A law firm that has no New York-licensed attorneys did not violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by writing a dunning letter to a Syracuse debtor indicating its creditor client would “consider additional remedies to recover the balance due” if the man did not respond, a federal judge has held.
Northern District Judge David N. Hurd ruled that the claims of the debtor, James Nichols, misinterpret §1692e(3) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which proscribes “the false representation or implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney.”
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
