Legal Opinion
Paula Jensen v. Pressler & Pressler
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit
Decided June 30, 2015No. 14-2808PublishedCited by 188 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
McKEE, Chief Judge.
We are asked to decide whether a false statement in a communication from a debt collector to a debtor must be material in order to be actionable under a provision of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692e. We conclude that materiality is required, as it is subsumed within the “least sophisticated debtor” standard that has traditionally governed FDCPA claims. Because we do not find the misstatement at issue in this case material, we will affirm the District Court’s grant of summary, judgment to Pressler & Pressler and Midland…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- United States v. GaudinSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
- Kungys v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Christ Clomon v. Philip D. JacksonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1993
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by188 opinions
- Michelle Tatis v. Allied Interstate LLCCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018
- Cohen v. Rosicki, Rosicki & Assocs., P.C.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2018
- In Re Nickelodeon Consumer Privacy LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2016
- Mary Chambers v. DC (EN BANC)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2022
- Candace Moyer v. Patenaude & FelixCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2021
183 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.