Sheriff v. Gillie
Sheriff v. Gillie | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| |||||||
Argued March 29, 2016 Decided May 16, 2016 | |||||||
Full case name | Mark J. Sheriff, et al., Petitioners v. Pamela Gillie, et al. | ||||||
Docket nos. | 15–338 | ||||||
Citations | |||||||
Opinion announcement | Opinion announcement | ||||||
Holding | |||||||
The use of the Ohio Attorney General's letterhead, as its direction, was permissible and not a false, deceptive, or misleading representation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. | |||||||
Court membership | |||||||
| |||||||
Case opinions | |||||||
Majority | Ginsburg, joined by unanimous | ||||||
Laws applied | |||||||
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act |
Sheriff v. Gillie, 578 U.S. ___ (2016), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that the use of the Ohio Attorney General's letterhead, as its direction, was permissible and not a false, deceptive, or misleading representation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.[1][2]
Background
The Ohio Attorney General contracted out debt collection to private attorneys and instructed them to use the Ohio Attorney General's letterhead.[2]
Opinion of the Court
Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg authored a unanimous decision.[2]
References
- ↑ SCOTUSblog coverage
- 1 2 3 Sheriff v. Gillie, No. 15–338, 578 U.S. ____ (2016).
External links
- Slip opinion from the U.S. Supreme Court
- SCOTUSblog coverage
- Oyez.org coverage
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the 6/6/2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.