CASE RESULTS

HELPING CONSUMERS FIGHT BACK…

The team at Schlanger Law Group is honored to successfully represent a variety of consumers, protect their rights, and restore their financial futures. We are proud to share these winning case results:

An attorney at Schlanger Law Group shakes hands with a satisfied client depicting the excellent case results we achieve.
At Schlanger Law Group we are proud of our many important case results.

FCRA and Identity Theft Case Results: 

We help victims of inaccurate credit reporting and identity theft every day.  Here are some examples of situations we have resolved on behalf of our clients: 
  • Preserved the credit history of a consumer whose husband had stolen her identity and run up hundreds of thousands of dollars of debt in her name. 
  • Assisted two former law enforcement officers whose identities were stolen in connection with dozens of illegal vehicle purchases. 
  • Helped repair the damaged credit and reputation of a banker whose credit card was stolen and used to incur tens of thousands of charges at nightclubs. 
  • Assisted a consumer whose identity was used by an auto dealership to finance another family member’s vehicle. 
  • Advocated for a client whose identity was stolen and used to rent (but not pay for) a New York City apartment. 
  • Protected the rights of a consumer whose credit history falsely stated that a debt was still owed when it had already been paid in full. 
  • Restored a businessman’s financial situation after his credit card was stolen while traveling abroad. 
  • Corrected negative credit reporting and stopped debt collection attempts against a consumer whose credit was damaged when he filed a debt dispute related to an unauthorized purchase. 
  • Protected a high-net-worth client facing collection actions related to tens of thousands of dollars of fraudulent credit card charges. 
  • Settled a case involving our client’s forged signature on auto loan documents. 

Class Action Case Results: 

We are leaders in consumer protection, and regularly represent classes of consumers in New Jersey, New York, and around the country in various matters. Some of our important case results include: 
  • A class action against Wells Fargo alleging interest overcharges on variable rate mortgages. Carrillo v. Wells Fargo, 2019 WL 3927369 (Aug. 20, 2019). 
  • An appellate victory in the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit in a class action related to a violation of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA). Jeffries v. Volume Services of America, 928 F.3d 1059 (July 2, 2019). 
  • A class action settlement in a case dealing with improper interest calculations owed by Georgia consumers on state court judgments. Thomas v. Sherwin P. Robin & Associates, P.C. et al., 16-cv-02529-AT (N.D.G.A.) 
  • A successful class action settlement in a case featuring a violation of New York’s Rent-To-Own statutes. Daisley v. West Creek Financial, Inc., 18-cv-03555-BMC (E.D.N.Y.) 
  • A class action brought and settled in favor of our clients against a high-volume debt collector that included misstatements in thousands of state court pleadings filed on behalf of National Collegiate Student Loan Trust. Winslow v. Forster & Garbus, LLP, No. CV 15-2996 (AYS), 2017 WL 6375744, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 13, 2017) and Winslow v. Forster & Garbus, LLP, et al., 15-CV-02996 (E.D.N.Y) 
  • An impactful class action settlement in an FDCPA case regarding fraudulent affidavits filed in tens of thousands of state court collection cases. Coble, et al. v. Cohen & Slamowitz, et al., 11-CV-01037 (S.D.N.Y.) See, 824 F. Supp. 2d 568 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 11, 2011) (denying defendants’ motion to dismiss) 
  • An important consumer class action settlement in a multi-district product liability case alleging defective plastic cooling tubes in certain Porsche vehicles. In re Porsche Cars North America, Inc., Plastic Coolant Tubes Products Liability Litigation, 11-MD-2233 (N.D. Ohio) See, 880 F. Supp. 2d 801 (S.D. Ohio 2012); 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 88693 (S.D. Ohio June 30, 2014), aff’d summary order (6th Cir. 14-3421, 7/13/15) 
  • A wide-reaching class settlement involving over 58,000 consumers, usury laws, and a non-bank that accepted the assignment of loans from a national bank. In re Midland Funding Interest Rate Litigation, 11-CV-814 (S.D.N.Y.) (class action). See, 2015 U.S. App. 8483, 786 F.3d 246 (2d Cir. 2015) rehearing denied 8/15/2015; 237 F.Supp.3d 130 (2017) 
  • A Fair Debt Collection Practices Act class action alleging that false and misleading collection letters were sent to judgment debtors. The defendant denied all allegations, but the case was settled and approved by the District Court. Moy v. Eltman, Eltman & Cooper, P.C., 12-CV-02382 (E.D.N.Y.) 
  • Another FDCPA class action against a high-volume debt collection law firm alleging misstatements regarding the debt collectors’ ability to sue and the defendant’s failure to meaningfully review state court collection pleadings. De La Paz v. Rubin & Rothman, LLC, et al., 11-CV-9625 (S.D.N.Y.) 
  • An FDCPA class action alleging defendant filed consumer collection actions against upstate New Yorkers in improper venues and made misstatements in boilerplate summonses. Klippel v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, et al., 15-cv-1061 (N.D.N.Y.) 

Other Notable Case Results: 

In addition to class actions, we are proud to help clients in other consumer protection matters including: 
  • FDCPA and Judiciary Law claims based on debt collection attorneys’ alleged failure to timely file a state court complaint under New York’s borrowing statute, and alleged failure to meaningfully review the complaint prior to filing. Diaz v. Portfolio Recovery Assoc., LLC, 10-CV-3920 (E.D.N.Y.) 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25802 (E.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2012), adopted by, objections overruled by, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72724 (E.D.N.Y. May 23, 2012) 
  • A challenge of the unlawful addition of attorney’s fees in a complaint filed against a rent-controlled tenant in housing court. DiMatteo v. Sweeney, Gallo, Reich & Bolz, 13-CV-8451 (S.D.N.Y.) See, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 12250 (2d Cir. July 16, 2015) 
  • Our request to strike the defendants’ answer and impose sanctions was granted in a case involving allegations of medical debt collection abuse. 894 F. Supp. 2d 245 (granting in part and denying in part parties’ cross motions for summary judgment) Douyon v. NY Med. Health Care, P.C., 10-CV-3983 (E.D.N.Y). See, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47850 (E.D.N.Y. May 4, 2011) Plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration granted at 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 138053 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 25, 2013); 49 F. Supp. 3d 328 (E.D.N.Y. 2014) (awarding attorney’s fees) 
  • The opponent’s motion to enforce an arbitration award was dismissed on the grounds that the arbitration forum was institutionally biased against consumers. FIA Card Services, N.A. v. Miguel Escobar, 2010 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3729 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. May 10, 2010) 
  • A case dismissal was reversed, and the court found federal jurisdiction pursuant to the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act. Pyskaty v. Wide World of Cars, LLC, 856 F.3d 216 (2d Cir. 2017). The case was successfully resolved just prior to trial. 
  • The court denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss and imposed sanctions against the defendant. Shepherd v. Law Offices of Cohen & Slamowitz, LLP, 08-CV-6199 (S.D.N.Y.). See, 668 F.Supp. 2d 579 (S.D.N.Y. 2009); 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 135501 (S.D.N.Y. December 21, 2010) (awarding fees) 
  • Our client was granted rescission of a home loan pursuant to the Truth in Lending Act. United States Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Pia, 2011 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 4962 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Oct. 7, 2011); affirmed 106 A.D.3d 991 (2d Dept. 2013); leave to appeal denied, 2013 LEXIS 2512 (Ct of Appeals, 9/17/13); 2014 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3841 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Aug. 26, 2014) (holding bank in contempt for non-compliance with prior court orders and denying bank’s motion to quash post-judgment discovery)