Rose v. Asset Acceptance
Debt collector Asset Acceptance, LLC, (Asset) sued appellant Freida Rose (Rose) for money she allegedly owed to “Pacific Bell Tel/[doing business as] SBC†(SBC) for telephone service. Rose countersued, claiming the telephone bills were not hers and that a statute of limitations had run on any amounts owed to SBC. She sought to certify a class of all California consumers that Asset had pursued to recover debts on telephone bills that were “so poorly documented that their authenticity [could not] be proven†and/or were “so old that they f[e]ll well beyond any pertinent statute of limitations under which they [could] be pursued . . . .†On appeal, Rose challenges the trial court’s order denying her motion for class certification and contends the court: (1) improperly decided a merits issue on the class certification motion, specifically, which statute of limitations applies to telephone bill debts; and (2) erred in ruling that a four-year state statute of limitations applies to such debts. We reject the contentions and affirm.
Comments on Rose v. Asset Acceptance