Edwards v. Niagara Credit Solutions, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a party had abandoned an argument that it made before the district court by failing to renew the argument in its initial brief on appeal
• holding that a debt collector who intentionally violated one provision of the FDCPA to avoid the possibility of violating a different provision could not establish the first element of the bona fide error defense
• defining a “bona fide error” as an error “made in good faith; a genuine mistake, as opposed to a contrived mistake” (quoting Kort v. Diversified Collection Servs., Inc., 394 F.3d 530, 538 (7th Cir. 2005)
• “The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act specifically requires that a debt collector disclose in all communications with a debtor that the message is from a debt collector.”
• “The [FDCPA] specifically requires that a debt collector disclose in all communications with a debtor that the message is from a debt collector.” (emphasis added) (citing 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(11))
• “A debt collector asserting the bona fide error defense must show by a preponderance of the evidence that its violation of the Act: (1) was not intentional; (2) was a bona fide error; and (3

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).