What is it Worth When You Catch a Lawyer Lying: Briefs from Appeal of $83M Verdict Against Debt Buyer PRA

Portfolio Recovery Associates appealed a jury verdict of $83 million. The argument was that the Goliath debt buyer continued to sue a woman for debt that did not belong to her until after she filed a counterclaim based on the FDCPA, and the judge sanctioned the company for its abusive litigation tactics by deciding liability in favor of the alleged debtor and letting the jury decide only the damages.

An attorney for PRA said in a hearing that the debt collector thought the counterclaim would be dropped after it acknowledged the woman may not have owed a debt. (They waffled, and made their dismissal without prejudice, just in case they could find any evidence supporting their claim against the woman.) When she refused to drop her suit, the PRA Group, Inc. subsidiary fought her full force and dirty.

It sounds a lot like my personal experience with Portfolio Recovery. Unfortunately, the judge on my case, Lee P. Rudofsky says no reasonable juror can find it is particularly annoying to have the debt collector ring my phone hundreds of times and not tell me who is calling or what they are calling about until I agreed to answer interrogatories on a recorded line. Judge Rudofsky dismissed the majority of my claims.

I am busy this next three weeks preparing for a hearing on May 23, 2023 in which I hope the Court reconsiders his opinion. So, with no more ado, here are the briefs filed by both parties in the jury verdict case and an amicus brief favoring the alleged debtor. Hopefully they will help you help your clients or yourself (pro se) so you don’t have to settle for the pittance Portfolio tosses your way.