19 Cited authorities

Landgraf v. USI Film Prods.
511 U.S. 244 (1994) Cited 3,840 times 34 Legal Analyses
Holding that a statute may apply retroactively when "clear congressional intent favor such a result"
Jerman v. Carlisle
559 U.S. 573 (2010) Cited 760 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
Federal Election Commission v. Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
454 U.S. 27 (1981) Cited 513 times
Holding that the FEC is "precisely the type of agency to which deference should presumptively be afforded"
Wagner v. Daewoo Heavy Industries Am. Corp.
314 F.3d 541 (11th Cir. 2002) Cited 723 times
Holding that a "district court is not required to grant a plaintiff leave to amend his complaint sua sponte when the plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, never filed a motion to amend nor requested leave to amend before the district court"
Doe v. R.R. Donnelley Sons Co.
42 F.3d 439 (7th Cir. 1994) Cited 824 times
Holding that Title VII does not recognize a claim for loss of consortium
Evory v. RJM Acquisitions Funding LLC
505 F.3d 769 (7th Cir. 2007) Cited 268 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that communications directed to a consumer's attorney are actionable under §§ 1692d–1692g
Bartlett v. Heibl
128 F.3d 497 (7th Cir. 1997) Cited 320 times
Holding that a plaintiff who was "not seeking actual damages" could still receive "statutory damages" under the FDCPA
Miller v. McCalla, Raymer, Padrick, Cobb
214 F.3d 872 (7th Cir. 2000) Cited 272 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding that a debt collector did not satisfy § 1692g by providing a phone number that the debtor could call to obtain the required information
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
Chuway v. Nat. Action Financial Services
362 F.3d 944 (7th Cir. 2004) Cited 142 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that the letter was confusing because the balance was not clearly stated
Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5 Cited 22,753 times 16 Legal Analyses
Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system
Section 7001 - General rule of validity
15 U.S.C. § 7001 Cited 204 times 40 Legal Analyses
Requiring recognition of electronic signatures
Section 7006 - Definitions
15 U.S.C. § 7006 Cited 35 times 7 Legal Analyses
Defining "consumer" in the context of the E-Sign Act as "an individual who obtains, through a transaction, products or services which are used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, and also means the legal representative of such an individual"

Oliva v. Blatt, Hasenmiller, Leibsker & Moore LLC

19 Cited authorities

Holding that a statute may apply retroactively when "clear congressional intent favor such a result"

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 the FEC is "precisely the type of agency to which deference should presumptively be afforded"

Holding that a "district court is not required to grant a plaintiff leave to amend his complaint sua sponte when the plaintiff, who is represented by counsel, never filed a motion to amend nor requested leave to amend before the district court"

Holding that Title VII does not recognize a claim for loss of consortium

Holding that communications directed to a consumer's attorney are actionable under §§ 1692d–1692g

Holding that a plaintiff who was "not seeking actual damages" could still receive "statutory damages" under the FDCPA

Holding that a debt collector did not satisfy § 1692g by providing a phone number that the debtor could call to obtain the required information

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

Holding that the letter was confusing because the balance was not clearly stated

Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

Requiring recognition of electronic signatures

Defining "consumer" in the context of the E-Sign Act as "an individual who obtains, through a transaction, products or services which are used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, and also means the legal representative of such an individual"