This educational guide is based on the linked primary sources. It is not a Court publication, is not affiliated with the Court, and is not legal advice.
In brief
Overview
According to Daniel L. Geyser, petitioner argues that non‑judicial foreclosures are covered by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).
The Court noted that after a repossession the debtor still owes 100 percent of the same debt they owed before the repossession.
Background and question before the Court
What each side argues
Petitioner (Dennis Obduskey)
According to Daniel L. Geyser, non‑judicial foreclosures are covered under the FDCPA as a direct attempt to collect a consumer’s debt.
According to Daniel L. Geyser, non‑judicial foreclosures are covered under the FDCPA as an indirect attempt because the foreclosure process is designed by law to automatically sell the consumer’s house to obtain payment on the debt.
Respondent (McCARTHY & HOLTHUS LLP)
Source-limited. The record does not yet support a complete account.
Amicus (United States)
According to Jonathan C. Bond, the FDCPA makes a compromise judgment between security‑interest enforcers as debt collectors for a single subsection of the Act, but not for the remainder.
What happened at oral argument
According to Justice Alito, jUSTICE ALITO: So what is the difference between that situation and the non-judicial foreclosure situation where the -- the homeowner is simply notified that the -- the house that -- the mortgage is being foreclosed?
JUSTICE GORSUCH: I have another question about your repo man example. You say we need that last sentence to capture him in a(6). But why wouldn't he be captured by the first sentence in a(6) too? Why isn't a repo man a classic debt collector under any definition, even the broad, the very broad ones you proffer for a(6), first sentence?
According to Justice Kavanaugh, jUSTICE KAVANAUGH: You are arguing, I think, that even if I disagree with you, we disagree with you on the first sentence, you win because of the third sentence, right?
JUSTICE BREYER: Can I ask you one question on what you mean? Imagine we have a person just like this one, he's trying to enforce a securities interest and he doesn't ask for any deficiency payment.
JUSTICE BREYER: No, in other words, you're saying if the state were exactly the same, but it just didn't say anything about newspapers, then his client would win?
According to Justice Kagan, jUSTICE KAGAN: What -- what -- what
According to Justice Gorsuch, jUSTICE GORSUCH: Can I see if I under -- I'm sorry.
According to Justice Gorsuch, jUSTICE GORSUCH: Is your answer that we determine that by reference to state law and what is mandated in order to collect on a security interest or to enforce a security interest?
- [1] f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdf, p. 23
- [2] f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdf, p. 25
- [3] f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdf, p. 45
- [4] f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdf, p. 65
- [5] f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdf, p. 67
- [6] f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdf, p. 68
- [7] f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdf, p. 68
- [8] f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdf, p. 69
What the Court decided
Why it matters
Terms to know
No glossary terms are available for this guide.
Primary sources
Read the source materials on the official site or open the immutable repository copy used for this guide.
- f7c0df9ad3f2f3a329ac-r1-5cce377b82d7ce53.pdforal argument transcript
Guide generated September 26, 2026. Automated validation accepted this version.