Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Alaan v. Asset Acceptance LLC

October 7, 2010

ARMINDA O. ALAAN, PLAINTIFF,
v.
ASSET ACCEPTANCE LLC, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hayes, Judge

ORDER

The matters before the Court are the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Defendant Asset Acceptance LLC ("Asset") (ECF No. 10), and the Ex Parte Motion to Continue Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Plaintiff Arminda O. Alaan (ECF No. 13).

I. Background

On February 10, 2010, Alaan initiated this action by filing a Complaint against Asset. (ECF No. 1.) On April 15, 2010, Alaan filed a First Amended Complaint. (ECF No. 3).

A. Allegations of the First Amended Complaint

In November 1999, Alaan incurred a consumer debt to Citibank. Id. ¶ 7. Alaan defaulted on the debt. Id. ¶ 8.

On February 19, 2009, Asset filed a lawsuit against Alaan in California state court which sought to collect $3,991.42 plus interest and attorney's fees. Asset alleged in the state court complaint that Asset was the "Assignee of Citibank." Id. ¶ 11. "[T]he Asset v. Alaan [state court] complaint ... misrepresents that the debt was assigned to Asset." Id. ¶ 13. "Asset misrepresented the character, amount or legal status of the debt in the Asset v. Alaan complaint." Id. ¶ 14. "Asset stated in the Asset v. Alaan complaint that it was collecting $3,991.42 as principal, however this is a misrepresentation of the principal, as the $3,991.42 figure includes fees, interest and other charges which are not part of the principal debt." Id. ¶ 12.

Alaan alleges that Asset violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §1692, and the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, Cal. Civ. Code §1788.

B. Procedural History

On June 11, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued an Order Scheduling an Early Neutral Evaluation Conference for July 21, 2010. (ECF No. 6).

On July 5, 2010, the parties filed a Joint Motion to Continue the Early Neutral Evaluation Conference in anticipation of Asset filing a motion for summary judgment. (ECF No. 8).

On July 6, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued an Order vacating the Early Neutral Evaluation Conference and scheduling a Case Management Conference on August 13, 2010. (ECF No. 9). The Magistrate Judge ordered the parties to make their initial disclosures and lodge a joint discovery plan by August 6, 2010.

On August 9, 2010, Asset filed the Motion for Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 10). Asset contends that it is entitled to summary judgment because:

The undisputed evidence shows that, contrary to Alaan's assertions, Asset acquired Alaan's unpaid Citibank account pursuant to a Purchase and Sale Agreement; Asset never said it was seeking to collect 'principal' in its collection complaint against Alaan, but even if it had, this would not state a claim under the FDCPA, given the Ninth Circuit's recent ruling in Donohue v. Quick Collect, Inc., 592 F.3d 1027 (9th Cir. 2010); Asset did not misrepresent its right to request attorneys' fees; and Asset prayed for interest at a rate ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.