Legal Opinion
Fritz v. Resurgent Capital Services, LP
District Court, E.D. New York
Decided July 24, 2013No. Case No. 11-CV-3300 FB VVPPublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
BLOCK, Senior District Judge:
Plaintiffs assert claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692-1692p, and New York General Business Law (“GBL”) § 349. Defendants move to dismiss the Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).
Because defendants urge numerous grounds for dismissal, it is necessary to structure the Court’s analysis. Part I presents the allegations of the SAC. Part II addresses plaintiffs’ claims under the FDCPA, including any defenses particular to those claims. Part III addresses…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Migra v. Warren City School District Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- California Motor Transport Co. v. Trucking UnlimitedSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Professional Real Estate Investors, Inc. v. Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Mayfield v. Asta Funding, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2015
- Vincent v. Money StoreDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2015
- Plummer v. Atlantic Credit & Finance, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
- McCrobie v. Palisades Acquisition Xvi, LLCDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2019
- Vu v. Diversified Collection Services, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 2013
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.