- Posted March 28, 2014
- Tweet This | Share on Facebook
Debt collector prevails in lawsuit tied to two words
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/be045/be045edf32cf0099830e0b409941fe95374cb203" alt=""
DETROIT (AP) -- Is there a difference between the words "of" and "after?" A federal court says no, at least not in a dispute between a Detroit man and a debt collector.
Carl Wallace sued Diversified Consultants. He accused the company of violating a federal law because of the wording of a debt notice related to a $2,000 phone bill.
Wallace was asked to respond within 30 days "of" receiving a notice. But the law covering debt collections says people have 30 days to respond "after" getting a notice.
So what? Indeed, that's what an appeals court said Wednesday in affirming the dismissal of a class-action lawsuit in Detroit federal court. The court doubts that anyone who got the letter was confused.
Attorney Brian Parker of Bingham Farms was seeking thousands of dollars.
Published: Fri, Mar 28, 2014
headlines Oakland County
headlines National
- March 1, 1828: Sojourner Truth goes to court
- ACLU and BigLaw firm use ‘Orange is the New Black’ in hashtag effort to promote NY jail reform
- DOJ nominees hedge on whether court orders must always be followed
- DNA evidence in open cases explored in ABC reality series
- Which law-related films have won Oscars? You may be surprised (photo gallery)
- ‘Radical agreement’ could lead to Supreme Court victory for reverse-discrimination plaintiff