Boyd v. Wexler
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
275 F.3d 642 (2001)
- Written by Heather Whittemore, JD
Facts
Norman Wexler (defendant) was an attorney who collected debts owed to his clients. Wexler worked at a law firm with two other lawyers and 45 additional employees. In an average month, the firm sent over 50,000 collection letters. Birgetta Boyd and Charlene Harrison (plaintiffs) received collection letters from Wexler. Boyd and Harrison sued Wexler in federal district court, alleging that Wexler violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) by sending them collection letters that he had not reviewed and implying that he had reviewed them. Wexler moved for summary judgment. To support his motion, Wexler submitted an affidavit claiming that he or one of the two other lawyers at the firm reviewed each debtor’s file before sending a collection letter to ensure the accuracy of information in the letter, with Wexler conducting most of the reviews. Wexler also claimed that he personally reviewed Boyd’s and Harrison’s files before sending them any collection letters. The district court accepted Wexler’s affidavit as truthful and granted his motion for summary judgment. Boyd and Harrison appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.