Camille Haddad v. Alexander, Zelmanski, Danner & Fioritto

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “the ‘baseline’ for verification is to enable the consumer to ‘sufficiently dispute the payment obligation.’”
• indicating that the “baseline” for verification in a given case will “depend upon the facts of [the] particular situation”
• noting that “the best means of’ verifying a debt is “an itemized accounting detailing the transactions in an account that have led to the debt” (emphasis supplied)
• “If the statement is not necessary to the outcome, it is dicta and nonbinding.”
• “the verification requirement is satisfied where the debtor ‘could sufficiently dispute the payment obligation.’”
• “If the statement is not necessary to the outcome, it is dicta and nonbinding.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).