BV80 Posted April 24, 2014 Report Share Posted April 24, 2014 Ruling from the Indiana Court of Appeals on March 21, 2014 Accordingly, because Asset is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Michigan, and because Asset does not have a physical situs within Indiana, the IUCCC's licensure provision does not apply to it. Because Asset was not required to obtain a license under the IUCCC, Wertz's claims under the IDCSA and the FDCPA cannot stand as alleged. Thus, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of Wertz's counterclaim for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=868309393044754635&q=%22Wertz+v.+Asset+Acceptance,+LLC%22&hl=en&as_sdt=6,41 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
admin Posted April 30, 2014 Report Share Posted April 30, 2014 Bummer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.