30 Cited authorities

  1. Heintz v. Jenkins

    514 U.S. 291 (1995)   Cited 1,006 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “debt collector” as used in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692a, includes attorneys notwithstanding the definition's lack of an express reference to lawyers or litigation
  2. Guggenheimer v. Ginzburg

    43 N.Y.2d 268 (N.Y. 1977)   Cited 3,300 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Reversing grant of motion to dismiss
  3. Miller v. Wolpoff Abramson, L.L.P.

    321 F.3d 292 (2d Cir. 2003)   Cited 936 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that demand for attorneys' fees in collection action did not violate the FDCPA where credit card agreement provided for such fees
  4. Clomon v. Jackson

    988 F.2d 1314 (2d Cir. 1993)   Cited 792 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the least sophisticated consumer standard applies to whether § 1692e has been violated
  5. Greco v. Trauner, Cohen Thomas, L.L.P.

    412 F.3d 360 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 240 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding no misrepresentation, and thus no 1692e liability against the debt collector law firm, where the law firm retained by the creditor clearly disclosed in the letter that the law firm was not acting as an attorney
  6. Avila v. Rubin

    84 F.3d 222 (7th Cir. 1996)   Cited 260 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that mass-produced dunning letters bearing facsimile of attorney's signature created false and misleading impression that communications were "from" attorney
  7. Zakrzewska v. the New School

    2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 3796 (N.Y. 2010)   Cited 104 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the NYCHRL imposes strict liability on the employer if "the offending employee 'exercised managerial or supervisory responsibility'"
  8. Nielsen v. Dickerson

    307 F.3d 623 (7th Cir. 2002)   Cited 121 times
    Holding that the FDCPA was violated where the attorney "knew nothing about the debtor and her potential liability beyond what [the client] had conveyed to him; and [the client] provided [the attorney] only the bare information that [he] required in order to complete the blanks in his form letter"
  9. Consolidated Edison Co. of New York, Inc. v. Town of Red Hook

    60 N.Y.2d 99 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 163 times
    Holding state had preempted local regulation regarding the siting of major steam electric-generating plants
  10. Jancyn Mfg. v. Suffolk County

    71 N.Y.2d 91 (N.Y. 1987)   Cited 132 times
    Holding that State law did not preempt a county ordinance prohibiting sale of sewage system cleaning additives where there was no express conflict with State Environmental Control Law
  11. Section 1692e - False or misleading representations

    15 U.S.C. § 1692e   Cited 5,670 times   82 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting "any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt"
  12. Section 1200.0 - Terminology

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 1200.0   Cited 1,662 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a lawyer to reveal confidential information “to the extent that the lawyer reasonably believes necessary ... to prevent the client from committing a crime”
  13. Section 1.1 - Definitions

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 23 § 1.1   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses

    For the purposes of this Part: (a)Charge-off means the accounting action taken by an original creditor to remove a debt obligation from its financial statements by treating it as a loss or expense. (b)Clear and conspicuous means that the statement, representation or term being disclosed is of such size, color, and contrast and/or audibility and is so presented as to be readily noticed and understood by the person to whom it is being disclosed. If such statement is necessary as a modification, explanation