UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

Deborah Gimbel §

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No.

v 5:20-cv-398

Midland Funding, LLC

Plaintiff’s Original Complaint

____________________

Introduction

1. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Ac t was enacted to stop debt 

collectors from harassing, abusing, and making misrepresentations to 

and about consumers. Congress found that these practices led to job 

loss, the number of personal bankruptcies, invasions of privacy, and 

marital instability. 

2. The FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from making false 

representations regarding the character, amount, or legal status of a 

debt. 

3. Plaintiff brings this action for Defendant’s violation of the FDCPA 

and seeks actual damages, statutory damages, attorneys’ f ees and 

costs. 

Case 5:20-cv-00398-DAE Document 1 Filed 03/27/20 Page 1 of 5
Jurisdiction & Venue 

4. Jurisdiction of this Court arises under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(d) and 28 

U.S.C. § 1331.

5. Venue is proper in this district and division pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 

1391(b) as a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to 

Plaintiff’s claims occurred here. 

Parties

6. Plaintiff, Deborah Gimbel, is a natural person who resides in and has 

resided in Seguin, Guadalupe County, Texas at all times relevant to 

this action.

7. Defendant, Midland Funding, LLC, is a Delaware limited liability 

company whose principal business address is 350 Camino De La 

Reina San Diego, CA 92108-3007. It may be served via its registered 

agent Corporation Service Company Dba Csc - Lawyers Inco at 211 

E. 7th Street Suite 620 Austin, TX 78701.

Facts

8. Midland regularly collects, and attempts to collect, defaulted debts 

which were incurred, or alleged to have been incurred, for personal, 

family, or household purposes on behalf of others using the U.S. 

Mail, telephone, and internet.

9. The principal purpose of Midland is the collection of such debts.

Case 5:20-cv-00398-DAE Document 1 Filed 03/27/20 Page 2 of 5
10. The Debt is an allegedly defaulted debt that Gimbel used for 

personal, family, and household purposes (the “Debt”).

11. Midland, via its in-house counsel, sued Gimbel in JP court in 

Guadalupe County in an effort to collect the Debt.

12. Gimbel, after filing a pro-se answer, filed a pro-se motion to compel 

arbitration. 

13. In orders dated September 18, 2020 the court grated her motion 

compelling arbitration and denied Midland’s response to the same. 

14. A true and correct copy of these orders are attached as Exhibit A.

15. Gimbel took steps to initiate the arbitration with JAMS. 

16. Midland failed respond.

17. JAMS on multiple occasions, sent correspondence to Midland 

requesting it pay the arbitration fees. 

18. This correspondence is attached as Exhibit B. 

19. Midland wholly failed to respond. 

20. Rather than comply with the court’s order compelling mediation, in 

a motion dated February 20, 2020 Midland filed a motion for 

summary judgment in the JP court. 

21. A true and correct copy of this motion is attached as Exhibit C.

22. In a letter dated March 13, 2020,due to Midland’s non-compliance,

JAMS administratively suspended the arbitration.

Case 5:20-cv-00398-DAE Document 1 Filed 03/27/20 Page 3 of 5
23. A true and correct copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit D. 

Cause of Action – Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

24. Midland Funding is a debt collector as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 

1692a(6).

25. The Debt is a debt as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5).

26. Gimbel is a consumer as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1692a( 3).

27. The motion for summary judgment is a communication as defined by 

15 U.S.C. § 1692a(2).

28. By ignoring the order compelling arbitration and filing the motion 

for summary judgment, Midland violated the FDCPA in that it:

a. It misrepresented the legal status of a debt in violation of 15 

U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(A); 

b. It falsely represented or implied that a communication is from 

an attorney or had meaningful attorney involvement in 

violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(3); and 

c. Made a false representation in the course of collection a debt in 

violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10). 

Jury Demand

29. Plaintiff demands this case be tried before a jury.

Case 5:20-cv-00398-DAE Document 1 Filed 03/27/20 Page 4 of 5
Prayer for Relief

Plaintiff prays, that this Court enter judgment against Defendant and in 

favor of Plaintiff for:

a. Actual damages per 15 U.S.C. § 1692 k(a)(1);

b. Statutory damages per 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(2); and

c. Attorney’s fees, costs, and litigation expenses per 15 U.S.C. § 1692

k(a)(3).

Dated: March 27, 2020 Respectfully Submitted,

/s/William M. Clanton

William M. Clanton

Texas Bar No. 24049436

Law Office of Bill Clanton, P.C.

926 Chulie Dr. 

San Antonio, Texas 78216

210 226 0800

210 338 8660 fax 

bill@clantonlawoffice.com

Case 5:20-cv-00398-DAE Document 1 Filed 03/27/20 Page 5 of 5