The 10 Most Popular Daily Decision Articles of 2022

Daily DecisionsWe’ve rounded up the most-read Daily Decisions of the year from ACA International’s compliance team.

12/22/2022 9:25 A.M.

3.5 minute read

You don’t need to be a lawyer with a Westlaw subscription to keep up with case law that impacts your business. ACA’s Daily Decisions are brief, reader-friendly summaries of industry-relevant legal decisions. Each day our compliance team selects cases to share—free—only with members. Check out the extensive library on our website and look for them in each issue of the ACA Daily e-newsletter.

As 2022 winds down, we dug into our online analytics to come up with the top 10 Daily Decisions that captivated our readers this year. The list features pivotal case decisions related to Hunstein, third-party letter vendors, medical debt credit reporting and more.

Enjoy this list of the year’s most-read Daily Decisions:


No. 1: Pharms v. Nat’l Credit Sys.: Collection Agency Prevails With Bona Fide Error Defense

Although a court found a consumer alleged a sufficient risk of harm to establish standing, the court granted summary judgment for a collection agency based on the bona fide error defense.

By Betsy Clarke, July 12, 2022


No. 2: Thompson v. Renner: 6th Circuit Affirms Decision that Garnishment Request by Law Firm Violated the FDCPA

A debt collector’s garnishment request without reasonable belief that the court has jurisdiction to grant it might be sufficient to violate the FDCPA.

By Betsy Clarke, May 4, 2022


No. 3: Palacio v. Medical Financial Solutions: 7th Circuit Finds Medical Billing Statement Not Subject to the FDCPA

An Illinois district court found that a medical bill that lacked certain disclosures required under the FDCPA was not subject to the act because the underlying debt was not in default when the defendant received the account.

By Andrew Pavlik, June 21, 2022


No. 4: Layne-Williams v. Radius Global Solutions: Court Finds a Debt Collector Had a Permissible Purpose to Review a Credit Report

A New York district court held that the FCRA’s permissible purposes section was not limited to creditors because the act “allows a ‘person’ to access a report ‘in connection with a credit transaction.’”

By Andrew Pavlik, Nov. 29, 2022


No. 5: Whittaker v. Real Estate Heaven: Arizona Court Rules Employee Can Be Held Liable Under the TCPA

An Arizona district court held that the defendants’ employee could be held directly liable under the TCPA because the plaintiff alleged that it was the employee himself who sent the text messages at issue.

By Andrew Pavlik, May 17, 2022


No. 6: Scott v. Morgan & Associates: Court Finds No Requirement to Include Sworn Affidavit When Verifying a Debt

A Kansas district court held that verification of a debt under the FDCPA involves nothing more than the debt collector confirming in writing that the amount being demanded is what the creditor is claiming is owed.

By Andrew Pavlik, Dec. 15, 2022


No. 7: Wilson v. AFNI: Court Grants Summary Judgment for Collector on FDCPA Claims

The court found a consumer lacked standing to bring her claims under the FDCPA because temporary emotional discomfort such as nervousness or fear does not constitute a concrete injury.

By Betsy Clarke, Aug. 2, 2022


No. 8: Beal v. Outfield Brew House: 8th Circuit Finds Dialing System Was Not an ATDS

The 8th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s finding that a system that sent promotional text messages to phone numbers that were randomly selected from a database of customer information was not an ATDS under the TCPA.

By Andrew Pavlik, April 13, 2022


No. 9: Jackin v. Enhanced Recovery: Court Holds Consumer Can Pursue Hunstein-Type Claim

A court found a consumer plausibly alleged a violation of the FDCPA when it objected to a collection agency’s use of a third-party letter vendor. The court stated it had to assume Congress meant what it said and must enforce statutes that way.

By Betsy Clarke, June 14, 2022


No. 10: Pierre v. Midland Credit: 7th Circuit Reverses Huge Jury Verdict Won by Consumer

The appellate court found that a collection letter advising a consumer that, because of the age of the debt, the collection agency would neither sue the consumer for it nor report it to a credit agency, did not violate the FDCPA because the consumer didn’t make a payment, promise to do so, or otherwise act to her detriment in response to anything in or omitted from the letter.

By Betsy Clarke, March 4, 2022


If you have executive leadership updates or other member news to share with ACA, contact our communications department at [email protected]. View our publications page for more information and our news submission guidelines here.





This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Review our Privacy Policy for more information. You may change your preferences on how cookies are stored by reviewing the settings on your browser.

The content on this site is presented for educational, general reference, and informational purposes only; is not intended to serve as legal or other advice; is not intended to be a full and exhaustive explanation of the law in any area; and should not replace the advice of your own legal counsel. By continuing to use our site, you are agreeing to the legal disclaimers in our Terms of Use. Review our Terms of Use for more information.

Friendly Reminder

Get continued access to ACA International’s wide array of resources, which can help you become more profitable, compliant and successful.

Renew your membership today to take advantage of tools you won’t find anywhere else:

  • Discounts on seminars, products, services and events
  • Resources to strengthen your compliance department
  • Industry-specific risk management products and services
  • Participation in ACA’s online community, The Hub
    Members-only website content
  • Professional development and training opportunities, and so much more!

If you have completed your renewal, please disregard this reminder.