It is currently Sat Apr 04, 2020 6:36 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Oct 11, 2007 9:33 pm 
Offline
Site Admin

Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 6:19 am
Posts: 1687
Case law addressing the FDCPA has expressly held that the litigation privilege does not apply to conduct proscribed by the FDCPA. In support, I've cited two cases: Irwin v. Mascott (N.D. Cal 2000) 11 F.Supp.2d 937, and Heintz v. Jenkins (1995) 514 U.S. 291.] Defendants like to cite Taylor v. Quall (C.D. Cal 2006) 458 F. Supp. 2d 1065, which holds that the California litigation privilege bars state law claims, including those under Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, for allegedly wrongful debt collection practices engaged in by defendants in the context of litigation. Authorities for no FDCPA litigation privilege: Nutter v. Messerli & Kramer, 07-00293 (D. Minn. 2007), Blevins v. Hudson & Keyse, Inc., 395 F. Supp. 2d 655, 662 (S.D. Ohio 2004); see also Campos v. Brooksbank, 120 F. Supp. 2d 1271 (D. N.M. 2000) (“Lawyers engaged in litigation are subject to the FDCPAâ€

_________________
David Szwak
Chairman, Consumer Protection Section, Louisiana State Bar Association
Bodenheimer, Jones & Szwak
509 Market Street, 7th Floor
Mid South Tower
Shreveport, Louisiana 71101
318-221-6444
Fax 318-221-6555


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 1 post ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group