Jessica Copeland and Riane Lafferty Important Reminders From the WDNY on Preservation of Evidence, Clear and Conspicuous Consumer Contract Language, and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA)
'Richard' provides a good refresher on the importance of preserving documentary evidence and the different standards surrounding preservation of documentary evidence, as compared to ESI. 'Schafer' includes an interesting discussion of what constitutes sufficiently clear and conspicuous language in a consumer contract. 'Braun' provides guidance on a law firm's obligations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
January 28, 2022 at 12:45 PM
10 minute read
Contractual Disputes
In this quarter's column we discuss three cases with some important reminders for practitioners. The first case, Richard v. Dignean, No. 6:11-CV-06013 EAW, 2021 WL 5782106 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2021), provides a good refresher on the importance of preserving documentary evidence and the different standards surrounding preservation of documentary evidence, as compared to electronically stored information (ESI). The second case, Schafer v. Direct Energy Services, No. 19-CV-6907-FPG, 2021 WL 5851189 (W.D.N.Y. Dec. 9, 2021), includes an interesting discussion of what constitutes sufficiently clear and conspicuous language in a consumer contract. Lastly, Braun v. Relin, Goldstein & Crane, No. 21-CV-6071 (CJS), 2021 WL 5054288 (W.D.N.Y. Nov. 11, 2021), provides guidance on a law firm's obligations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §1692 et seq., when collecting debts on behalf of clients.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All
Lawsuit Alleging $23 Million Contract Breach Against Biogen Moves Forward
Illusory Contract; Eviction Based on Illegal Use of Premises: This Week in Scott Mollen's Realty Law Digest
Splitting the (Painting of the) Baby: The Issue of Fine Art in Prenups and Divorces
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-58
- 2Sweet James Clinches $17.4M Personal Injury Jury Verdict in California's Kings County
- 3In Lame-Duck Session, US Senate Confirms Illinois Federal Judge on Bipartisan Vote
- 4Gordon Rees Opens 80th Office, ‘Collaboration Hub’ in Palo Alto
- 5The White Stripes Drop Copyright Claim Against Trump Campaign
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250
