96 F. Supp. 2d 968 - Irwin v. Mascott’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently December 2019
3 district · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1601 (§ 102 of the Truth in Lending Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692 (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692A (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692E (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692F (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692K (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692N (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1367
Relies on Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin · Medtronic, Inc. v. Lohr · English v. General Electric Co. · Finley v. United States · Chicago & North Western Transportation Co. v. Kalo Brick & Tile Co.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This title does not annul, alter, or affect, or exempt any person subject to the provisions of this title from complying with the laws of any State with respect to debt collection practices, except to the extent that those laws are inconsistent with any provision of this title, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency. For purposes of this section, a State law is not inconsistent with this title if the protection such law affords any consumer is greater than the protection provided by this title.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“1. (i) all persons with addresses in California; (ii) to whom any defendant has sent or will send or has caused or will cause to be sent a letter containing demands or representation which are identical or similar to the demands or representations contained in any of the letters attached as Exhibits 1-10 to the Complaint; (iii) in connection with attempts to collect debts arising from dishonored checks (iv) which checks were not returned as undeliverable by the Post Office.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Sub-class A: Those members of the umbrella class whose checks were written for personal, family or household purposes at any time on or after January 1, 1997 [the FDCPA class]; Sub-class B: Those members of the umbrella class whose checks were written for any purpose at any time on or after January 1,1994 [the CUBPA class].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.