3 Proven Strategies for Dealing with a Midland Funding Lawsuit
We noted earlier the Supreme Court’s review of the Third Circuit’s decision in Rotkiske v. Klemm regarding the statute of limitations for claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Again, this was a case...more
A&B ABstract: On December 10, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court held that, absent the application of an equitable doctrine, the one-year statute of limitations for actions against debt collectors under the Fair Debt Collection...more
Rotkiske v. Klemm, 589 U.S. (2019) In a recent decision, the US Supreme Court ruled that a consumer claimant under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) has one year from the alleged violation to file...more
The Situation: The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA") allows plaintiffs to sue over abusive debt-collection practices within one year of "the date on which the violation occurs." 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). The U.S. Court...more
The Supreme Court of the United States (“Supreme Court”) recently affirmed the Third Circuit’s decision holding Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) claims are subject to a one-year statute of limitations from the...more
Earlier this year, this blog reported on the Supreme Court's grant of certiorari in Rotkiske v. Klemm to resolve a split in circuits on the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act's (FDCPA) statute of limitations. This week, in an...more
In a victory for common sense, the Supreme Court has ruled, in Rotkiske v. Klemm, that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act’s statute of limitations begins to run when the alleged FDCPA violation occurs, not when the...more
In an 8-1 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in Rotkiske v. Klemm that the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations (SOL) runs from the date of the alleged violation and not from a consumer’s discovery of the...more
On December 10, 2019, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Rotkiske v. Klemm, holding that, absent application of an equitable doctrine, the statute of limitations for a claim under the Fair Debt Collection...more
On December 10, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Rotkiske v. Klemm, et al., No. 18-328, holding that the one-year statute of limitations set out in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) begins to...more
In Rotkiske v. Klemm, the Supreme Court has the opportunity to do what many plaintiffs’ attorneys have dreamed of for years: effectively expand the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations by applying the “discovery rule” to...more
The FDCPA requires that any lawsuit must be brought, if at all, “within one year from the date on which the violation” of the act occurs. 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d). The US Supreme Court will hear argument this month in Rotkiske v....more
Partially obscured by the significant patent venue ruling in TC Heartland, another decision issued by the Supreme Court on the same day, Water Splash v. Menon, presents guidance for multinational plaintiffs and defendants...more
The Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (“Hague Service Convention” or “Convention”), was designed to simplify and standardize the service of legal documents...more
This paper is based on reports on precedential patent cases decided by the Federal Circuit distributed by Peter Heuser on a weekly basis. ...more
The U.S. Supreme Court rendered an 8-0 decision in Water Splash, Inc. v. Menon, on May 22, 2017, confirming that service of a complaint and summons by mail is not precluded by the Hague Service Convention (the “Convention”)....more
Last summer, we wrote about a unique situation that arose in the case of Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. 14-1935 (7th Cir. July 19, 2016), in which the Seventh Circuit found itself unable to assemble a “majority” of...more