Opinion No. 57-0502

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 collection letter seeking payment on a time-barred debt (without disclosing its unenforceability) but offering a ‘settlement’ and inviting partial payment (without disclosing the possible pitfalls) could constitute a violation of the FDCPA”
• holding that an effort to collect on a time or procedurally-barred debt is not automatically unlawful, but a letter violates the Act if it could lead “unsophisticated consumer” to believe her debt is legally enforceable
• holding that a “collection letter seeking payment on a time-barred debt (without disclosing its unenforceability) but offering a ‘settlement’ and inviting partial payment (without disclosing the possible pitfalls) could constitute a violation of the FDCPA.”
• observing that \it is not automatically unlawful for a debt collector to seek payment of a time-barred debt\
• noting that \it is not automatically unlawful for a debt collector to seek payment of a time-barred debt\
• explaining that because “Congress clearly intended the FDCPA to have a broad remedial scope,” it “should therefore be construed broadly and in favor of the consumer.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).