18 Cited authorities

Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 220,134 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
Jerman v. Carlisle
559 U.S. 573 (2010) Cited 762 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the bona fide error defense in § 1692k(c) does not apply to a violation of the FDCPA resulting from a debt collector's incorrect interpretation of the requirements of that statute" and reversing the contrary judgment of the court of appeals
Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores
421 U.S. 723 (1975) Cited 2,083 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that only purchasers and sellers of a security have a private right of action under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b–5
Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc.
458 U.S. 564 (1982) Cited 1,270 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court has no discretion in the assessment of the double-wage penalty
Johnson v. Cambridge Industries, Inc.
325 F.3d 892 (7th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,325 times
Holding that "Johnson's allegation that he was given harder work assignments" does not amount to a materially adverse employment action
Lewis v. ACB Business Services, Inc.
135 F.3d 389 (6th Cir. 1998) Cited 1,500 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a company whose principal purpose is to extend credit rather than collect debts is not a debt collector under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act
Demarest v. Manspeaker
498 U.S. 184 (1991) Cited 227 times
Holding that prisoners who testify in federal court are entitled to witness fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1821, even though “prisoners are technically ‘produced’ under a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, rather than summoned by a subpoena”
Kort v. Diversified Collection Services, Inc.
394 F.3d 531 (7th Cir. 2005) Cited 207 times
Holding that the bona fide error defense requires only negation of specific intent
Nielsen v. Dickerson
307 F.3d 623 (7th Cir. 2002) Cited 132 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"
AA Sales & Associates, Inc. v. Coni-Seal, Inc.
550 F.3d 605 (7th Cir. 2008) Cited 105 times
Explaining that "the procuring cause rule is merely a default rule and is inapplicable when a contract specifies other bases of fee recovery"
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 335,322 times 160 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 1692k - Civil liability
15 U.S.C. § 1692k Cited 6,186 times 66 Legal Analyses
Holding debt collectors civilly liable for illicit debt collection practices
Section 1821 - Per diem and mileage generally; subsistence
28 U.S.C. § 1821 Cited 2,298 times 38 Legal Analyses
Setting witness fees at $40 per day
Section 1692i - Legal actions by debt collectors
15 U.S.C. § 1692i Cited 370 times 2 Legal Analyses
Establishing venue requirements for a debt collector "in the case of an action [brought by the debt collector] to enforce an interest in real property securing the consumer's obligation"

Oliva v. Blatt, Hasenmiller, Leibsker & Moore LLC

18 Cited authorities

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Holding that "the bona fide error defense in § 1692k(c) does not apply to a violation of the FDCPA resulting from a debt collector's incorrect interpretation of the requirements of that statute" and reversing the contrary judgment of the court of appeals

Holding that only purchasers and sellers of a security have a private right of action under Section 10(b) and Rule 10b–5

Holding that a court has no discretion in the assessment of the double-wage penalty

Holding that "Johnson's allegation that he was given harder work assignments" does not amount to a materially adverse employment action

Holding that a company whose principal purpose is to extend credit rather than collect debts is not a debt collector under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act

Holding that prisoners who testify in federal court are entitled to witness fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1821, even though “prisoners are technically ‘produced’ under a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum, rather than summoned by a subpoena”

Holding that the bona fide error defense requires only negation of specific intent

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"

Explaining that "the procuring cause rule is merely a default rule and is inapplicable when a contract specifies other bases of fee recovery"

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Holding debt collectors civilly liable for illicit debt collection practices

Setting witness fees at $40 per day

Establishing venue requirements for a debt collector "in the case of an action [brought by the debt collector] to enforce an interest in real property securing the consumer's obligation"