Henson V Santander Consumer Usa Inc 137 S Ct 1718 2017 Caseођ Ricky henson and others (plaintiffs) borrowed money from citifinancial auto in connection with car purchases. after henson and the other borrowers defaulted on their loans, santander consumer usa, inc. (defendant) bought the defaulted loans from citifinancial. santander then tried to collect payment on the loans from henson and the other borrowers. Get more case briefs explained with quimbee. quimbee has over 36,900 case briefs (and counting) keyed to 984 casebooks quimbee case briefs.
United States V Doe Case Brief Summary Law Case Explained Facts this case arises from the dispute over the definition of “debt collector” within the fair debt collection practices act. In henson v. santander consumer usa inc., u.s. , 137 s.ct. 1718, 198 l.ed.2d 177 (2017), the supreme court held that a defendant who purchased a defaulted loan and sought to collect the debt was not a "debt collector." summary of this case from lima v. u.s. dep't of educ. Sep 16 2016. petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (response due october 17, 2016) sep 27 2016. order extending time to file response to petition to and including november 16, 2016, for all respondents. nov 16 2016. brief of respondent santander consumer usa inc. in opposition filed. nov 30 2016. distributed for conference of january 6, 2017. Henson et al. v. santander consumer usa inc. certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fourth circuit. no. 16–349. argued april 18, 2017—decided june 12, 2017. the fair debt collection practices act authorizes private lawsuits and weighty fines designed to deter the wayward practices of “debt collec tor[s],” a term.
Comments are closed.