Michael T. Etmund

Mike regularly represents clients in the financial services and collection industries – including corporations and other general business entities – in matters involving defense of consumer protection statutes, compliance and regulatory analyses, and commercial collection. Compliance and regulation are at the forefront of issues for clients due to the continually evolving nature of this area of law.

Mike keeps clients up to date on important developments affecting Regulation E (Electronic Funds Transfer Act) and E-SIGN compliance, data breach laws, licensing renewals, and consumer protection regulations on the federal and state levels. This further involves advising clients with regard to federal and state privacy, accessibility, and data security laws and regulations, such as website accessibility under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA).

A passionate advocate of creditors’ remedies, Mike practices in the area of commercial litigation and in defense of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), and other consumer protection statutes.

In the commercial collection context, Mike has earned a reputation for his efficient methods and his ability to obtain high recovery rates for clients, even in potentially volatile situations. Mike recognizes the economic realities of knowing which matters to litigate or resolve at an earlier stage while working with clients to evaluate strategy, tactics, and probable outcomes. As part of his work in the commercial collection practice, he acts as a facilitator of payment arrangements on behalf of clients, which allows them to concentrate on the daily operations of running a business and generating new sources of revenue instead of spending valuable time attempting to recover on delinquent accounts.”

Experience

Second Circuit affirms district court’s decision dismissing interest disclosure claims. Successfully argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in support of affirming the district court’s decision that it is not misleading within the meaning of Section 1692e for a debt collection letter to state the amount of a debt without disclosing that the debt, which once accrued interest or fees no longer does so. The Second Circuit ruled that “a collection notice that fails to disclose that interest and fees are not currently accruing on a debt is not misleading within the meaning of Section 1692e.”
Landmark dismissal of “professional negligence” claims against computer programming consultants. Prevailed on motions to dismiss claims in two separate federal courts alleging that computer consultants employed by our client committed “professional negligence” in connection with the creation of a commercial website. In cases of first impression in both Michigan and Minnesota, Moss & Barnett established that the traditional scope of professional negligence claims should not be extended to include computer consultants, despite the plaintiff’s claim of damages in the “hundreds of thousands of dollars” arising from the alleged negligence.

Credentials

Education

William Mitchell College of Law, J.D.

Marist College, B.S., Business Administration; cum laude

Classes / Seminars Taught

Speaker, “Enforcing and Collecting Family Court Judgments,” Minnesota Family Law Institute (Spring 2018)
Speaker, “Strategies and Solutions to Become Regulation E-Compliant,” Debt Collection Forum (Spring 2016)
Speaker, “Post-judgment Collections – Getting Debtors to Pay,” National Business Institute webcast (May 2011)
Speaker, “Collection Law From Start to Finish,” Pre-suit Collection Strategies (June 2010)