Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

BASHAM v. MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, 4:15 CV 30 CDP. (2015)

Court: District Court, E.D. Missouri Number: infdco20150707905 Visitors: 7
Filed: Jun. 11, 2015
Latest Update: Jun. 11, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM AND ORDER CATHERINE D. PERRY , District Judge . Upon the Court's own motion to correct inadvertent typographical errors and avoid any potential confusion, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Order of this Court dated June 8, 2015 [24], is amended by interlineation as follows: on page 9, line 14 "Count VI" is substituted for "Count VII." IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants are required to answer Counts I-III (alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) of the a
More

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

Upon the Court's own motion to correct inadvertent typographical errors and avoid any potential confusion,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Order of this Court dated June 8, 2015 [24], is amended by interlineation as follows: on page 9, line 14 "Count VI" is substituted for "Count VII."

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that defendants are required to answer Counts I-III (alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) of the amended complaint, part of Count IV (to the extent it states violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act), Count V (alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act), Count VI (alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act), as well as all factual allegations and averments in the amended complaint as previously ordered in my June 8, 2015, Memorandum and Order. Part of Count IV (to the extent it alleges violations of "the State Act" or violations of something other than the FDCPA) and Counts VII (alleging "negligent training and supervision"), VIII (alleging "reckless and wanton training and supervision"), X (alleging "respondeat superior"), and XI (alleging "wanton, malicious and intentional conduct") remain dismissed without prejudice in accordance with my June 8, 2015, Memorandum and Order. Count IX (to the extent it alleges defamation, libel and slander claims) remains dismissed without prejudice as previously ordered, but defendants still remain obligated to respond to the factual allegations and averments contained therein regarding her loss of income which, while not a separate claim for relief, relate to the remaining claims set out in her amended complaint.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer