Sinegal v. Big Horn Auto Sales, Inc.

Full title: GERALD SINEGAL, Plaintiff, v. BIG HORN AUTO SALES, INC. AND ROBERT JOHN…

Court: United States District Court, Southern District of Texas

Civil Action H-21-3102

Date published: Mar 16, 2022

FACT: 

Gerald Sinegal bought a 2007 Chevrolet Silverado from Big Horn Auto Sales. Big Horn hired Texas Recovery Solutions to repossess the vehicle based on Sinegal’s failure to pay, a remedy permitted under the parties’ financing agreement. While the vehicle was parked outside Sinegal’s home, Texas Recovery Solutions loaded the vehicle onto the tow truck, with Sinegal and his cousin inside the vehicle. Sinegal sued Texas Recovery Solutions for unfair debt collection practices under 15 U.S.C. § 1692f and for violating Section 9.609 of the Texas Business and Commerce Code, which requires a secured party to proceed without breaching the peace during a repossession. Sinegal sued both Big Horn and Texas Recovery Solutions under Section 392.301 of the Texas Finance Code, which prohibits threatening or coercive tactics during repossession, and for battery. Texas Recovery filed an answer and Big Horn moved to dismiss based on lack of jurisdiction.

ISSUE:

Conclusion:

Big Horn’s motion to dismiss, Docket Entry No. 6, is denied. The initial conference, set for Friday, March 18, 2022, will proceed as scheduled.

Related Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

two + seven =