UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

YOLANDA GORDON,

Plaintiff,

v.

ENHANCED ACQUISITIONS LLC,

RODNEY A. GIOVE, SCOTT RICHMOND,

and LISA SMITH,

Defendants.

 /

Case No. 14-13839

Honorable Nancy G. Edmunds

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY

JUDGMENT [25]

Plaintiff Yolanda Gordon moves for summary judgment against Defendant Rodney

Giove. For the following reasons, Plaintiff's motion is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

Plaintiff filed suit against Defendants for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices

Act ("FDCPA"). On October 15, 2015, Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed Defendants Scott

Richmond and Lisa Smith. (Dkt. 11) On November 13, 2015, the Court entered default

judgment against Defendant Enhanced Acquisitions LLC for $7876.50 (Dkt. 20), leaving

Defendant Giove as the only remaining defendant. Plaintiff now moves for summary

judgment against Defendant Giove for all costs that have been awarded in this case, plus

the cost of bringing this motion.

Summary judgment is appropriate only when there is no genuine issue as to any

material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See FED. R.

CIV. P. 56(c). The central inquiry is "whether the evidence presents a sufficient

2:14-cv-13839-NGE-RSW Doc # 26 Filed 09/21/16 Pg 1 of 3 Pg ID 111
disagreement to require submission to a jury or whether it is so one-sided that one party

must prevail as a matter of law." Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc., 477 U.S. 242, 251-52

(1986). After adequate time for discovery and upon motion, Rule 56(c) mandates summary

judgment against a party who fails to establish the existence of an element essential to that

party's case and on which that party bears the burden of proof at trial. See Celotex Corp.

v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986).

In the Sixth Circuit, a plaintiff may hold a member of an LLC individually liable for

violations of the FDCPA only if that member qualifies as a "debt collector" under the Act. 

See Kistner v. Law Offices of Michael P. Margelefsky, LLC, 518 F.3d 433, 437-38 (6th Cir.

2008). The FDCPA defines a "debt collector" as "any person who uses any instrumentality

of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the

collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly,

debts ..." 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6). Therefore, to obtain relief, Plaintiff must allege "one crucial

premise: that the defendant is 'personally liable on the basis of his participation in the debt

collection activities of the [firm]." Martin v. Trott Law, P.C., __ F. Supp. 3d. __, 2016 WL

3997029, at *13 (E.D. Mich. July 26, 1016) (quoting Kistner, 518 F.3d at 437).

Here, Plaintiff has not alleged that Defendant Giove has participated directly or

indirectly in debt collection. Plaintiff only alleges that Defendant Giove has "an onwership

interest, and/or interest in the income of Defendant Enhanced Acquisitions LLC." (Dkt. 25,

at 1) Therefore, Plaintiff has not shown that she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law,

and the Court DENIES WITHOUT PREJUDICE Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

2

2:14-cv-13839-NGE-RSW Doc # 26 Filed 09/21/16 Pg 2 of 3 Pg ID 112
So ordered.

s/Nancy G. Edmunds 

Nancy G. Edmunds

United States District Judge

Dated: September 21, 2016

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of

record on September 21, 2016, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Carol A. Bethel 

Case Manager

3

2:14-cv-13839-NGE-RSW Doc # 26 Filed 09/21/16 Pg 3 of 3 Pg ID 113