By: Derek Hawkins//June 20, 2016//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: Ronald Oliva v. Blatt, Hasenmiller, Leibsker & Moore, LLC
Case No.: 15-2516
Officials: BAUER, FLAUM, and MANION, Circuit Judges.
Focus: FDCPA
FDCPA protects debt collector from liability for engaging in conduct that was expressly permitted under controlling law in effect at the time, but was later prohibited after a retroactive change in law.
“This is not to say that Blatt did not exercise any independent judgment in deciding where to sue in Cook County. In deciding whether to file suit at the Daley Center, Blatt had to determine both that Oliva resided in Cook County, and that in light of that fact the Daley Center was an appropriate venue under Newsom. Neither of Blatt’s independent judgments in this regard, however, involved a legal interpretation of the FDCPA. Moreover, even if Blatt’s violation was the result of its own interpretation of the law, Jerman still would not apply, for Blatt’s interpretation was not mistaken when it was made. That is, assuming Blatt independently interpreted the control‐ ling law of Newsom before filing suit, its interpretation was undisputedly correct, since it relied on Newsom to file suit exactly where Newsom allowed. That Blatt’s conduct would later be deemed a violation under Suesz is not the result of Blatt’s mistaken interpretation of the FDCPA, but of a retroactive change of law that was entirely outside Blatt’s control.”
Affirmed