Bates v. C _ S Adjusters_ Inc Case Brief

Document Sample
Bates v. C _ S Adjusters_ Inc Case Brief Powered By Docstoc
					Bates v. C & S Adjusters, Inc. 908 F.2d 865 (2d Cir. 1992)








Bates received a collection notice from C&S, based on a debt he incurred while living in the Western District of Pennsylvania. He alleged a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. He sued in Federal Court, in the Western District of New York. C&S filed a motion to dismiss for improper venue. o C&S was located in the Western District of Pennsylvania. o Bates now lived in the Western District of New York. New York Trial Court dismissed the claim for improper venue. o Bates argued that the case could be brought under 28 USC § 1391(b)(2), which allows action to be brought in a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred. New York Appellate Court reversed the Trial Court's ruling, and remanded the case back to the Trial Court. o Appellate Court felt that the venue was proper under 28 USC § 1391(b)(2).  28 USC § 1391(b)(2) has been amended in 1990. Prior to that, it only allowed for a venue in the judicial district where the claim arose.  Prior to 1966, the only venue available was the one in which the defendant had a domicile. o Appellate Court also noted that even prior to the 1990 amendment to 28 USC § 1391, several Courts had held that, under the FDCPA, a plaintiff could bring suit in their home district if a collection agency had mailed notice to their address in that district, of called them on the phone there.

Project Wonderful - Your ad here, right now, for as low as $0


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Tags:
Stats:
views:171
posted:1/26/2008
language:English
pages:1