Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Garduno v. Autovest LLC

United States District Court, D. Arizona

October 27, 2015

Robert Garduno, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Autovest LLC, et al., Defendants

         Decided October 26, 2015.

          For Robert Garduno, Theresa Ruiz, Plaintiffs: Floyd W Bybee, LEAD ATTORNEY, Bybee Law Center PLC, Chandler, AZ.

         For Autovest LLC, Defendant: Robert Travis Campbell, LEAD ATTORNEY, Simmonds & Narita LLP, San Francisco, CA.

         For Fulton, Friedman & Gullace LLP, Defendant: Cynthia Lee Fulton, LEAD ATTORNEY, Fulton Friedman & Gullace PLLC, Phoenix, AZ.

Page 924

         ORDER

         Honorable Roslyn O. Silver, Senior United States District Judge.

         Plaintiffs were sued by Defendants in state court for not paying off a car loan. According to Plaintiffs, Defendants waited too long to file that suit. Plaintiffs now allege the filing of the state court suit violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (" FDCPA" ). Defendants seek judgment on the pleadings, arguing this suit is barred by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine or because the FDCPA claim was a compulsory

Page 925

counterclaim that should have been raised in state court. Defendants are incorrect and Plaintiffs' claim may proceed.

         BACKGROUND

         In 2007, Plaintiffs Robert Garduno and Theresa Ruiz purchased a car. To finance that purchase, Plaintiffs took out a loan from the car dealer, secured by the car. (Doc. 1 at 3). The car dealer later assigned the debt to Wells Fargo Bank. After Plaintiffs fell behind on their payments, Wells Fargo repossessed and sold the vehicle in April 2009. The sales proceeds were not enough to satisfy the outstanding balance. Wells Fargo then sold the debt to Defendant Autovest LLC. Autovest hired the law firm of Fulton, Friedman & Gullace, LLP (" FFG" ), to assist " in collecting the claimed deficiency balance from Plaintiffs." (Doc. 1 at 3).

         On June 17, 2014--well over five years after the car was repossessed--FFG filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court. That lawsuit, brought on behalf of Autovest, was an attempt to collect on the deficiency balance. (Doc. 15-1 at 5). Plaintiffs allege the lawsuit was barred by the statute of limitations at the time it was filed and Defendants Autovest and FFG knew as much. Despite the suit being untimely, Plaintiffs did not raise that issue in state court and eventually stipulated to entry of judgment in the amount of $24,971.32. (Doc. 1 at 4). The state court entered judgment in January 2015. (Doc. 15-1 at 23).

         On June 3, 2015, Plaintiffs filed the present suit alleging a single claim under the FDCPA. As described by Plaintiffs, their claim is that Autovest and FFG (collectively, " Defendants" ) violated the FDCPA " by filing suit on a time-barred debt." (Doc. 23 at 2). Defendants answered the complaint but shortly thereafter filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings. Defendants' motion argues this suit constitutes an inappropriate challenge to the state court judgment or ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.