McGrady v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp.

[David A. Szwak]

McGrady v. Nissan Motor Acceptance Corp.
40 F.Supp.2d 1323
M.D.Ala.,1998.
November 02, 1998

Owner of automobile that was repossessed by automobile financing company commenced action against financing company and company hired to collect deficiency after automobile was sold, alleging conversion and violations of state repossession laws and Fair Debt Collection Practice Act (FDCPA). On defendants' motions for summary judgment, the District Court, De Ment, J., held that: (1) automobile owner established prima facie case of conversion; (2) issue of material fact existed as to whether company hired to physically repossess car was agent of financing company, so that financing company could be liable for conversion; (3) no breach of peace occurred during repossession; (4) notice was proper; (5) disposition of vehicle following repossession was proper; (6) financing company was not debt collector, so FDCPA did not apply to it; (7) company hired to collect deficiency was not agent of financing company; (8) material issue of fact existed as to whether collection company violated FDCPA; (9) claimed damages for mental anguish resulting from alleged FDCPA violations were actual damages, with unlimited recovery permitted; and (10) financing company was entitled to recover deficiency balance remaining after sale of repossessed automobile.
So ordered.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER


DE MENT, District Judge.
Before the court are two separate motions for summary judgment. First, Defendants Nissan Motor Acceptance Corporation (“Nissanâ€