Fair Debt Collection Practices Act: Legal Argument [Against the Great Weight of Adverse Authority]

Abstract:     
This article treats the adverse authority of case law in favor of strict attorney liability under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. It illustrates legal and procedural aspects of defending an attorney who has been sued pursuant to the FDCPA for unfair debt collection practices. Focused on a case that was new in 2001, the analysis demonstrates how that 2001 case was open to interpretation but also illustrates the difficulty in making an argument for judicial leniency on behalf of a defendant attorney debt collector. The article is followed by student arguments this author assigned, selected, and edited. The student arguments were drafted pursuant to this author's classroom exercise focused on appellate advocacy. Both the lead article, and the "student arguments" article that follows it, fit into the theme of treating adverse authority in a specific content situation. Both provide illustrative examples of techniques in fully confronting adverse authority in legal argumentation. These materials are also useful as illustrations of the strict liability that attaches to attorney debt collectors under the FDCPA.

Keywords: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, FDCPA, attorney debt collector, Heintz v. Jenkins, debt collection, consumer protection

JEL Classifications: K1, K19, K30, K39, K41

Accepted Paper Series