Kaltenbach v. Richards

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 party who falls under the general definition of “debt collector” is a debt collector for the purposes of the FDCPA as a whole, regardless of whether the party is enforcing a security interest
• holding FDCPA applies to initiation of executory process foreclosure
• “[L]itigating lawyers are not exempt from the FDCPA if they otherwise qualify as debt collectors.”
• construing a complaint liberally in part because the litigant proceeded pro se
• “Heintz stands for the proposition that litigating lawyers are not exempt from the FDCPA if they otherwise qualify as debt collectors.”
• “[T]he entire FDCPA can apply to a party whose principal business is enforcing security interests but who nevertheless fits § 1629a(6)’s general definition of a debt collector.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).