O'Rourke v. Palisades Acquisition Xvi, LLC
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 5295
| 7th Cir. | 2011Background
- O'Rourke owed Citibank credit card debt; over time the debt was sold to Palisades Acquisition XVI and others.
- Palisades filed a state court lawsuit attaching an exhibit resembling a credit card statement that listed Palisades as issuer and showed a closing date several months before filing.
- Palisades admits the attached statement was never sent to O'Rourke before filing the suit.
- O'Rourke filed a federal FDCPA claim arguing the attachment was false/misleading to a state judge for purposes of obtaining a default judgment.
- The district court granted summary judgment for Palisades; the issue on appeal is whether the FDCPA applies to statements intended to mislead a state court judge.
- Seventh Circuit holds the FDCPA protections do not extend to communications directed at judges, focusing on consumer protection under the Act.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the FDCPA reach statements directed at a state court judge? | O'Rourke contends the statement deceived a judge and falls within §1692e/10. | Palisades argues FDCPA protects consumers, not judges; the Act does not extend to communications to judges. | FDCPA does not extend to communications intended to mislead a state court judge. |
Key Cases Cited
- Ruth v. Triumph P'ships, 577 F.3d 790 (7th Cir. 2009) (unsophisticated consumer standard for actionable misrepresentation)
- Beler v. Blatt, Hasenmiller, Leibsker & Moore, LLC, 480 F.3d 470 (7th Cir. 2007) (whether FDCPA covers state court pleadings)
- Evory v. RJM Acquisitions Funding, L.L.C., 505 F.3d 769 (7th Cir. 2007) (attorney communications to consumer actionable under FDCPA)
- Gearing v. Check Brokerage Corp., 233 F.3d 469 (7th Cir. 2000) (false assertion of subrogation in state court pleading violates FDCPA)
- Veach v. Sheeks, 316 F.3d 690 (7th Cir. 2003) (FDCPA applied to pleadings showing inflated sums in small claims context)
- Wahl v. Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc., 556 F.3d 643 (7th Cir. 2009) (misleading/deceptive standard tied to consumer impact)
- Tinsley v. Integrity Financial Partners, Inc., 634 F.3d 416 (7th Cir. 2011) (distinguishing consumer vs. attorney perspectives under FDCPA)