Linda Lynaugh v. Michael Vincent

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedMarch 19, 2021
Docket20-15363
StatusUnpublished

This text of Linda Lynaugh v. Michael Vincent (Linda Lynaugh v. Michael Vincent) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Linda Lynaugh v. Michael Vincent, (9th Cir. 2021).

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION FILED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MAR 19 2021 MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LINDA LYNAUGH, No. 20-15363

Plaintiff-Appellant, D.C. No. 2:19-cv-04643-DJH

v. MEMORANDUM* MICHAEL VINCENT; STINSON LEONARD STREET LLP,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona Diane J. Humetewa, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 16, 2021**

Before: GRABER, R. NELSON, and HUNSAKER, Circuit Judges.

Linda Lynaugh appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing

her action alleging Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) claims. We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a dismissal under

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) for failure to state a claim. Kwan v.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3. ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). SanMedica Int’l, 854 F.3d 1088, 1093 (9th Cir. 2017). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Lynaugh’s action because Lynaugh

failed to allege facts sufficient to show a qualifying debt under the FDCPA. See

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009) (to avoid dismissal, “a complaint must

contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to state a claim to relief that is

plausible on its face” (citation and internal quotation marks omitted)); Turner v.

Cook, 362 F.3d 1219, 1226-27 (9th Cir. 2004) (holding that court judgments are

not transactions under the FDCPA; a transaction under the FDCPA must involve

some kind of business dealing or consensual obligation).

We reject as unsupported by the record Lynaugh’s contentions that

defendants made fraudulent misrepresentations in the district court.

AFFIRMED.

2 20-15363

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (Supreme Court, 2009)
Turner v. Cook
362 F.3d 1219 (Ninth Circuit, 2004)
Kwan v. SanMedica International
854 F.3d 1088 (Ninth Circuit, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Linda Lynaugh v. Michael Vincent, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/linda-lynaugh-v-michael-vincent-ca9-2021.