Dorian N. Rivera v. Diversified Recovery Bureau LLC

Rivera · United States District Court for the District of Colorado · March 31, 2026 · No. 1:24-cv-01952-SBP

Summary

The United States District Court for the District of Colorado denied Diversified Recovery Bureau LLC’s motion for summary judgment in Dorian N. Rivera’s action alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Colorado Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The court held that factual disputes remained regarding whether Rivera’s communications constituted a refusal to pay or a request to cease communication, and whether the defendant’s follow-up email violated the applicable statutes.

Holdings

  1. Plaintiff's statement that she 'reject[ed] to pay' the debt created, at minimum, a genuine factual dispute as to whether she notified Defendant in writing that she refused to pay, thereby triggering Defendant's obligation not to communicate further concerning the debt, subject to statutory exceptions not applicable here.
  2. Even if Defendant's follow-up email merely confirmed an inquiry concerning the validity of the debt rather than attempted collection, the email could still constitute prohibited further communication under 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(c), because debt validation is not one of the applicable statutory exceptions.
  3. Defendant was not entitled to summary judgment because genuine disputes existed concerning whether Plaintiff's communications triggered the FDCPA's cease-communication protection and whether Defendant's response violated that protection. The CFDCPA claim likewise survived because it hinged on the same unresolved arguments.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Plaintiff's March 12, 2024 email, including the statement that she rejected paying the debt, created a genuine dispute as to whether she notified Defendant in writing that she refused to pay or wanted communications to cease under 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(c).
  2. Whether Defendant's follow-up email constituted prohibited further communication concerning the debt or instead merely confirmed an inquiry concerning debt validation.
  3. Whether Defendant was entitled to summary judgment on Plaintiff's FDCPA and CFDCPA claims.

Disposition

other

Cases Cited (19)

  • Crowe v. ADT Sec. Servs., Inc., 649 F.3d 1189, 1194 (10th Cir. 2011)(followed)
  • Adler v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 144 F.3d 664, 671 (10th Cir. 1998)(followed)
  • Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 323, 325 (1986)(followed)
  • Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 249-50 (1986)(followed)
  • Bones v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc., 366 F.3d 869, 875 (10th Cir. 2004)(followed)
  • Tolan v. Cotton, 572 U.S. 650, 656 (2014)(followed)
  • Banner Bank v. First Am. Title Ins. Co., 916 F.3d 1323, 1326 (10th Cir. 2019)(followed)
  • Smith v. Allbaugh, 921 F.3d 1261, 1268 (10th Cir. 2019)(followed)
  • United States v. Griffith, 928 F.3d 855, 864 n.1 (10th Cir. 2019)(followed)
  • Requena v. Roberts, 893 F.3d 1195, 1205 (10th Cir. 2018)(followed)

Showing top 10 of 19.

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…