Zamos v. Asset Acceptance, LLC

How courts have described this case

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

• suggesting that a call merely identifying caller as a debt collector is insufficient to violate the FDCPA
• implying that a call that merely identified the caller as a debt collector was insufficient to violate the FDCPA
• “[Disputes currently exist among the courts as to whether the FCRA creates a private cause of action for a consumer against a furnisher of credit information.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).