In Rotkiske v. Klemm, the Third Circuit ruled that the statute of limitations for a Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) claim begins to toll on the date of the alleged violation, not when the plaintiff discovers the violation. That's significant, because the Fourth and Ninth Circuits have ruled otherwise.
The plaintiff in this case had alleged that the defendant law firm violated the FDCPA by erroneously obtaining a default judgment against him in 2009 when it knowingly served him at an improper address. However, the plaintiff alleged that he did not discover the judgment until September of 2014, when he was denied a mortgage loan based on the judgment, and that he timely filed his claim in June of 2015, within the one year statute of limitations under the FDCPA. The defendants moved to dismiss based on a plain reading of the FDCPA, arguing that the case was commenced more than one year after the alleged violation occurred. The Plaintiff argued that the legislative history and intent of the FDCPA incorporated a discovery rule into the Act which tolled the accrual of the statute of limitations until the plaintiff knew or should have known of the violation. In support of his argument, the Plaintiff cited decisions by the United States Courts of Appeals for the Fourth and Ninth Circuits applying the "discovery rule" and holding that the FDCPA statute of limitations begins to accrue when the plaintiff discovers the violation. See Lembach v. Bierman, 528 F. App'x 297 (4th Cir. 2013) (per curiam); Mangum v. Action Collection Serv., Inc., 575 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2009).
The relevant text of the FDCPA...
