§Why CasetextPricing

Christopher Phillips v. Archstone Simi Valley Llc et al

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Partial Summary Judgment as to Adjudication of Liability

32 Cited authorities

  1. Heintz v. Jenkins

    514 U.S. 291 (1995)   Cited 1,133 times   8 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. Richards v. CH2M Hill, Inc.

    26 Cal.4th 798 (Cal. 2001)   Cited 393 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in the context of FEHA claims, "[i]f the employer has made clear in word and deed that the employee's attempted further reasonable accommodation is futile, then the employee is on notice that litigation, not informal conciliation, is the only alternative for the vindication of his or her rights"

  3. Mccollough v. Johnson, Rodenburg Lauinger

    637 F.3d 939 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 274 times
    Holding that debt collection firm violated the FDCPA by requesting unauthorized attorney's fees in its underlying state collection complaint

  4. Fox v. Citicorp Credit Services, Inc.

    15 F.3d 1507 (9th Cir. 1994)   Cited 339 times
    Holding that “[a]ttorneys, like all other persons, are subject to the definition of ‘debt collector’ in 15 U.S.C. § 1692a ” and concluding that the defendant attorney acting on behalf of a client debt collector was subject to the FDCPA's requirements

  5. Kistner v. the Law Offices of Michael

    518 F.3d 433 (6th Cir. 2008)   Cited 178 times
    Holding "that the 'more than one reasonable interpretation' standard is applicable to the entirety of § 1692e as a useful tool in analyzing the 'least-sophisticated-consumer' test"

  6. Chicago Title Insurance v. AMZ Insurance Services, Inc.

    188 Cal.App.4th 401 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010)   Cited 139 times
    Holding that for ostensible agency to arise from the silence of the principal, the principal must know that the ostensible agent is holding himself out as having agency authority

  7. Komarova v. National Credit Acceptance, Inc.

    175 Cal.App.4th 324 (Cal. Ct. App. 2009)   Cited 132 times
    Holding that the violations that occurred during the continuing course of making harassing phone calls were not barred by the statute of limitations

  8. Joseph v. J.J. Mac Intyre Companies, L.L.C.

    281 F. Supp. 2d 1156 (N.D. Cal. 2003)   Cited 111 times
    Finding 24 calls, and automated calls to plaintiff's residence, allowed jury to find violation of state and federal law

  9. Ditty v. Checkrite, Ltd.

    973 F. Supp. 1320 (D. Utah 1997)   Cited 118 times
    Holding that defendant violated FDCPA by attempting to collect an amount in excess of Utah's $15 dishonored check fee, because to allow collection of a higher fee under the shoplifting statute "would undermine the effectiveness of the statute and would be inconsistent with Utah's Legislature's intention that dishonored checks be governed by the specific procedures outlined in the statute"

  10. Mabe v. G.C. Services Ltd. Partnership

    32 F.3d 86 (4th Cir. 1994)   Cited 119 times
    Holding that child support payments were not "debt" because they were "not incurred to receive consumer goods or services"

  11. Section 1692 - Congressional findings and declaration of purpose

    15 U.S.C. § 1692   Cited 15,046 times   139 Legal Analyses
    Finding that abusive debt-collection practices lead to "personal bankruptcies," "marital instability," "loss of jobs," and "invasions of individual privacy"

  12. Section 1692e - False or misleading representations

    15 U.S.C. § 1692e   Cited 6,946 times   109 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting false representation of the "character, amount, or legal status of a debt"

  13. Section 1692a - Definitions

    15 U.S.C. § 1692a   Cited 6,243 times   83 Legal Analyses
    Defining debt collector

  14. Section 1692k - Civil liability

    15 U.S.C. § 1692k   Cited 6,133 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Holding debt collectors civilly liable for illicit debt collection practices

  15. Section 1692g - Validation of debts

    15 U.S.C. § 1692g   Cited 3,451 times   68 Legal Analyses
    Setting forth requirements for disputing a debt

  16. Section 1788 - Title of act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1788   Cited 1,061 times   5 Legal Analyses

    This title may be cited as the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Ca. Civ. Code § 1788 Amended by Stats 2000 ch 375 (AB 1331), s 5, eff. 1/1/2001. Previously Amended September 3, 1999 (Bill Number: AB 969) (Chapter 319).

  17. Section 1788.17 - Applicability of United States Code provisions to debt collectors

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.17   Cited 526 times
    Incorporating federal FDCPA provisions

  18. Section 1692b - Acquisition of location information

    15 U.S.C. § 1692b   Cited 371 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Governing the acquisition of location information

  19. Section 1788.30 - Liability of debt collector for violation; costs and attorney's fees in action to enforce; cure of violation; violation not intentional; limitation of action; intentional violation by debtor

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1788.30   Cited 298 times
    Providing " debt collector shall have no civil liability . . . for a violation of this title, if the debt collector shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such violation"

  20. Section 2300 - Ostensible agency

    Cal. Civ. Code § 2300   Cited 248 times

    An agency is ostensible when the principal intentionally, or by want of ordinary care, causes a third person to believe another to be his agent who is not really employed by him. Ca. Civ. Code § 2300 Enacted 1872.