Legal Opinion
Wright v. Enhanced Recovery Co.
District Court, D. Kansas
Decided December 16, 2016No. Case No. 15-1268-EFM-KGGPublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
ERIC F. MELGREN, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
In 2014, Plaintiff William Wright began receiving phone calls from Defendant Enhanced Recoveiy Company, LLC, regard*1209ing a debt owed to AT&T. But the debt was owed by Stephanie Yokom, and not William Wright. Wright’s phone was ringing because Enhanced Recovery was calling a wrong number, and it did so 21 times. Wright claims that he informed Enhanced Recovery that the debt was not his and asked that they stop calling, and yet, the calls persisted. And so he filed suit, alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of CatrettSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1998
- Fogarty v. GallegosCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2008
- Mitchell v. City of MooreCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2000
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Boozer v. Enhanced Recovery Company, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 2019
- Brown v. Financial Recovery Services, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2022
- Hayes v. Receivables Performance Management, LLCDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 2018
- James Julian v. Kirkendall Dwyer II, LLP, et al.District Court, D. Kansas · 2026
- Short v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Kan., Inc.Court of Appeals of Kansas · 2019
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.