David Schultz Reviews a Humorous—But Important—FDCPA Procedural Ruling

In the August 10, 2026, issue of the AccountsRecovery.net ARM Compliance Digest, Hinshaw partner David Schultz recommends the entertainment value of reading a 28-page decision by District Judge Seeger denying a motion for default judgment in a case brought under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

David writes:

We’re generally too busy to read cases for fun. However, if you have a chance, you’ll get a kick out of N.D. IL Judge Seeger’s ruling in Love v Travelers Management Group, et al. He essentially writes a 28 page law review article on a relatively straightforward legal issue but does so with humor. In the process, he explains it “isn’t common for the leading case on a procedural question to come from the Reconstruction era” – Frow v. De La Vega, 82 U.S. 552, 554 (1872).

If you want the holding, you could probably just skip to the last page. Even the judge says he rambled on: “All of this is a long way of making a simple point.” That simple point is that the court “needs to sit tight on entering a default judgment against the agent until this Court has resolved the claims against the principal on the merits.”

He explains that when the liability of co-defendants is mutually dependent, multiple judgments create a potential for inconsistencies. He elaborates on this point: “Joint liability is like being on a ship with a bunch of friends, and hitting an iceberg in the North Atlantic. It’s sink-or-float time, for everyone. You’re going to stay afloat as a group, or you’re all going down together. Everyone is in the same boat, literally and figuratively.”

It’s not a particularly complex legal issue but Judge Seeger surely makes it a fun story.

• • AccountsRecovery.net ARM Compliance Digest: “Judge Invokes 154-Year-Old Precedent to Deny Default Judgment in FDCPA Case” (August 10, 2026)