Automated Summary
Key Facts
Plaintiff Maria Keating obtained a default judgment against Defendant Frederick Debt Management, LLC for alleged Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) violations. Frederick repeatedly sent debt collection communications directly to Keating after she was represented by counsel, falsely threatening judgment and wage garnishment when Frederick never intended to seek judgment or garnish wages. The court granted the motion and awarded $6,403 in statutory damages, attorney fees, and costs.
Issues
- Whether defendant Frederick Debt Management violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(a)(2) of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by sending debt collection communications directly to Plaintiff Maria Keating when the court knew she was represented by counsel Christopher Wilcox and Carl E. Christensen.
- What amount of statutory damages, attorney fees, and costs should be awarded for the FDCPA violation. The court must determine reasonable attorney fees based on hours worked and prevailing market rates, and award statutory damages not exceeding $1,000 under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2)(a).
Holdings
The court granted Plaintiff Maria Keating's motion for default judgment against Defendant Frederick Debt Management, LLC. The judgment awards Keating $6,403 in total, including $1,000 in statutory damages for FDCPA violations, $4,913 in attorneys' fees and costs, and $500 for hearing attendance. The court found Frederick violated 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(a)(2) by repeatedly sending debt collection communications directly to Keating when Frederick knew she was represented by counsel.
Remedies
The court granted a default judgment awarding Plaintiff Maria Keating $6,403 against Defendant Frederick Debt Management, LLC. This includes statutory damages up to $1,000 under the FDCPA, attorney fees totaling $4,913, and filing costs of $500.
Monetary Damages
6403.00
Legal Principles
The court applies FDCPA § 1692c(a)(2) prohibiting communication with represented consumers. For default judgments, factual allegations must constitute a legitimate cause of action. Attorney fees are calculated using the lodestar method, with the burden of proof on the party seeking fees to establish reasonableness through evidence of rates and hours worked.
Precedent Name
- Hensley v. Eckerhart, 461 U.S. 424, 433-34, 437 (1983)
- Kelly v. United Payment Ctr. Inc., No. 22-cv-1799 (D. Minn. Sep. 27, 2023)
- In re RFC, 399 F. Supp. 3d 827, 846 (D. Minn. 2019)
- Hagen v. Sisseton-Wahpeton Cmty. Coll., 205 F.3d 1040, 1042 (8th Cir. 2000)
- Kaminski v. Frederick Debt Mgmt., LLC, No. 2:25-cv-80 (S.D. Ohio July 18, 2025)
- Bryant v. Jeffrey Sand Co., 919 F.3d 520, 529 (8th Cir. 2019)
- Radisson Hotels Int'l, Inc. v. Fairmont Partners LLC, No. 19-cv-1176 (D. Minn. Feb. 10, 2020)
- Murray v. Lene, 595 F.3d 868, 871 (8th Cir. 2010)
- Fox v. Vice, 563 U.S. 826, 838 (2011)
- Major v. Halliday Watkins & Mann, P.C., No. 24-cv-1897 (D. Minn. Dec. 27, 2024)
- Marshall v. Baggett, 616 F.3d 849, 852 (8th Cir. 2010)
- Everyday Learning Corp. v. Larson, 242 F.3d 815, 818–19 (8th Cir. 2001)
- Berscheid v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., No. 22-cv-86 (D. Minn. June 1, 2023)
Cited Statute
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
Judge Name
Eric C. Tostrud
Passage Text
- Plaintiff Maria Keating seeks a default judgment against Defendant Frederick Debt Management, LLC. Keating alleges that Frederick's debt collection practices violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq. (FDCPA), and amounted to the tort of intrusion upon seclusion under Minnesota law. Keating's motion will be granted, though in a slightly lower amount than she requests.
- Accordingly, based on the foregoing, and on all the files, records, and proceedings herein, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 1. Plaintiff Maria Keating's motion for default judgment [ECF No. 13] is GRANTED. 2. The Clerk of Court shall enter default judgment against Defendant Frederick Debt Management, LLC, and in favor of Plaintiff Maria Keating in the amount of $6,403.
- Keating claims that Frederick's conduct violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692c(a)(2), 1692d, 1692e, 1692e(4), 1692e(5), 1692f, and the complaint's taken-as-true factual allegations constitute a legitimate cause of action at least under 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(a)(2). Frederick repeatedly sent debt collection communications directly to Keating when Frederick knew Keating was represented by counsel.