Douyon v. NY Medical Health Care, P.C.
894 F. Supp. 2d 245
E.D.N.Y2012Background
- Plaintiff Douyon sues for FDCPA and NY GBL § 349 claims arising from NY Medical’s debt collection efforts by Schneider and Golyan.
- Schneider, a freelance debt collector, acted on behalf of NY Medical to collect Douyon’s debt and used telephones as part of collections.
- Plaintiff’s medical debt originated from 2009 emergency heart surgery and subsequent treatment at NY Medical; insurer paid part, leaving a balance disputed by Douyon.
- Defendants moved for summary judgment; Plaintiff seeks partial summary judgment on certain FDCPA and NY GBL § 349 violations; NY Medical seeks to limit vicarious liability and certain claims.
- Key events include Schneider’s workplace visit, a threatening voicemail, and letters allegedly claiming 10% interest, plus a business card that depicted him as a ‘Financial Crimes Investigator’.
- Judge grants in part and denies in part both parties’ motions, with trial on several issues reserved.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Schneider is a FDCPA debt collector | Douyon contends Schneider qualifies as a debt collector under FDCPA. | Defendants argue its status as a debt collector is a legal conclusion for the court to decide. | Schneider is a debt collector under the FDCPA. |
| FDCPA §1692g and related disclosures | Douyon argues Schneider failed to provide required notices within five days of initial communication. | Defs. concede no timely written disclosures were provided. | Plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on §1692g violations. |
| FDCPA §1692e(11) voicemail disclosure | Douyon asserts the voicemail lacked required debt-collector disclosure. | Defs. contend no initial disclosure was required in the voicemail. | Plaintiff is entitled to summary judgment on §1692e(11) for the voicemail. |
| FDCPA §1692c(b) third-party disclosure and other e-claims | Douyon argues Schneider discussed the debt at her workplace in front of a coworker and other deceptive acts. | Defs. contend no asserted §1692c(b) claim in the complaint; factual disputes remain on several e subsections. | Summary judgment denied for §1692c(b) and most §1692e subsections; issues of fact remain for trial. |
| NY GBL §349 claims and letters regarding interest | Douyon asserts deceptive practices under §349, including misrepresentations about interest. | Defs. contend Plaintiff lacked injury from letters she never received; verbal representations argued could sustain a claim. | NY GBL §349 claim denied regarding the January 19 and March 15, 2010 letters; verbal representations may proceed; other §349 claims denied. |
| Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress | Douyon alleges extreme conduct caused severe emotional distress. | Defs. contend lack of medical evidence and distress cannot meet the stringent IIED standard. | IIED claim dismissed due to absence of medical evidence and abandonment of the claim. |
Key Cases Cited
- Clomon v. Jackson, 988 F.2d 1314 (2d Cir.1993) (least sophisticated consumer standard for FDCPA claims)
- Howell v. New York Post Co., 81 N.Y.2d 115 (N.Y. 1993) (rigorous standard for IIED; strict elements)
- Oswego Laborers’ Local 214 Pension Fund v. Marine Midland Bank, N.A., 85 N.Y.2d 20 (N.Y. 1995) (economic-harm injuries and injury requirement under §349)
- People v. Gen. Electric Co., Inc., 302 A.D.2d 314 (1st Dep’t 2003) (agency/control considerations in imposing liability)