Pleading Requirements

In Murphy v. Stephens & Michaels Associates, Inc., 2011 WL 1465761 (S.D.Cal. 2011), Judge Lorenz held that, at the pleading stage, whether a defendant was a “debt collector” was an affirmative defense for which Defendant owed the burden, not Plaintiff’s pleading burden. Plaintiff alleges a factual basis for relief she seeks under the FDCPA and the Rosenthal Act. Defendant argues… Read More

In Caudell v. Financial Credit Network, Inc., 2011 WL 1377643 (E.D.Cal. 2011), Judge O’Neill applied Iqbal/Twombly to find that Plaintiff had not adequately pleaded obscene or profane communications in connection with debt collection, nor did Plaintiff’s allegations of daily telephone calls rise to the level of pleading harassment. 15 U.S.C. § 1692d(2) “was meant to deter offensive language which is… Read More

In Taylor v. Pinnacle Credit Services, LLC, 2011 WL 1303430 (N.D.Cal. 2011), Judge Spero applied Iqbal/Twombly to find that (1) determination of whether a form letter violates the FDCPA/Rosenthal Act can be decided as a matter of law, and (2) the debt collector’s letter, which stated that defendant was represented by an attorney from New Jersey who was not licensed… Read More

In Marseglia v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2010 WL 4595549 (S.D.Cal. 2010), Judge Houston put to rest questions about the common law torts of invasion of privacy and “tort-in-se”, as well as the question regarding whether the Rosenthal Act provides multiple penalties for debt collection torts.    As to the invasion of privacy claim deriving from purportedly… Read More

On District Court in North Carolina says that it does.  In Racick v. Dominion Law Associates, --- F.Supp.2d ----, 2010 WL 3928702 (E.D.N.C.), Judge Fox applied the Twombly/Iqbal pleadings standards to affirmative defenses set forth by a debt collector in an FDCPA case, and set forth a primer on the split of authority amongst the district courts on the subject.  … Read More

In Riggs v. Prober & Raphael, 2010 WL 3238969 (N.D.Cal.), Judge Fogel held that, under Iqbal and Twombly, an FDCPA plaintiff failed to state a claim for lack of meaningful attorney involvement or for violating the Camacho  standard for debt validation warnings.  As to the former, Judge Fogel explained,   Plaintiff contends that her allegations that (1) Defendants sent the… Read More

In Day v. American Home Servicing, Inc. 2010 WL 2231988 (E.D.Cal. 2010), Judge Burrell held that a consumer stated a Rosenthal Act claim under the Iqbal/Twombly pleading standard for communicating with a represented party notwithstanding the fact that notice was not given in writing.  Judge Burrell explained:   Since the Rosenthal Act incorporates violations of the federal Fair Debt Collection… Read More

In Elliott v. Credit Control Services, Inc., 2010 WL 1495402 (S.D.Cal. 2010) Judge Sabraw applied the more stringent pleading standard of Iqbal and Twombly to find that a debt collector’s use of the term “Warning Notice” with its debt validation letter neither overshadowed the debtor’s validation rights nor constituted an unfair debt collection practice.    In two recent opinions, the… Read More

In Osei v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. 2010 WL 727831 (E.D. Cal. 2010), Judge Karlton discussed the pleading standards for a Rosenthal Act claim.  However, Judge Karlton did not discuss the heightened pleading standard for FDCPA claims as some other district courts have under Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twonbly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) and Ascroft v. Iqbal 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009). … Read More

In Korzeniowski v. NCO Financial Systems, Inc. 2010 WL 466162 (D.Conn.2010), Judge Eginton held that a bare bones Complaint merely setting forth the FDCPA's legal requirements failed under Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twonbly, 550 U.S. 544, 555 (2007) and Ascroft v. Iqbal 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949 (2009), explaining: [P]laintiff's complaint lacks any factual allegations entitled to deference under Iqbal by the Court. As the Supreme… Read More

In Puttner v. Debt Consultants of America, 2009 WL 1604570 (S.D.Cal. 2009), Judge Hayes applied a liberal pleading standing to the FDCPA under FRCP 8.  The Plaintiff argued that “foundational facts need not be pled with particularity in order to state a claim under the FDCPA or the RFDCPA” and that “the Complaint alleges sufficient facts to support claims for… Read More

In Sullivan v. CTI Collection Services, 2009 WL 1587588 (M.D.Fla. 2009), Judge Moody held that threadbare recitals of the FDCPA fail to meet the pleading standard of FRCPs 8 and 12(b)(6).  Judge Moody explained:      While the Supreme Court has not explicitly overruled Conley, it has explicitly rejected the language relied on by Plaintiff in Bell Atlantic Corporation v.… Read More

In Hambrick v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 2009 WL 1532676 (N.D.Miss. 2009), Judge Pepper required a Plaintiff to plead each element of the definition of “debt collector”, denying the Plaintiff the right to conduct discovery in order to be able to plead one of the elements.  The issue involved whether, when Wells Fargo took assignment of the debt, the debt… Read More