Talbott v. Giltner

How courts have described this case

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

• “Offering a payment option that does not violate the statute does not save offering a payment option that would violate the statute, as the latter is still an attempt to collect a fee which is prohibited.”
• “Offering a payment option that does not violate the statute does not save offering a payment option that would violate the statute, as the latter is still an attempt to collect a fee which is prohibited.”
• denying a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss a Section 1692f(l) claim where defendant notified the plaintiff by letter that she would be charged an additional $3.00 convenience fee if she made a payment using a credit or debit card
• “The FDCPA is a broad remedial statute and its terms are to be applied in a ‘liberal manner’”; to establish FDCPA violation, a plaintiff need only show: “(1) plaintiff has been the object of collection activity arising from a consumer debt; (2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).