Gallego

Gallego v. Hunts and Henriques, CLP

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaJune 12, 20203:19-cv-07596California465 words

Opinion

trial_court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIANE GALLEGO, Case No. 19-cv-07596-VC

Plaintiff,

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR

v. SUMMARY JUDGMENT

HUNTS AND HENRIQUES, CLP, et al., Re: Dkt. No. 26 Defendants.

Diane Gallego filed this lawsuit against Hunts & Henriques (H&H) under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) upon receipt of a summons that provided notice for Gallego to appear in Santa Clara Superior Court to respond to a suit purportedly filed by H&H, a law firm, on behalf of Synchrony Bank. See Dkt. No. 1-2. Everyone agrees that the summons was fake. Although Gallego owed a debt to Synchrony Bank, no lawsuit based on that debt was filed in state court, nor is Synchrony Bank (also a named defendant here) a client of H&H. H&H has moved for summary judgment on the ground that Gallego failed to create a triable issue as to whether H&H created or served the sham summons, a necessary fact to hold H&H liable under the FDCPA. See 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5), (9). To support its motion, H&H submitted a declaration by one of its partners that (i) denied that H&H had sent the summons to Gallego; (ii) explained that many…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.