Rosa v. Gaynor

How courts have described this case

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

• placing collection letter on attorney’s letterhead deceptive where letter is not from attorney because it creates a false sense of urgency
• granting plaintiff summary judgment where (1) letter created the false impression that defendant could and would file an enforcement action in Ohio immediately even though the defendant could have initiated suit only after obtaining authority from the collection agency and (2
• “The FDCPA does not extend to every bizarre or idiosyncratic interpretation by a debtor of a creditor’s notice . . . [but] does reach the reasonable interpretation of a notice by even the least sophisticated [consumer].”
• “The FDCPA does not extend to every bizarre or idiosyncratic interpretation by a debtor of a creditor’s notice . . . [but] does reach the reasonable interpretation of a notice by even the least sophisticated [consumer].”
• “The FDCPA does not extend to every bizarre or idiosyncratic interpretation by a debtor of a creditor’s notice . . . [but] does reach the reasonable interpretation of a notice by even the least sophisticated [consumer].”
• “The FDCPA does not extend to every bizarre or idiosyncratic interpretation by a debtor of a creditor’s notice . . . [but] does reach the reasonable interpretation of a notice by even the least sophisticated [consumer].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).