United States Second Circuit

In a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) action claiming that defendant law firm violated the FDCPA by personally serving plaintiff with a summons and complaint during the FDCPA thirty-day validation period, without explaining that commencement of the lawsuit did not affect the rights set forth in the validation notice, summary judgment for plaintiff is affirmed where service of process during the validation period must, at a minimum, be preceded or accompanied by notice to the consumer clarifying that the lawsuit does not in any way alter the information contained in the validation notice.

Appellate Information

• Argued 11/20/2009
• Decided 01/13/2010
• Published 01/13/2010

Judges

• PAUL A. CROTTY, District Judge:, Before CABRANES and SACK, Circuit Judges, and CROTTY, District Judge.

Court

• United States Second Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Jonathan Elliot, Zeldes, Needle & Cooper, P.C., for Defendants-Appellants., Joanne S. Faulkner, New Haven, CT, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Thomas R. Dominczk, Maurice & Needleman, P.C., (Donald Maurice, Jr., Maurice & Needleman, P.C., Tomio B. Narta, Simmonds & Narita LLP, Eric M. Berman, Eric M. Berman, P.C., on the brief), for Amicus Curiae The National Association of Retail Collection Attorneys, in support of Defendants-Appellants.