Middle District Court concludes that writ of execution upon a bank account used to satisfy a judgment, and issued pursuant to New Jersey substantive law, is not a "legal action on a debt against a consumer" for purposes of the FDCPA venue provision.

Middle District Court concludes that a writ of execution upon a bank account used to satisfy a judgment, and issued pursuant to New Jersey substantive law, is not a "legal action on a debt against a consumer" for purposes of the FDCPA venue provision. The court reasoned that, under New Jersey law, a bank levy is an action between a judgment creditor and a third-party garnishee, not between a creditor and debtor; thus, the venue provision was not implicated when the writ was issued. The court further noted that New Jersey law permits a writ of execution to issue in any county within the state and it was permissible for the writ to issue in Bergen County, even though the plaintiff has no direct contact there. Finally, the court was persuaded by the fact that the plaintiff failed to contest the original suit brought against him in Atlantic County and that he has never disputed the validity of his casino debt.