Gully v. Van Ru Credit Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “a settlement offer that states the proposed discount and the length of the offer, but does not expressly nor implicitly indicate that no other offer will be made, passes muster” under the FDCPA
• rejecting claims that artificial deadlines create a false sense of urgency in the absence of proof that the collection agency \asserted or implied that this was the plaintiffs' only opportunity to settle\
• finding no FDCPA violation because the letter “did not state that [the defendant] was authorized to settle ‘only’ for 40 per cent until the specific dates mentioned, which would have injected an artificial sense of finality into the offer”
• dismissing complaint but collecting conflicting cases

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).