United States Eighth Circuit

In an action brought under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) arising after plaintiff's credit card debt was assigned for collection, summary judgment for defendant-collector is affirmed in part, but reversed in part where: 1) the record did not show that defendant or other parties ever provided plaintiff with the initial notice of his right to dispute the debt and request verification that is required by 15 U.S.C. section 1692g(a), and consequently defendant's threat to sue was an action "that cannot legally be taken" under the FDCPA; and 2) even if defendant timely provided such disclosure notice to plaintiff, a Notice of Lawsuit did not disclose that collection activities must cease if he timely disputed the debt and requested validation.

Appellate Information

• Decided 03/03/2008
• Published 03/03/2008

Judges

• LOKEN, Chief Judge., Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, GRUENDER and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Eighth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• John J. Gosbee, argued, Mandan, ND, for appellant.


• For Appellees:
  
• Michael A. Klutho, argued, Minneapolis, MN (Gary R. Akovenko, Bismarck, ND, on the brief), for appellees Credico and Debbie Akovenko., Caren W. Stanley, argued, Fargo, ND (Jon R. Brakke, on the brief), for appellee Pinnacle Credit Services.