Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/18-328_pm02.pdf
Page Number: 3.0

Cite as:  589 U. S. ____ (2019) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the 
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to 
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington, D. C. 20543, of any typographical or other formal errors, in order that 
corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 18–328 
_________________ 

KEVIN C. ROTKISKE, PETITIONER v. 
PAUL KLEMM, ET AL. 

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF 
APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

[December 10, 2019]

 JUSTICE THOMAS delivered the opinion of the Court. 
The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) author-
izes private civil actions against debt collectors who engage
in  certain  prohibited  practices.    91  Stat.  881,  15  U. S. C. 
§1692k(a).  An  action  under  the  FDCPA  may  be  brought 
“within  one  year  from  the  date  on  which  the  violation  oc-
curs.”  §1692k(d).  This case requires us to determine when 
the  FDCPA’s  limitations  period  begins  to  run.    We  hold  
that,  absent  the  application  of  an  equitable  doctrine,  the 
statute of limitations in §1692k(d) begins to run on the date
on which the alleged FDCPA violation occurs, not the date
on which the violation is discovered. 

I 
A 
In 1977, Congress enacted the FDCPA “to eliminate abu-
sive  debt  collection  practices  by  debt  collectors,  to  insure
that  those  debt  collectors  who  refrain  from  using  abusive 
debt  collection  practices  are  not  competitively  disadvan-
taged, and to promote consistent State action to protect con-
sumers  against  debt  collection  abuses.”    §1692(e).    The