DS News

» VISIT US ONLINE @ DSNEWS.COM 29 decision, I think this certainly helps not only our firm but everyone who practices in the industry and will dramatically cut down on the number and the cost of lawsuits, and the cost of compliance. Had this decision gone a different direction, I think the cost to do business in this field would've skyrocketed. We are excited that the Supreme Court strongly agreed with a 9-0 decision," he added. "e U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus, LLP, was an important ruling," said Seth Shapiro, Senior Regulatory Counsel, LoanCare. "It resolved a circuit split among the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and it provided much needed guidance regarding the applicability of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act to nonjudicial foreclosure activities. Resolving this uncertainty should help consumers and the industry reduce the costs and delays associated with litigating these issues." David Scheffel, Partner at Dorsey & Whitney and co-chair of the firm's Consumer Financial Practices Group said, "is decision essentially gives law firms and lenders more protection in nonjudicial foreclosure states. In these jurisdictions, homeowners and borrowers will no longer be able to file lawsuits under the FDCPA against law firms who are pursuing foreclosures. is essentially eliminates a heavily used practice by plaintiffs' attorneys. Ultimately, this should have the effect of reducing the cost that lenders/ servicers bear in terms of getting to a final foreclosure in these states as the FDCPA lawsuits delay this process significantly." In 2007, Dennis Obduskey obtained a loan for $329,940 to buy a residential property in Bailey, Colorado, and he defaulted in 2009. Later in 2014, Wells Fargo hired McCarthy & Holthus, to pursue a nonjudicial foreclosure on the property. On August 8, 2015, the petitioner filed suit against M&H and multiple Wells Fargo entities in the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. e firm and the Wells Fargo entities moved to dismiss the complaint, and on July 19, 2016, the district court granted the motions and denied the Temporary Restraining Order. On the same day that the district court issued its order, Obduskey filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy and appealed to the 10th Circuit. On January 19, 2018, the court of appeals affirmed the lower court's ruling, which sought to interpret the congressional intent in passing the FDCPA by analyzing the plain language of the statute and policy considerations. A total of nine amicus briefs by 19 entities were filed in support of McCarthy & Holthus, LLP. In February, the Legal League 100 held a webinar that explored the potential outcomes of the Obduskey vs. McCarthy & Holthus Supreme Court case and the impact of these outcomes on both the mortgage industry and the legal professionals supporting it. e webinar was presented by Matthew Podmenik, Managing Partner, McCarthy & Holthus Law Firm. Earlier in November 2018, the amicus curiae brief filed by the Legal League 100 in support of McCarthy & Holthus contended that law firms acting on behalf of their mortgage servicer clients by completing the nonjudicial foreclosure process in states where permitted are not subject to regulation under the FDCPA. e brief noted that such servicers are not collecting a debt as defined under the plain language of the statute. e brief also stated the possibility of states with carefully crafted foreclosure laws designed to protect borrowers and lenders being compelled to rewrite their laws in order to comply with the FDCPA. "is was a case of great importance and an undecided question for many years. We had the Legal League 100 and eight other organizations who filed amicus briefs. A total of 19 different parties joined us and all of us came together and this is a real team victory." -Matthew Podmenik, McCarthy& Holthus Law Firm THE LEADER IN DEFAULT SERVICING NEWS Help shape the next issue of DS News. Drop us a line at Editor@DSNews.com.

• Cover