TAYLOR v. ALLTRAN FINANCIAL, LP et al
| EDWARD TAYLOR |
| ALLTRAN FINANCIAL, LP and LVNV FUNDING, LLC |
| 1:2018cv00306 |
| February 1, 2018 |
| US District Court for the Southern District of Indiana |
| Indianapolis Office |
| Mark J. Dinsmore |
| Jane Magnus-Stinson |
| Other Statutory Actions |
| 15 U.S.C. ยง 1692 Fair Debt Collection Act |
| Plaintiff |
Follow case documents by RSS
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing
57
ENTRY - Plaintiff Edward Taylor and a class of similarly situated people received a form debt collection letter from Defendant Alltran Financial, LP ("Alltran"). They brought suit under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA "), 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et. seq, contending that the letters are unclear as to whether Alltran was collecting on behalf of Defendant LVNV Funding, LLC ("LVNV") or nonparty Springleaf Financial Services ("Springleaf"). De fendants, Alltran and LVNV, have moved for judgment on the pleadings, arguing that the unsophisticated consumer would not find the dunning letter confusing. [Filing No. 41 .] But Defendants' arguments ignore the "distinction between wha t may confuse a federal judge and an unsophisticated consumer" and the Seventh Circuit's admonition that courts must avoid "reliance on [their] intuitions." McMahon v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 744 F.3d 1010, 1020 (7th Cir. 2014) (int ernal quotation omitted). Defendants also gloss over dispositive differences between the cases they cite and the facts of this case. The Court therefore DENIES Defendants' Motion. Mr. Taylor has plausibly alleged that the dunning letter he r eceived from Defendants failed to clearly identify LVNV as the creditor to whom his debt was owed. Rather, the unsophisticated consumer may read the letter and believe based upon the reference to the "judgment awarded on your Springleaf Finan cial Services Inc. account" that Springleaf, rather than LVNV, was the current creditor. Mr. Taylor's allegations state a claim under the FDCPA, and the Court therefore DENIES Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings. 41 (SEE ENTRY). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/19/2018. (APD)
|
|
Filing
56
ENTRY - Plaintiff Edward Taylor alleges that Defendants sent him and over 200 others a form debt collection letter which failed to effectively identify the current creditor, in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA" ), 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et. seq. Mr. Taylor now seeks to certify a class consisting of everyone who received the same form letter from February 1, 2017, to the present. [Filing No. 32 .] Defendants oppose class certification, arguing that Mr. T aylor has failed to satisfy the requirements set forth in Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. But Defendants ultimately demand far more of Mr. Taylor than is required by Rule 23. For the reasons described below, the Court GRANTS Mr. Taylor's Motion. For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that Mr. Taylor has met the requirements of Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) and that class certification is appropriate in this case. The Court therefore GRANTS Mr. Taylor's Motion for Class Certificat ion. 32 Specifically, the Court certifies the following class: All persons similarly situated in the State of Indiana from whom Defendants attempted to collect a defaulted consumer debt allegedly owed for a Springleaf Financial Services account, via the same form collection letter that Defendants sent to Plaintiff, from February 1, 2017 to the present. Finally, the Court appoints Mr. Taylor's current attorneys as class counsel. (SEE ENTRY). Signed by Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson on 9/17/2018. (APD)
|
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 Indiana Southern 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.
