Rotkiske v. Klemm

In 2008, debt collector Paul Klemm filed a lawsuit against Kevin Rotkiske on behalf of a bank for unpaid credit card debt. The complaint was served at an address where Rotkiske no longer lived and was accepted by a household member, but he never actually received notice. A default judgment was entered in 2009. Rotkiske discovered the judgment in 2014 while applying for a mortgage. In 2015, he sued Klemm under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), alleging false representations in obtaining the default judgment. The District Court and the Third Circuit dismissed the suit as time-barred, holding that the FDCPA’s one-year statute of limitations ran from the date of the violation, not from the date of discovery. The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari. On December 10, 2019, the Court unanimously affirmed, ruling that the statutory text plainly requires the limitations period to commence on the date the alleged FDCPA violation occurs, without an implied discovery rule.

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that the FDCPA's statute of limitations starts on the date the violation occurs, not when it is discovered, rejecting the application of a general discovery rule.

Whether the one-year statute of limitations under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act begins to run on the date of the alleged violation or on the date the consumer discovers the violation.

The decision narrowed the timeframe for consumers to bring FDCPA claims, strictly limiting the ability to sue over collection misconduct discovered years later, and underscored a textualist approach to statutory interpretation, prompting discussion about potential legislative reform to protect consumers with delayed discovery.