted below. The facts were as follows: Plaintiff seeks actual damages, statutory damages, attorneys fees, and costs for the alleged violations. Id. at 9. The alleged violations… Read More

In Swelnis v. Universal Fidelity L.P., 2014 WL 1571323 (N.D.Ind. 2014), Judge Cherry addressed discovery in an FDCPA class action.  First, Judge Cherry required disclosure of “Training Materials”: Plaintiff's Interrogatory No. 9 and Document Request Nos. 4–6, 8, and 11 each seek infor-mation—specifically: training manuals and other relevant documents—that relate to Defendants' Af-firmative Defense of bona fide error. Defendants objected… Read More

In De La Torre v. Legal Recovery Law Office, 2014 WL 1279738 (S.D.Cal. 2014), Magistrate Judge Bartick ordered defendant to produce phone bills, but only for the time relevant in the Complaint and redacted to exclude calls made to parties other than the Plaintiff. Here, the Court concludes Defendant's phone bills are only relevant to the extent they contain evidence… Read More

In Miranda v. Integrity Solution Services, Inc., 2014 WL 519239 (D.Colo. 2014), Magistrate Judge Mix ordered discovery of communications between the debt collector and consumer reporting agencies about the debtor’s debt even though no credit reporting allegations were pleaded.  Judge Mix framed the issue as follows: The discovery requests at issue seek information and documents that Defendant provided to the… Read More

In Devlin v. Law Offices of Howard Lee Schiff, P.C., 2013 WL 1459195 (D.Mass. 2013), Judge Dein ordered production of FDCPA manuals. The defendant shall produce any manuals concerning debt collection that it uses for general training purposes, as well any specific handouts or materials that it uses for purposes of compliance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”)… Read More

In U.S. v. Warner, 2012 WL 6087193 (N.D.Cal. 2012), Judge Beeler ordered the Government to produce FDCPA compliance information with regard to its efforts to collect on student loans from an in-pro-per attorney. So, are his discovery requests relevant to them? Yes. As noted above, Mr. Warner essentially seeks all communications between him and the Department (and its agents) and… Read More