Web Design & SEO By Viking Web Group. Copyright 2012-2017 The Law Offices of Ronald S. Canter, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

The  

information  

in  

this  

website  

is  

intended  

to  

communicate  

general  

information  

about  

our  

firm  

and  

is  

not  

intended  

to

constitute  

the  

giving  

or  

offering  

of  

legal  

advice.  

This  

website  

is  

not  

intended  

to  

constitute  

advertising  

under  

applicable

laws  

and  

ethical  

rules.  

The  

Law  

Offices  

of  

Ronald  

S.  

Canter,  

LLC  

does  

not  

seek  

to  

represent  

any  

person  

or  

entity

desiring  

representation  

based  

upon  

viewing  

this  

website  

in  

a  

state,  

territory  

or  

foreign  

country  

where  

the  

site  

fails  

to

comply  

with  

applicable  

laws  

and  

ethical  

rules.  

In  

addition,  

our  

attorneys  

do  

not  

seek  

to  

practice  

law  

in  

states,  

territories

and foreign countries where they are not properly authorized to do so.

Practicing in Federal and State courts in Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia. 
200A Monroe Street, Suite 104 Rockville, MD 20850 301-424-7490 (office) 301-424-7470 (fax) 301-943-6111 (cell) rcanter@roncanterllc.com
Baylor v. Rubenstein & Associates (United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 2017) – Confirming lower court ruling that debt collection activities of law firm is not a “trade practice” under the District of Columbia Consumer Practices and Procedures Act; remanding attorney fee award for District Court’s failure to conduct a de novo review of a Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation of $41,000.00 in attorney fees on FDCPA claim; concurring opinion observed that a grossly excessive fee petition for $221,000.00 in an FDCPA claim settled by offer of judgment was “steep overbilling (that) ought to come at a steep price”, suggesting that an award for $1001.00 in fees would not be an abuse of discretion.
Jimenez v. Trident Asset Management  (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2017) – Holding that credit furnisher’s  alleged misstatement of the first date of delinquency on credit account was not a material misrepresentation to support a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Covert v. LVNV  (United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2015) - a confirmed Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan operates as res judicata and bars a subsequent suit alleging that a creditor filed an invalid proof of claim in the bankruptcy.  Elyazidi v. SunTrust Bank (United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2015) – rejecting FDCPA suit alleging that debt collection attorney falsely represented claim for attorney fees where request included estimate of time needed to collect judgment; the inclusion of a consumer’s Social Security number on a billing statement filed with the Court is not an unfair or unconscionable collection practice where the lapse occurred in the course of litigation and was easily remedied. Solis v. Global Acceptance Credit Company   (United States Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals 2015) – Affirming lower court dismissal of consumer protection suit on grounds of issue preclusion.  Frazier v. RJM Acquisitions, LLC  (United States District Court for the District of Maryland 2015)- debt buyer who has good faith reason to believe that debt is owed has a permissible purpose in obtaining consumer’s credit report notwithstanding consumer’s denial of existence of debt.  Penn v. NRA Group  (United States District Court for the District of Maryland 2014) –patient who provided cell phone number to healthcare provider is deemed to consent to automated dialer calls to cell number by healthcare provider’s debt collector.  Grant-Fletcher v. Collecto, Inc.  (United States District Court for the District of Maryland 2014) ­–allowing third party collector to enforce arbitration clause and class action waiver included in contract between consumer and cell phone provider.  West v. Ford Motor Credit Co.  (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2013) – Maryland judgment creditor can pursue writ of garnishment against consumer who moved to Pennsylvania and is employed in that jurisdiction notwithstanding  Pennsylvania’s statute prohibiting wage garnishments.  Yu v. Kevin B. Wilson Law Offices  (United States District Court for the District of Maryland, 2013) – Attorney/debt collector sued for attempting to collect bankrupt debt prevails on FDCPA’s bona fide error defense by establishing that law firm required that client not send bankruptcy accounts for collection and where attorney had understanding with client to notify counsel when bankruptcy filed on accounts previously referred for collection.  Davis v. Lyons, Doughty & Veldhuis, P.A.    (United States District Court for the District of Delaware, 2012) – Dismissing debtor suit  contending that attorney letter falsely represented attorney involvement in collection process and falsely threatened suit. Sayyed v. Wolpoff & Abramson   (United States District Court for the District of Maryland, 2010) – Law firm meets bona fide error defense under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Condon v. Global Credit & Collection Corp.   (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, 2010) – Dismissing suit by attorney representing consumer complaining that collection agency violated Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by not disclosing the call was in connection with the collection of a debt. Watson v. United Consumers, Inc.  (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, 2010) – Dismissing consumer’s suit  against debt collector based on prior settlement with creditor that released creditor’s agent from claims based upon collection of the obligation. Kelly v. Wolpoff & Abramson   (United States District Court for the District of Colorado, 2008) – A debt is not extinguished merely because a creditor charges off the obligation and sends IRS 1099-C form to obligor. Jackson v. Pasadena Receivables, Inc.   (Maryland 2007) Maryland courts will apply the law selected in a credit card agreement (i.e., South Dakota) in a collection suit brought by a debt buyer regardless of more restrictive Maryland Lending statute. In Re Byrd, (United States Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals 2004) – Creditor filing involuntary bankruptcy petition establishes prima facie case of lack of bona fide dispute as to the debt based upon prior unstayed state court judgment. Schmidt v. Prince George ’s Hospital  (Maryland 2001) – Affirming principle that minor child upon reaching age of majority is liable for  necessary medical services.   Pickett v. Sears Roebuck & Company  (Maryland 2001) – Court order permitting alternative service by first class mail and posting of summons on debtor’s front door complies with constitutional due process requirements where a debtor has avoided service of process. Montgomery County v. May Department Stores Company  (Maryland 1998) – Judgment creditor’s lien on real property has priority over the County Code provision requiring purchaser of moderately priced unit to pay excess profit to County Housing Fund. Carroll v. Wolpoff & Abramson   (United States Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals 1995) –  Affirms trial court’s broad discretion in limiting attorney’s fees under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act suit where debtor had minimal success in the litigation.
NOTEWORTHY CASES
Ronald S. Canter
Practicing in Federal and State courts in Maryland, Virginia, Florida, Pennsylvania and the District of Columbia.
MENU
200A Monroe Street, Suite 104 Rockville, MD 20850 301-424-7490 (office) 301-424-7470 (fax) 301-943-6111 (cell) rcanter@roncanterllc.com
Copyright 2012-2017  The Law Offices of Ronald S. Canter, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

The information in this website is intended to communicate

general information about our firm and is not intended to

constitute the giving or offering of legal advice. This website

is not intended to constitute advertising under applicable laws

and ethical rules. The Law Offices of Ronald S. Canter, LLC

does not seek to represent any person or entity desiring

representation based upon viewing this website in a state,

territory or foreign country where the site fails to comply

with applicable laws and ethical rules. In addition, our

attorneys do not seek to practice law in states, territories and

foreign countries where they are not properly authorized to

do so.

NOTEWORTHY CASES
Jimenez v. Trident Asset Management (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2017) – Holding that credit furnisher’s  alleged misstatement of the first date of delinquency on credit account was not a material misrepresentation to support a claim under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Jackson v. Pasadena Receivables, Inc. (Maryland 2007) Maryland courts will apply the law selected in a credit card agreement (i.e., South Dakota) in a collection suit brought by a debt buyer regardless of more restrictive Maryland Lending statute.
Baylor v. Rubenstein & Associates (United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 2017) – Confirming lower court ruling that debt collection activities of law firm is not a “trade practice” under the District of Columbia Consumer Practices and Procedures Act; remanding attorney fee award for District Court’s failure to conduct a de novo review of a Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation of $41,000.00 in attorney fees on FDCPA claim; concurring opinion observed that a grossly excessive fee petition for $221,000.00 in an FDCPA claim settled by offer of judgment was “steep overbilling (that) ought to come at a steep price”, suggesting that an award for $1001.00 in fees would not be an abuse of discretion.
Schmidt v. Prince George ’s Hospital (Maryland 2001) – Affirming principle that minor child upon reaching age of majority is liable for  necessary medical services. 
Pickett v. Sears Roebuck & Company (Maryland 2001) – Court order permitting alternative service by first class mail and posting of summons on debtor’s front door complies with constitutional due process requirements where a debtor has avoided service of process.
Montgomery County v. May Department Stores Company (Maryland 1998) – Judgment creditor’s lien on real property has  priority over the County Code provision requiring purchaser of moderately priced unit to pay excess profit to County Housing Fund.
Covert v. LVNV (United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2015) - a confirmed Chapter 13 bankruptcy plan operates as res judicata and bars a subsequent suit alleging that a creditor filed an invalid proof of claim in the bankruptcy. 
Elyazidi v. SunTrust Bank (United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit 2015) – rejecting FDCPA suit alleging that debt  collection attorney falsely represented claim for attorney fees where request included estimate of time needed to collect judgment; the inclusion of a consumer’s Social Security number on a billing statement filed with the Court is not an unfair or unconscionable collection practice where the lapse occurred in the course of litigation and was easily remedied.
Solis v. Global Acceptance Credit Company (United States Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals 2015) – Affirming lower court  dismissal of consumer protection suit on grounds of issue preclusion. 
In Re Byrd, (United States Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals 2004) – Creditor filing involuntary bankruptcy petition establishes prima facie case of lack of bona fide dispute as to the debt based upon prior unstayed state court judgment.
Carroll v. Wolpoff & Abramson (United States Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals 1995) –  Affirms trial court’s broad discretion in  limiting attorney’s fees under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act suit where debtor had minimal success in the litigation.
Frazier v. RJM Acquisitions, LLC (United States District Court for the District of Maryland 2015)- debt buyer who has good faith reason to believe that debt is owed has a permissible purpose in obtaining consumer’s credit report notwithstanding consumer’s denial of  existence of debt. 
Penn v. NRA Group (United States District Court for the District of Maryland 2014) –patient who provided cell phone number to  healthcare provider is deemed to consent to automated dialer calls to cell number by healthcare provider’s debt collector. 
Grant-Fletcher v. Collecto, Inc. (United States District Court for the District of Maryland 2014) ­–allowing third party collector to  enforce arbitration clause and class action waiver included in contract between consumer and cell phone provider. 
West v. Ford Motor Credit Co. (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2013) – Maryland judgment creditor can pursue writ of garnishment against consumer who moved to Pennsylvania and is employed in that jurisdiction notwithstanding  Pennsylvania’s statute prohibiting wage garnishments. 
Yu v. Kevin B. Wilson Law Offices (United States District Court for the District of Maryland, 2013) – Attorney/debt collector sued for attempting to collect bankrupt debt prevails on FDCPA’s bona fide error defense by establishing that law firm required that client not send bankruptcy accounts for collection and where attorney had understanding with client to notify counsel when bankruptcy filed on accounts previously referred for collection. 
Davis v. Lyons, Doughty & Veldhuis, P.A. (United States District Court for the District of Delaware, 2012) – Dismissing debtor suit  contending that attorney letter falsely represented attorney involvement in collection process and falsely threatened suit.
Condon v. Global Credit & Collection Corp. (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, 2010) – Dismissing suit by attorney representing consumer complaining that collection agency violated Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by not disclosing the call was in connection with the collection of a debt.
Sayyed v. Wolpoff & Abramson (United States District Court for the District of Maryland, 2010) – Law firm meets bona fide error  defense under Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Watson v. United Consumers, Inc. (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, 2010) – Dismissing consumer’s suit against debt collector based on prior settlement with creditor that released creditor’s agent from claims based upon collection of the  obligation.
Kelly v. Wolpoff & Abramson (United States District Court for the District of Colorado, 2008) – A debt is not extinguished merely  because a creditor charges off the obligation and sends IRS 1099-C form to obligor.