Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Thomas v. U.S. Bank, N.A.
Citation: 325 F. App'x 592Docket: No. 07-36100
Court: Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit; May 19, 2009; Federal Appellate Court
Plaintiff George Thomas filed a lawsuit against Defendant U.S. Bank for attempting to collect a debt he claimed was uncollectible and for pulling his credit report twice, alleging violations of Oregon statutes and the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). The district court granted summary judgment in favor of U.S. Bank on Thomas's claims under the Oregon Unlawful Debt Collection Practices Act (UDCPA). Specifically, Thomas's claim under Or.Rev.Stat. 646.639(2)(m) was dismissed due to lack of evidence that U.S. Bank indicated his debt would increase due to fees or charges. His claim under Or.Rev.Stat. 646.639(2)(n) also failed as he did not demonstrate that the difference between his actual debt and the amount U.S. Bank sought to collect was due to added interest or fees. Additionally, his claim under Or.Rev.Stat. 646.639(2)(k) was rejected because litigation is not a “right or remedy” that was unavailable to U.S. Bank when it threatened to sue, referencing case law from Porter v. Hill and Pro Car Care, Inc. v. Johnson. The court affirmed the judgment as a matter of law for U.S. Bank regarding Thomas's FCRA claim under 15 U.S.C. 1681b(f), as he failed to provide evidence that U.S. Bank or Capital Management Services, Inc. requested his credit report for reasons outside of debt collection, which is permissible under the FCRA. The court also upheld the exclusion of video testimony from Thomas's deceased expert witness and the awarding of attorney's fees to U.S. Bank. The overall ruling was affirmed by Judge J. Michael Seabright, sitting by designation.