Collection

Daniel Schlanger is a partner at Kakalec & Schlanger, LLP, where he heads the firm's consumer practice. His practice focuses on representing victims of unfair collection tactics, predatory lending, hidden fees, auto fraud, defective products, and other marketplace injustice. The firm brings affirmative litigation (including class actions and significant individual claims) on behalf of consumers and also regularly represents consumers who have been sued on significant debts, including credit card debt, medical debt, auto loans, home loans, lines of credit, personal guarantees, etc. Dan joined Kakalec & Schlanger, LLP's predecessor firm (Schlanger & Schlanger) in 2007 after working as a staff attorney at Legal Aid Society of Cleveland, where he was a member of that organization’s consumer law unit, and helped to found a program focused on wage and hour litigation on behalf of low-income workers. Prior to that, Dan clerked for the Hon. R. Lanier Anderson, III on the United States Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit. Dan received his law degree from Harvard Law School, cum laude, in 2004. He received his undergraduate degree from Carleton College, magna cum laude, in 1994.

Muhammad Ramadan, Esq., is the founder of Attorneys of Chicago, an award-winning law firm focusing solely on auto accidents, medical negligence, nursing home abuse and dog bite cases. Muhammad Ramadan is from the South Side of Chicago and received his Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from DePaul University, Chicago and his Juris Doctor from Michigan State College of Law. The combination of his South Side upbringing and law degree, Mr. Ramadan brings his hustle work ethic, fighter mentality and law expertise to his practice and his clients. Mr. Ramadan is a distinguished Super Lawyers awardee, a peer-review organization, and is also an honorable board member of the grassroots organization Inner-City Muslim Action Network (IMAN) of Chicago. He was awarded the Inner-City Muslim Action Network Community Achievement Award for his commitment and love to the people of Chicago. Our Chicago personal injury attorney, Muhammad Ramadan, graciously earned a diverse collection of awards that showcase his dedication and care to his community, including: The Chicago Commission on Human Relations Award for his contribution to the residents of Chicago during the 2020 Pandemic DePaul University Distinguished Alumni Award The Global Directory of Who’s Who Top Lawyer The Top 100 Magazine Top 100 Attorneys. Muhammad Ramadan is dedicated to advocating for the hardworking, blue-collar residents of Chicago. Through his legal expertise, he has successfully secured millions of dollars in compensation for his clients.

Julia has over 20 years of experience representing diverse business industries and individuals as debtors in reorganizations, bankruptcy, and debt restructuring. She has been lead and co-counsel in Chapter 11 bankruptcies on behalf of real estate developers, hospitality companies, commercial landlords, manufacturers, fabricators, logistic companies and high net-worth individuals. She also has significant experience representing lenders and creditors in bankruptcy court and state court, including stay modification litigation, adversary actions, priority lien disputes and commercial collection and foreclosure, as well as contractors and homeowners in construction and mechanic’s lien litigation. Julia has in-depth experience drafting contracts, leases, business sales transactions and settlement agreements with an eye toward anticipating potential litigation and protecting her clients. Additionally, she represents condominium and homeowners’ associations in litigation, collection, negotiations with vendors and disputes with utilities and municipalities. Julia is experienced with drafting estate plans and representing estate and beneficiaries in probate litigation. As a seasoned attorney, Julia handles all aspects of litigation including investigations, pleadings, discovery, pre-trial matters, trial, and if appropriate, settlements and/or appeals of trial decisions. Julia is a frequent speaker with the Illinois State Bar Association on topics in Bankruptcy, Mechanics Lien and Collection Strategies. Julia is the Chair of the Firm’s Litigation Practice, and a third year honoree for the 2026 Illinois Super Lawyers® list.

We focus our practice exclusively on consumer protection and class action law. We work on behalf of consumers whose rights had been violated by advertisers, banks and other lenders, auto dealers, credit bureaus, debt collectors and landlords. Consumer protection laws are designed to protect consumers like you from predatory lenders, overzealous debt collectors, careless credit bureaus and other harmful business practices. At our firm, we work to enforce existing consumer protection statutes to resolve consumer problems with: Unfair collection practices/debt collection harassment Unwanted telemarketing calls (robocalls) and spam texts Junk faxes Identity theft Credit reporting problems Mortgage problems

Fitzgerald & Campbell is a Consumer Debt Defense Law Firm unlike any other. We provide affordable protection to consumers suffering from debt throughout California and assist them in getting out of debt for as little as possible. We resolve judgments, garnishments, student loan debt (federal & private), collection lawsuits, debt settlement, collection harassment and bankruptcy. We have been practicing law for over 25 years and have helped thousands to become debt free on a basis you can afford. Our motto is Admit Nothing, Demand Proof!

Ryan Peterson is a former debt collection attorney turned consumer rights expert and advocate. After graduating from William Mitchell law school in 2008, Ryan opened his own criminal defense firm. In 2010 Ryan joined a Minneapolis-based debt collection firm. There, he quickly learned the nuances of rights and regulations regarding consumers. As time went on, Ryan developed a deep desire to work for consumers - to protect individuals who are wrongly treated, often knowingly, by big business and banking institutions. As Ryan frequently says, he’s grateful to practice law in a way that aligns with his personal beliefs. He values his relationship with clients and strives to partner with each individual to ensure a fair outcome. ​ Like all native Minnesotan, Ryan loves cabin time Up North. He is also a self-described “avid indoorsman” who enjoys cooking, reading, bar trivia, and board games. He lives in Minneapolis with his wife and daughter.

Andrei Armas is a founding partner of Armas & Joseph. Mr. Armas specializes in consumer protection, including banking, credit, debt collection, and deceptive business practices. Over the last 10 years, Mr. Armas has successfully litigated and fought for consumers' rights involving identity theft, unauthorized transactions, debt collection and credit reporting. Mr. Armas has also successfully represented consumers with misrepresented services and goods, including through class action litigation.

Christopher M. Lefebvre, Esq. practices family, bankruptcy and consumer protection law with his father in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. Chris is a member of the debtor/creditor committee of the Rhode Island Bar Association and is a frequent speaker on consumer matters. He was the 1995 recipient of the Rhode Island Bar Association's Pro Bono Publico Award for his commitment to equal access to justice for the poor. To date, his largest case was the Sears bankruptcy class action suit where 190,000 former debtors received restitution in excess of $175 million. Chris received his B.S. from Boston College and his J.D. from Suffolk University Law School.CASES OF INTEREST:Melfi v. WMC Mortgage Corp., 568 F.3d 309 (1st Cir. 2009) : TILA class action case where mortgage company left spaces on model form blank for date of refinancing and date of actual deadline for rescission. District Court held that these technical deficiencies did not violate TILA and First Circuit affirmed. Petition for Rehearing en banc and/or Panel Rehearing filed 6/25/09. If denied, Plaintiff intends to seek a petition for certiorari to the United States Supreme Court.Bonney v. Washington Mutual Bank, 596 F.Supp.2d 173 (D.Mass. 2009): Borrower alleged that mortgage company's failure to include the transaction date on the notices of rescission violated TILA. Although the magistrate judge agreed that such a notice stated a claim, the District Court disagreed and called omitting such information "merely technical."Tenney v. Deutsche Bank Trust Corp., 2009 WL 415510 (D.Mass. 2009): Borrower signed a "Certificate of Confirmation of Notice of Right to Rescind."at the closing which both "confirmed" that he would not exercise his right to rescind and stated that the three business days for rescission had already elapsed, when they had not. District Court held that the Borrower had stated a TILA claim and case would not be dismissed.Deandrade v. Trans Union LLC, 523 F.3d 61 (1st Cir. 2008): Consumer litigation under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) regarding the credit bureaus' alleged failure to reinvestigate and delete a disputed debt from consumer's credit report.Megitt v. Indymac Bank, F.S.B., 547 F.Supp.2d 56 (D.Mass. 2008): TILA class action case regarding blank spaces on model form.Dixon v. Calusa Investments, LLC, 554 F.Supp.2d 139, (D.R.I. 2008): Consumer brought a putative class action against a creditor, claiming that it had violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in sending out various mailers.In re Chiappone, 2007 WL 4178510 (Bankr.D.Conn. 2007): Successful adversary litigation on behalf of non-debtor wife and her divorce attorney regarding non-dischargeability of certain domestic support obligations and related attorney fees arising from Rhode Island Family Court divorce decree.Dixon v. Shamrock Financial Corp., 482 F.Supp.2d 172 (D.Mass.2007): Consumer sued under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) for creditor sending solicitation offering free consultation for purposes of, inter alia, restructuring his debt.Sullivan v. Greenwood Credit Union, 499 F.Supp.2d 83 (D.Mass. 2007): Class action on behalf of creditors who received a "pre-approved" letter for a home loan from credit union, claiming that the credit union unlawfully accessed the credit reports of the recipients.Park v. Ford Motor Co., 928 A.2d 469 (R.I. 2007): Consumer class action against truck manufacturer that failed to provide security system listed on window sticker as a standard feature.In re Wilding, 475 F.3d 428 (1st Cir. 2007): Bankruptcy Court and B.A.P. both held that Debtor could not avoid judicial lien that had already been satisfied, but the First Circuit reversed and held that if the lien existed at the filing of the bankruptcy petition and was not satisfied until afterwards the lien could be avoided.Palmer v. Champion Mortg., 465 F.3d 24, (1st Cir. 2006): TILA litigation where borrower alleged notice of rescission was confusing because dates which were completed had already passed by time borrower received notices in mail.In re Montes, 2006 WL 3898386 (Bankr.D.R.I. 2006): On Debtor's Complaint, Banrkuptcy Court held any obligation for car repairs could not be deemed an extension of the original retail installment contract and was merely an unsecured claim discharged in bankruptcyMorrissey v. Webster Bank, N.A., 417 F.Supp.2d 183 (D.Mass. 2006): Consumer who was not customer of bank brought action against bank, challenging adequacy of fee notices posted on automatic teller machines (ATMs) owned by bank under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act.Belini v. Washington Mut. Bank, FA, 412 F.3d 17 (1st Cir. 2005): As matter of first impression, TILA permits damages claim based on lender's alleged failure to respond properly to borrower's notice of rescission.In re Watson, 403 F.3d 1(1st Cir 2005): Litigated to the First Circuit issue of whether or not cost of private school tuition for Chapter 13 debtors' minor children was "reasonably necessary" expense so as to be included in "disposable income" available to debtors for payments under their chapter 13 plan (no longer relevant under BAPCPA).Hoefs v. CACV of Colorado, LLC, 365 F.Supp.2d 69 (D.Mass. 2005): Consumer brought action against collection agency, law firm, and lawyer alleging violations of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and state law - arbitration compelled.In re Ladds,2005 WL 1365078 (Bankr.D.R.I. 2005): Bankruptcy Court denied non-debtor spouse's request for abstention to allow litigation regarding litigation against debtor wife regarding non-dischargeability of certain credit card debt to proceed in Rhode Island Family Court.Rodrigues v. Members Mortgage Co., Inc., 323 F.Supp.2d 202 (D.Mass. 2004): TILA class action against mortgage company and lender alleging violation of disclosure requirements in federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Massachusetts Consumer Credit Cost Disclosure Act (CCCDA).Barrett v. Avco Financial Services Management Co., 292 B.R. 1 (D.Mass. 2003): Class action to recover for creditor's alleged practice of attempting to collect discharged prepetition debts pursuant to "reaffirmation agreements" which did not satisfy statutory requirements.Mann v. Chase Manhattan Mortg. Corp., 316 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2003): Chapter 13 debtor-mortgagors sued to recover for mortgagee's alleged violations of automatic stay.Arruda v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 310 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2002): Former Chapter 7 debtors brought putative class action against creditor-retailer, its affiliated entity, and retailer's law firm, alleging that defendants violated the Bankruptcy Code, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and/or state law by entering into post-discharge redemption agreements with plaintiffs without bankruptcy court approval.In re Lamanna, 285 B.R. 347 (Bankr.D.R.I. 2002): Litigation regarding dischargeability of student loan obligations where Bankruptcy Court adopted the "hybrid approach" to student loan dischargeability, whereby the undue hardship analysis is applied to a debtor's educational debt on a loan-by-loan basis.In re Singleton, 284 B.R. 322 (D.R.I. 2002): Bankruptcy Court could only certify debtor class from Rhode Island district regarding creditor's alleged violation of discharge injunction in connection with reaffirmation agreements.In re Larocque, 283 B.R. 640 (Bankr.D.R.I. 2002): Bankruptcy court exercised its discretion to deny enforcement of arbitration clause and retained jurisdiction over TILA dispute.In re Mann, 249 B.R. 831, (BAP 1st Cir. 2000): Bankruptcy Appellate Panel affirmed that consumer debtor could "strip off" wholly undersecured second mortgage on residential real property and treat it as unsecured.Conley v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 222 B.R. 181 (D.Mass. 1998): At the time, the largest class action case in bankruptcy court history, holding Sears liable for obtaining unauthorized reaffirmation agreements from Debtors and failing to file them with various bankruptcy courts.In re Kheng, 202 B.R. 538 (Bkrtcy.D.R.I. 1996): Debtor allowed to "strip off" portion of nonresidential real estate mortgage that was undersecured and continue to pay agreed to monthly mortgage payments for term of note under chapter 13 plan.

Frank Kerney III is a managing partner of The Consumer Lawyers. Frank grew up in central New Jersey before moving to Florida to attend the University of South Florida. After graduation, Mr. Kerney attended Stetson University College of Law where he was inducted into the law school’s honors fraternity and awarded the William F. Blews pro bono service award at graduation. Prior to co-founding The Consumer Lawyers, Frank worked for Morgan & Morgan’s national consumer protection department where he represented consumers across the Untied States in a variety of cases, with a focus on consumer credit reporting and illegal debt collection. Frank has been named a “Rising Star” by Super Lawyers magazine every year since 2016. Only the top 2.5% of lawyers in each state receive this award. In 2020, Frank was named a Top Attorney Under 40 by Law360, and was one of only two Plaintiff’s lawyers to be included in that list. Frank has been interviewed as legal analyst by multiple publications, including Law360, ABC, NBC, and Fox, and stories about his cases have been featured all over the world.