In our continuation of “inconvenient time/place ruling week” here at AccountsRecovery, we have yet another ruling in a defendant’s favor, except this time, it’s not on a motion to dismiss. A District Court judge in Oklahoma has denied a plaintiff’s motion to remand a case back to state court where it was originally filed, ruling that receipt of a single unwanted communication is enough for the plaintiff to have suffered a concrete injury and keep the case in federal court.
The background: After being denied for a mortgage because of a negative item on her credit report, the plaintiff mailed a dispute letter to the defendant. In the letter, the plaintiff told the defendant that the only convenient way to communicate with her was via email and provided her email address.
- The defendant responded to the dispute by sending a verification notice through the mail, not via email.
- The plaintiff filed suit in Oklahoma state court, accusing the defendant of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In her suit, the plaintiff claimed to have suffered actual damages as a result of the alleged illegal collection tactics in the form of invasion of privacy, intrusion upon seclusion, personal embarrassment, loss of productive time, emotional distress, frustration, anger, humiliation, and other negative emotions.
- The defendant removed the case to federal court, at which point the plaintiff sought to send it back to state court.
The ruling: The plaintiff sought to have the case sent back to state court, arguing she did not complain of any harm other than the deprivation of her statutory rights under the FDCPA.
- But courts in the Tenth Circuit — which includes Oklahoma — have held that the receipt of a single unwanted phone call was analogous to intrusion upon seclusion and sufficient for a plaintiff to have standing to sue, pointed out Judge Jodi W. Dishman of the District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma.
- If one unwanted phone call is enough to have standing, then any unwanted communication is enough, Judge Dishman noted.
