Barbato v. Greystone Alliance — civil — affirmance — Krause
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act aims to protect consumers by regulating the actions of “debt collectors,” defined to include those “in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts.” A company that purchased charged-off consumer debt and then contracted out to another company the job of actually haranguing the consumers, argued that it was not subject to the FDCPA because it was not a debt collector. Today, the Third Circuit disagreed, relying mainly on past circuit precedent and the statute’s text.
Grammarians will rejoice at this footnote:
At both oral argument and in its supplemental briefing, Crown argued that the word “collection” is a verb. It is not. It is a noun. See Collection, Webster’s Third at 444 (denoting with the abbreviation “n” that the word being defined is a noun).
Joining Krause were Hardiman and Bibas. Arguing counsel were Matthew Rosenkoff of Atlanta for the debt collectors and Daniel Edelman of Chicago for the consumer.