Spady v. Diversified Consultants, Inc., 19-5968 (NLH/KMW). (2019)
Court: District Court, D. New Jersey
Number: infdco20191010d70
Visitors: 12
Filed: Oct. 09, 2019
Latest Update: Oct. 09, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER NOEL L. HILLMAN , District Judge . This case comes before the court on Plaintiff Joshua Spady's Motion to Stay (Docket Item 10) pending the outcome of the appeal in Cadillo v. Stoneleigh Recovery Associates, a District of New Jersey case that held that the language at issue did not satisfy the requirement of the FDCPA. Defendant Diversified Consultants, Inc., which had previously filed a Motion to Dismiss (Docket Item 5) in this case, opposed Plaintiff's Motion
Summary: MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER NOEL L. HILLMAN , District Judge . This case comes before the court on Plaintiff Joshua Spady's Motion to Stay (Docket Item 10) pending the outcome of the appeal in Cadillo v. Stoneleigh Recovery Associates, a District of New Jersey case that held that the language at issue did not satisfy the requirement of the FDCPA. Defendant Diversified Consultants, Inc., which had previously filed a Motion to Dismiss (Docket Item 5) in this case, opposed Plaintiff's Motion t..
More
MEMORANDUM OPINION & ORDER
NOEL L. HILLMAN, District Judge.
This case comes before the court on Plaintiff Joshua Spady's Motion to Stay (Docket Item 10) pending the outcome of the appeal in Cadillo v. Stoneleigh Recovery Associates, a District of New Jersey case that held that the language at issue did not satisfy the requirement of the FDCPA. Defendant Diversified Consultants, Inc., which had previously filed a Motion to Dismiss (Docket Item 5) in this case, opposed Plaintiff's Motion to Seal (Docket Item 12). The Court notes that Defendant's opposition to the Motion to Seal was premised in large part on the argument that the Third Circuit had not yet accepted the interlocutory appeal in Cadillo. (See Docket Item 12.) In the time since Defendant filed its opposition, however, the Third Circuit has decided to consider the appeal in Cadillo and has set a briefing schedule beginning on October 18, 2019. See Cadillo v. Stoneleigh Recovery Associates, Appellate Docket No. 19-2811.
THEREFORE, IT IS this 9th day of October 2019, hereby
ORDERED that Defendant Diversified Consultants, Inc., is afforded 20 days to notify the Court if it will continue in its opposition to the Motion to Stay and, if so, the grounds for such opposition.
Source: Leagle
