Nathan Wertz v. Asset Acceptance, LLC - 2/25/14

Back to TopPrintE-mail
Tuesday  February 25, 2014 
11:00 AM  EST

11 a.m. 71A03-1305-CC-175 . Nathan Wertz appeals the trial court’s judgment dismissing his counterclaim against Asset Acceptance, LLC, pursuant to Indiana Trial Rule 12(B)(6) for failing to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.  In his counterclaim, Wertz alleged that Asset, a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Michigan, had attempted to collect a debt from Wertz, which it had purchased from the original lending institution, in Indiana without first having obtained a license from the Department of Financial Institutions pursuant to Indiana’s Uniform Consumer Credit Code.  The parties also dispute whether Asset was required to obtain a license under the Indiana Collection Agency Act, whether Wertz’s counterclaim sufficiently pleaded a claim under the Indiana Deceptive Consumer Sales Act, and whether Wertz’s counterclaim entitled him to relief under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Back to Events
Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Hail to our Constitutional Law Expert in the Executive Office! “What you’re not paying attention to is the fact that I just took an action to change the law,” Obama said.

  2. What is this, the Ind Supreme Court thinking that there is a separation of powers and limited enumerated powers as delegated by a dusty old document? Such eighteen century thinking, so rare and unwanted by the elites in this modern age. Dictate to us, dictate over us, the massess are chanting! George Soros agrees. Time to change with times Ind Supreme Court, says all President Snows. Rule by executive decree is the new black.

  3. I made the same argument before a commission of the Indiana Supreme Court and then to the fedeal district and federal appellate courts. Fell flat. So very glad to read that some judges still beleive that evidentiary foundations matter.

  4. KUDOS to the Indiana Supreme Court for realizing that some bureacracies need to go to the stake. Recall what RWR said: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. Government programs, once launched, never disappear. Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth!" NOW ... what next to this rare and inspiring chopping block? Well, the Commission on Gender and Race (but not religion!?!) is way overdue. And some other Board's could be cut with a positive for State and the reputation of the Indiana judiciary.

  5. During a visit where an informant with police wears audio and video, does the video necessary have to show hand to hand transaction of money and narcotics?

ADVERTISEMENT