Almeida v. Radius Global Solutions, LLC

• Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
• Decided: January 7, 2022
• Docket: 6:21-cv-00885
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

ORLANDO ALMEIDA,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 6:21-cv-885-WWB-DCI

RADIUS GLOBAL SOLUTIONS, LLC,

Defendant. / ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Stay (Doc. 19), wherein Defendant requests that this case be stayed pending the Eleventh Circuit’s en banc rehearing and decision in Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Management Services, Inc., No. 19-14434, which will address whether a plaintiff alleging a claim for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., based on the transmission of personal information to a third-party has Article III standing. See Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Mgmt. Servs., Inc., 994 F.3d 1341, 1344 (11th Cir. 2021); Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Mgmt. Servs., Inc., No. 19-14434, Memorandum to Counsel or Parties (11th Cir. Nov. 23, 2021). Plaintiff opposes the Motion, (Doc. 19 at 9), but has not filed a written response in opposition thereto. A district court has “broad discretion to stay proceedings,” and a stay may be justified “pending the resolution of a related case in another court.” Ortega Trujillo v. Conover & Co. Commc’ns, 221 F.3d 1262, 1264 (11th Cir. 2000) (quotation omitted). “When ruling on a motion to stay pending the resolution of a related case in another forum, district courts must consider both the scope of the stay and the reasons given for the stay.” Lipford v. Carnival Corp., 346 F. Supp. 2d 1276, 1278 (S.D. Fla. 2004). Here, Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. 1) alleges that Defendant violated federal debt collection practices by providing Plaintiff’s personal information to a third-party vendor to

generate, print, or transmit a debt collection letter without Plaintiff’s consent. (Id. ¶¶ 18– 21, 25). Plaintiff does not allege any other basis for liability. (Id. ¶¶ 46, 50). Thus, because Plaintiff’s standing to assert a claim under the FDCPA has been called into question, the outcome in Hunstein could be dispositive in this litigation. Having reviewed the pleadings, this Court finds that a brief stay of these proceedings pending the resolution of Hunstein is proper. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Defendant’s Motion for Stay (Doc. 19) is GRANTED. 2. This case is STAYED pending the Eleventh Circuit’s resolution of Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Management Services, Inc., No. 19-14434.

Defendant shall notify this Court within fourteen days of the issuance of an opinion in the above referenced matter by the Eleventh Circuit and shall attach a copy of the same to its notice. 3. The Clerk is directed to administratively close this case. DONE AND ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on January 7, 2022. WENDY W.B UNITED STATES T JUDG

Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record