For the Re also: Eric Dubois, Borrower. Chaille Dubois, f/k/an effective Chaille Gaines, f/k/an excellent Candace DuBois, f/k/an excellent Candace Gaines, f/k/a great Candi Gaines, f/k/an excellent Candi DuBois; Kimberly Adkins, Plaintiffs–Appellants, v. Atlas Acquisitions LLC, Defendant–Appellee, Timothy P. Branigan; Nancy Spencer Grisby, Trustees.
Zero. 15–1945
Appellants Kimberly Adkins and you will Chaille Dubois submitted separate Part 13 case of bankruptcy petitions regarding the Personal bankruptcy Legal to your Area out of Maryland. Appellee Atlas Purchases LLC (Atlas) submitted proofs from claim within case of bankruptcy cases centered on bills that were prohibited by Maryland’s law regarding limits. 1 The trouble into interest is if Atlas broken the Fair Debt collection Means Act (FDCPA) by the submitting proofs out of allege according to go out-prohibited bills. I keep one Atlas’s carry out will not break the brand new FDCPA, and you will affirm brand new personal bankruptcy court’s dismissal out-of Appellants’ FDCPA states and associated county laws claim.
The important points away from Appellants’ circumstances try similar. Adkins filed to own Section thirteen bankruptcy for the . Atlas recorded one or two evidences from allege inside her circumstances. The initial proof of allege showed that Adkins due Atlas $ considering financing you to definitely started having pay check bank Evaluate Letter Wade hence Atlas bought out of Top-notch Organization Qualities, LLC (Elite Business) on . dos This new proof of allege known the last purchase day on the new membership just like the . Atlas’s 2nd proof of claim try getting $ based on financing one got its start which have payday bank Impact Cash United states of america and that Atlas purchased out of Elite Company on . The newest proof of allege recognized the last transaction go out on that membership as the . It’s undeniable you to definitely one another debts have been beyond Maryland’s around three-season law of restrictions whenever Atlas ordered and attempted to assert brand new costs from inside the Adkins’s bankruptcy circumstances. Find Md. Code Ann., Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5–101. Adkins neither noted the fresh bills on her behalf bankruptcy dates nor sent a notification from case of bankruptcy to help you Atlas.
Dubois registered to possess Section 13 personal bankruptcy towards . Atlas registered an evidence of allege for $ predicated on financing one to got its start which have pay check lender Iadvance and you to definitely Atlas purchased away from Elite Enterprise for the . The brand new proof allege identified the last purchase time to the membership because the . It is undisputed this particular loans has also been beyond Maryland’s statute of limits whenever Atlas purchased and you will tried to assert your debt into the Dubois’s bankruptcy proceeding instance. Dubois don’t listing the debt on her case of bankruptcy times nor performed she post an alerts away from case of bankruptcy in order to Atlas.
Adkins and Dubois registered independent opponent grievances against Atlas. Both objected so you can Atlas’s says as being time-barred and extra alleged one Atlas broken brand new FDCPA by the filing proofs from allege on Hawaii auto title loans stale expense. Appellants wanted disallowance regarding Atlas’s states together with damages, attorney’s fees, and you will will cost you underneath the FDCPA. step 3
Atlas conceded that the claims was considering date-barred expenses and stipulated on the disallowance. But not, Atlas transferred to write off Appellants’ FDCPA states less than Federal Laws from Civil Procedure twelve(b)(6) having failure to state a claim upon which save would be granted. Look for Given. R. Bankr. P. 7012(b) (incorporating Laws twelve(b)(6) with the challenger procedures). After reading consolidated dental objections, new case of bankruptcy court concluded that processing a proof claim does perhaps not make up debt collection passion within the meaning of the latest FDCPA and you may provided Atlas’s actions to help you dismiss. Pursuant twenty eight U.S.C. § 158(d)(2), we allowed Appellants to help you interest new personal bankruptcy court’s decision straight to that it Courtroom. I opinion the new bankruptcy proceeding court’s dismissal of Appellants’ claims under Rule 12(b)(6) de- novo. Pick, e.grams., Into the re also Mwangi, 764 F.3d 1168, 1173 (9th Cir. 2014); For the re also McKenzie, 716 F.three dimensional 404, 412 (6th Cir. 2013).
Within the Lso are: Eric Dubois (2016)
In advance of approaching the fresh new compound out of Appellants’ claims, you can expect a brief history of the relevant laws and regulations contained in this case: new Personal bankruptcy Code (the brand new “Code”) additionally the FDCPA.