Thomasson v. GC Services Ltd. Partnership
Docket: No. 07-56215
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; November 6, 2008; Federal Appellate Court
Andrew and Rebecca Thomasson appeal the district court's summary judgment favoring GC Services regarding their claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the California Information Privacy Act (CIPA). The Thomassons successfully contest the FDCPA ruling, but the CIPA claim is affirmed. The court reverses sanctions imposed on their attorney, Robert Arleo. The district court found insufficient evidence from the Thomassons regarding call monitoring and notification. However, the Thomassons provided depositions and affidavits, including testimonies from eighteen individuals, indicating GC Services monitored calls without notification. They argue this constitutes a deceptive practice under the FDCPA, which forbids false or misleading representations in debt collection. The court agrees the Thomassons raised a factual dispute regarding a potential FDCPA violation. Conversely, under CIPA, the court clarifies that eavesdropping requires a third party to secretly listen in on a conversation. Since only the Thomassons and GC Services participated in the calls, the monitoring does not meet the legal definition of eavesdropping, thus GC Services cannot be held liable under CIPA. Regarding the sanctions against Arleo, the court vacates them, stating that while his language in an affidavit was poorly chosen, it did not warrant sanctions during a disqualification motion. The issue of costs for the Thomassons is rendered moot by the court's decision. The case is partially reversed and partially affirmed, with each party responsible for their own costs. The ruling is not published as precedent. The Thomassons' claim of recorded calls was abandoned on appeal.