When you’re being sued by the debt collector and have brought a counterclaim, you might bring a motion for summary judgment motion as to both parts of the case. They’re treated just a little differently differently. If they file a motion for summary judgement before you do, your motion would be called a “Cross-Motion,” and if they file first, you need to include your cross-motion with your response to their motion.
Just as we said about defending against a motion for summary judgment, these motions are first – and far more importantly – about the facts. Only secondarily do the arguments about what those facts might mean come in. Prove that they can’t show the facts to win their case – or that they can’t defend against your case – and you will win.
Filing a Motion as to the Debt Collector’s Case
The plaintiff has the burden of proof, and that makes a lot of difference in motions for summary judgment. It means that you can prove your defense against the debt collector either by showing that and one part of its case against you cannot be proved.
If the debt collector cannot prove ownership of the debt it is asserting against you, for example, its whole case must fail. Likewise if it can’t prove the amount of the debt or that you owe it. If any part of the plaintiff’s case fails, all of it does. And you can prove that it fails either by proving—remember,
you must show that there is “no dispute” about the things you are proving—that the debt collector is wrong (it isn’t your social security number or name, for example), or that the debt collector will not be able to prove the debt.
How Can You Know What You Need to Know?
How could you prove the debt collector can’t prove something? Well, a simple example could be an old Mastercard account. Let’s say the debt collector has no admissible evidence that the account was ever yours. And this is not rare, by the way. It was hoping to get you to admit that it was (or not to defend yourself at all). But you testify that it was not or that you do not remember one way or another.
That leaves it with no evidence on this crucial issue.
Or suppose it wants to prove an amount owed, but all it has is an inadmissible computer tape (or nothing but bills it sent you) and you deny owing the amount. That leaves it without evidence. You want to prove that the debt collector is without evidence, and if you do, you should get a summary judgment.
How do you know in advance that it doesn’t have any admissible evidence on these things? Because you will have asked by interrogatories for everything they have. When they give it all to you, you will be able to say what they can or cannot prove.
Or what if one of the things they give you shows that the debt is owed by someone else? Or owned by someone else? All these things are possible, and they sometimes happen.
When Do You File?
Consider what the debt collector must prove in order to show you owe it money. This is called its “prima facie” (pronounced in a wide variety of ways!) case. When you have the evidence you need that the debt collector cannot prove at least one part of its case against you, you will file your motion.
Motion for Summary Judgment on Your Counterclaim
Your motion for summary judgment as to your counterclaim is somewhat different. As the plaintiff in that claim, you have the burden of proof. That means that you must prove every part of your case, and they only have to prove one is missing. It means that instead of attacking on just one point, you must show undisputed facts as to all of them.
Summary Judgment on FDCPA Claims
Luckily, the FDCPA really lends itself to motions for summary judgment. The FDCPA lends itself to summary judgment because you don’t need to prove that the debt collector intended to do anything wrong. You don’t have to prove that you believed anything it said. Or that you suffered any particular damages.
Plus, if the violation occurred in the legal process (by using a false or deceptive affidavit, for example) or by a deceptive or threatening letter from the debt collector, the proof is right there in written form.
Almost undeniable. Or completely undeniable.
You Can Prove Them, Though
You can prove those things, but you don’t have to. If you have a claim for emotional distress, for example, your actual deception or intimidation, their intent, and any harm to you could very well make a difference. You often don’t want them determined on summary judgment, though, because you want the jury to get the full impact of all the testimony, and a judgment on the issue might cause the judge to curtail some of it.
That means that all you have to do is prove that the affidavit was deceptive—which may be obvious on its face. Or the letter threatening. Or whatever. And remember that you will have done discovery to find out whatever wasn’t obvious. If you have any other claims against the debt collector this will probably be more important.
Again, you will follow the rules regarding summary judgment very, very carefully. Numbered paragraphs, attached memos, exhibits correctly marked, etc. Do all that, and you should have your summary judgment.
Partial Summary Judgment
What if you prove that the debt collector violated the FDCPA but not that the debt is no good? What then? Well, it is possible to get what is called a “partial” summary judgment, where the court decides part of the case and leaves the rest for the jury to determine. You can prove they violated the FDCPA, but not how much they should pay, for example. And this is called “partial summary judgment as to liability but not damages.”