Finley v. Dynamic Recovery Solutions LLC et al

Filing 40

ORDER vacating hearing and permitting discovery. Further Case Management Conference set for 6/22/2015 01:30 PM in Courtroom 12, 19th Floor, San Francisco. Signed by Judge Thelton E. Henderson on 05/07/2015. (tehlc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2015)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

3
4

NANCY H. FINLEY,

5

Plaintiff,

6
7
8

v.
DYNAMIC RECOVERY SOLUTIONS
LLC, et al.,

Case No. 14-cv-04028-TEH
ORDER VACATING HEARING,
PERMITTING FURTHER
DISCOVERY, AND SETTING CASE
MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE

Defendants.
9

This matter is before the Court on Defendant Consumer Recovery Associates’

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

(“CRA’s” ) motion for summary judgment, currently set for hearing on June 1, 2015. Mot.

12

at 1 (Docket No. 27). In her opposition, Plaintiff argues that the hearing on the motion

13

should be continued in order to allow her conduct additional discovery that might reveal

14

evidence of communications between CRA and third parties, in which CRA may have

15

omitted the fact that Plaintiff disputed her debt. Opp’n at 1, 4, 17 (Docket No. 28). CRA

16

argues that any such evidence would be immaterial, because the relevant section of the

17

Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(8), only applies to “credit

18

information,” and in any event, that Plaintiff has not met the requirements of Federal Rule

19

of Civil Procedure 56(d). Reply at 7, 12 (Docket No. 36).

20

The Court cannot conclude, based on the papers submitted, that such additional

21

evidence would be immaterial. The statute imposes liability for the following actions of a

22

debt collector, among other things: “Communicating or threatening to communicate to any

23

person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including

24

the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(8)

25

(emphasis added). Plaintiff has provided some authority for the proposition that this

26

provision applies to communications from a debt collector to a third party who is not a

27

credit reporting agency. Opp’n at 13 (citing Plummer v. Atl. Credit Fin., Inc., --- F. Supp.

28

3d ---, 2014 WL 6969546, at *5 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 8, 2014)). Indeed, the phrase “any

1

person” bears such an interpretation. Accordingly, evidence showing that CRA failed to

2

communicate information that it was required to communicate would be material to

3

Plaintiff’s Fair Debt Collection Practices Act claims. Further discovery will also provide

4

more information as to the application of the statute of limitations to Plaintiff’s claims.

5

The Court views Plaintiff’s argument in her opposition as a Rule 56(d) motion to

6

continue the hearing. Although Plaintiff should have stated with more particularity, in an

7

affidavit or declaration, the “specified reasons” that more discovery is required, the need

8

for such discovery is apparent from the papers. Rather than decide a motion for summary

9

judgment on an incomplete record, the better course of action in this case is to conduct
additional discovery on the narrow question identified above. See Burlington N. Santa Fe

11
United States District Court
Northern District of California

10

R. Co. v. Assiniboine & Sioux Tribes of Ft. Peck Reservation, 323 F.3d 767, 773-74 (9th

12

Cir. 2003).

13

Accordingly, the June 1, 2015 hearing on CRA’s motion for summary judgment is

14

VACATED. Plaintiff shall have 45 days to conduct discovery regarding CRA’s

15

communications to third parties as relevant to the pending motion. A case management

16

conference regarding the status of Plaintiff’s discovery shall be held on June 22, 2015, at

17

1:30 PM. The parties shall submit a joint statement no later than seven days in advance of

18

the case management conference, setting forth in detail the status of discovery on this issue

19

and proposing a further schedule on CRA’s motion for summary judgment.

20
21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23
24

Dated: 05/07/15

_____________________________________
THELTON E. HENDERSON
United States District Judge

25
26
27
28

2