Nace v. Lawyer Disciplinary Bd.

How courts have described this case

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

• describing that, although § 1692f is a “catch-all” provision, there is a distinct body of case law elucidating § 1692f claims
• “[Section] 1692c restricts debt collectors’ communications with and about consumers and is understood to protect only the consumer-debtors themselves.”
• “In contrast to § 1692d, § 1692c restricts debt collectors' communications with and about consumers and is understood to protect only the consumer-debtors themselves”; Montgomery v. Huntington Bank, 346 F.3d 693, 696 (6th Cir. 2003

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).