Skip to main content
Philip D Stern
Avvo
Pro

Philip Stern’s Legal Cases

5 total

  • Christine M. Nicholas vs. CMRE Financial Services, Inc.

    Practice Area:
    Debt Collection
    Date:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Outcome:
    Court decision was first in US District Court for New Jersey holding that FDCPA requires the disclosures.
    Description:
    Class action against debt collector for leaving telephone messages in which insufficient disclosures were made. Collector moved to dismiss arguing that the FDCPA did not require disclosures.
  • Michael P. Koby, et al. v. ARS National Services, Inc.

    Practice Area:
    Debt Collection
    Date:
    Apr 15, 2009
    Outcome:
    Class settlement pending
    Description:
    Class action against debt collector for leaving telephone messages in which insufficient disclosures were made. Collector moved to dismiss arguing that the FDCPA did not require disclosures.
  • Williams v. Pressler and Pressler, LLP

    Practice Area:
    Class Action
    Date:
    Dec 16, 2011
    Outcome:
    Pending class certification
    Description:
    Collection law firm's letter sent to consumers who were defending themselves in a collection lawsuit is alleged to violate the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The letter stated that, by paying the proposed settlement, “Proof that the debt has been paid will be sent to the court and copy to you so that you can advise the credit bureau.” By specifically stating that the purpose for sending the consumer a copy of its notice is "so that you can advise the credit bureau," the law firm (1) implied that there was something about the lawsuit or the client's claim on the consumer's credit report, and (2) sending the copy of the firm's court notice would do something positive for the consumer. The firm's client, however, had not done any credit reporting or, if it had, all reported information was automatically deleted as soon as the consumers filed their answer to the complaint. Therefore, at the time the letter was sent, there was nothing about the lawsuit or the client's claim on the consumer's credit report, and if the consumer settled, sending a copy of what the law firm sent to the court would do nothing to affect the consumer's credit report.
  • MSW v. Zaidi and New Century Financial v. Oughla

    Practice Area:
    Debt Collection
    Date:
    Aug 27, 2012
    Outcome:
    Pending on appeal
    Description:
    There are two debt collection cases which are pending on appeal. In both cases, the trial court granted the debt-buyer's summary judgment motion. The consumers are claiming that the debt-buyers failed to prove ownership of the accounts by way of documentation demonstrating a valid chain of assignment, and that the debt-buyer's submissions regarding the amount due on the account was not through competent witnesses and was not admissible business records.
  • Bock v. Pressler and Pressler, LLP

    Practice Area:
    Debt Collection
    Date:
    Jun 30, 2014
    Outcome:
    Judgment finding that the law firm violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
    Description:
    Claim against NJ's largest debt collection law firm for robo-signing collection complaints.