Underwood v. Dynamic Recovery Solutions, LLC et al
| Myles Underwood |
| Dynamic Recovery Solutions, LLC and CF Medical, LLC |
| 1:2021cv01490 |
| March 18, 2021 |
| US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Steven C Seeger |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on April 19, 2021. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: Pursuant to the Notice of Voluntary Dismissal (Dckt. No. #11 ), this case is dismissed with prejudice. All pending deadlines/hearings are hereby stricken. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) |
| Filing 11 NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Myles Underwood (Philipps, David) |
| Filing 10 Plaintiff's Statement Regarding Article III Standing STATEMENT by Myles Underwood (Philipps, David) |
| Filing 9 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: The Court reviewed the complaint in this case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. (Dckt. No. #1 ) Plaintiff Underwood filed for bankruptcy and received a discharge on September 15, 2020. But about six months later, he received a collection letter dated March 1, 2021, about a medical debt that was discharged in bankruptcy. The Court has serious questions about whether Plaintiff suffered an injury in fact, and thus has standing to sue under the Seventh Circuit's recent case law. For example, the Seventh Circuit addressed the issue of standing under the FDCPA in at least six opinions in the last few month. See, e.g., Nettles v. Midland Funding LLC, 2020 WL 7488610 (7th Cir. 2020) (addressing standing under the FDCPA); Bazile v. Fin. Sys. of Green Bay, Inc., 2020 WL 7351092 (7th Cir. 2020) (same); Spuhler v. State Collection Service, Inc., 2020 WL 7351098 (7th Cir. 2020) (same); Brunett v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc., 982 F.3d 1067 (7th Cir. 2020) (same); Gunn v. Thrasher, Buschmann & Voelkel, PC, 982 F.3d 1069 (7th Cir. 2020) (same); Larkin v. Fin. Sys. of Green Bay, Inc., 982 F.3d 1060 (7th Cir. 2020) (same). Plaintiff basically alleges that he received a single collection letter for a debt that was discharged in bankruptcy. He does not allege that he acted to his detriment in response to the letter (say, by paying a debt that he did not owe, or making other financial decisions as a result of the letter). He simply alleges that "[d]efendants' actions caused Plaintiff to question whether his counsel had done its job, whether he had been discharged for this debt by filing a bankruptcy, whether he had the right to be left alone, and whether he had the right to be represented by counsel all of which upset, distressed, outraged, and alarmed Mr. Underwood." See Cplt., at para. 18. That allegation sounds like an allegation that Plaintiff was confused, but confusion without more is not an injury in fact. In particular, in Brunett, the Seventh Circuit held that "the state of confusion is not itself an injury." See Brunett, 982 F.3d at 1068. Confusion is a part of life; it is not an injury in fact. "If it were, then everyone would have standing to litigate about everything." Id. The fact that "[Plaintiff's] confusion led [him] to hire a lawyer does not change the evaluation." Id.; see also id. ("A desire to obtain legal advice is not a reason for universal standing."). Maybe Plaintiff also alleges that he was upset by the letter, but being upset is not enough to constitute an injury in fact. Otherwise, presumably every plaintiff in every case would have standing, because plaintiffs only go to the courthouse when they are upset about something. Simply put, "[t]alk is cheap, but where's the concrete harm?" Id. The Court also has doubts about the merits of the case. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants violated his right to privacy. But the complaint is about a debt covered by a public bankruptcy filing, so Plaintiff himself put the existence of the debt into the public record. In fact, the complaint itself alleges that "Plaintiff's bankruptcy is a matter of public record." See Cplt., at para. 11. The complaint also refers to a blanket "right to be left alone," which appears nowhere in the statute. Id. at para. 15. Receiving a collection letter, in and of itself, does not appear to give rise to Article III standing, and does not appear to violate the statute, either. By April 16, Plaintiff must file a statement and show cause why the case should not be dismissed for lack of standing. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) |
| Filing 8 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Myles Underwood as to CF Medical, LLC on 3/26/2021, answer due 4/16/2021. (Philipps, David) |
| Filing 7 SUMMONS Returned Executed by Myles Underwood as to Dynamic Recovery Solutions, LLC on 3/22/2021, answer due 4/12/2021. (Philipps, David) |
| Filing 6 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Steven C. Seeger: An initial status report is due by June 1, 2021. Counsel must read the Standing Order entitled "Initial Status Conferences and Joint Initial Status Reports" on the Court's website. The parties must confer as required by Rule 26(f) about the nature, scope, and duration of discovery. The parties must submit two documents to the Court. First, the parties must file the Joint Initial Status Report under Rule 26(f) on the docket. A Word version of the Joint Initial Status Report is available on the Court's website. All parties must participate in the preparation and filing of the Joint Initial Status Report. The Court requires a joint report, so a filing by one side or the other is not sufficient. Second, the parties must email a Word version of a proposed Scheduling Order under Rule 16(b) to the Court's proposed order inbox. Lead counsel for the parties must participate in filing the initial status report. Plaintiff must serve this Order on all other parties. If the defendant has not been served with process, plaintiff's counsel must contact the Courtroom Deputy at jessica_j_ramos@ilnd.uscourts.gov to reschedule the initial status report deadline. Plaintiff should not file the Joint Initial Status Report before the defendant(s) has been served with process. The parties must discuss settlement in good faith and make a serious attempt to resolve this case amicably. All counsel of record must read and comply with this Court's Standing Orders on its webpage. Please pay special attention to the Standing Orders about Depositions and Discovery. Mailed notice. (jjr, ) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Myles Underwood by Angie K. Robertson (Robertson, Angie) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Myles Underwood by Mary Elizabeth Philipps (Philipps, Mary) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Myles Underwood by David J. Philipps (Philipps, David) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Philipps, David) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Myles Underwood; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-18032977. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit Group A, #2 Exhibit B, #3 Exhibit C, #4 Exhibit D, #5 Exhibit E)(Philipps, David) |
| SUMMONS Issued as to Defendants CF Medical, LLC, Dynamic Recovery Solutions, LLC (gw, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Steven C. Seeger. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert. Case assignment: Random assignment. (crl, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the US Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
