Opinion ID: 2996359
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Turner’s Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment

Text: As mentioned above, the district court denied Turner’s cross-motion for summary judgment. On appeal, Turner urges us to direct entry of summary judgment in his favor. Federal Courts of Appeals have the authority under 28 U.S.C. § 2106 to provide that relief when so doing would be “just under the circumstances.” Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. v. Martin, 466 F.2d 593, 600 (7th Cir. 1972). In most instances, however, such a decision is best made by the district court; we would rarely find it appropriate to direct the entry of summary judgment. Id. 2 (...continued) (5) a statement that, upon the consumer’s written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if dif- ferent from the current creditor. 12 No. 02-3511 This case is not an exception to the rule. The district court did not address the merits of Turner’s cross-motion for summary judgment and, on the state of this record, we are not satisfied as a matter of law that Turner is entitled to prevail in what remains of his suit, although nothing in this opinion necessarily precludes the court below from so concluding pursuant to a proper motion. We therefore decline Turner’s invitation to direct the entry of summary judgment in his favor.