United States District Court, D. Minnesota
Troy K. Scheffler, Plaintiff,
Gurstel Chargo, P.A. Defendant.
J. Nickitas, Esq., counsel for plaintiff.
H. Newburger, Esq. and Barron & Newburger, PC, and Amy M.
Goltz, Esq. and Gurstel Chargo, P.A., counsel for defendant.
S. Doty, Judge
matter is before the court upon the motion for summary
judgment by defendant Gurstel Chargo P.A. Based on a review
of the file, record, and proceedings herein, and for the
following reasons, the court grants the motion.
debt-collection dispute arises out of plaintiff Troy
Scheffler's acknowledged credit card debt in the amount
of $9, 896.90 owed to Discover Bank. Second Am. Compl.
¶¶ 5-7; Scheffler Decl. Ex. B. Scheffler is a
former debt collector who has filed many lawsuits in this
district alleging violations of the Fair Debt Collection
Practice Act (FDCPA). Gurstel is a law firm engaged in debt
31, 2009, Gurstel secured a judgment against Scheffler on
Discover's behalf. Second Am. Compl. ¶ 6; Answer
¶ 6. In July 2014, Gurstel sent a garnishment
summons to Financial One Credit Union. Second Am. Compl.
¶ 9; Answer ¶ 9. Gurstel sent a copy of the
garnishment summons to Scheffler. Second Am. Compl. ¶ 9;
Answer ¶ 9. In early August 2014, Scheffler mailed
Gurstel a cease letter, and Gurstel acknowledged receipt of
the letter. Second Am. Compl. ¶ 17; Answer ¶ 17.
early August 2015, Gurstel sent Financial One Credit Union a
garnishment notice. Second Am. Compl. ¶ 19. On August
11, Gurstel sent copies of the garnishment notice to
Scheffler with a cover letter stating the following:
These documents were served upon Financial One Credit Union
on or about August 6, 2015. If you have any questions, please
contact one of our collections representatives at
Decl. Ex. D, at 2 (emphasis in original). The letter
concludes with the following admonition:
This communication is from a debt collector and is an attempt
to collect a debt. Any information obtained will be used for
Id. On September 21, 2015, Scheffler called the
number on the letter and spoke to John Thomas, a Gurstel
employee. Scheffler Decl. Ex. G; Goltz Decl. Ex. 13.
Scheffler claims that he called only to ask questions about
the garnishment notice but that Thomas “insisted on
attempting to collect the debt.” Second Am. Compl.
¶ 28. The call, which the court has listened to several
times, tells a different story. See Scheffler Decl.
Ex. E; Goltz Decl. Ex. 13. In the call, Scheffler did not ask
any questions about the garnishment notice beyond asking why
Gurstel sent it to him:
Salter: Are you calling in regards to the, the
garnishment disclosure you received?
Scheffler: Well yeah I mean I got that. I mean you
guys have on here call if I have any questions. So, I