Chapter

However, Asset Acceptance argued that even if Fulton had violated the FDCPA, Asset Acceptance could not be held vicariously liable for the letters Fulton had drafted and sent. What did the appellate court think of Asset Acceptance's defense against vicarious liability? What was its reasoning? $[$Janetos v$.$ Fulton Friedman & Gullace, LLP$,825$ F$.3$ d $317(2016).]$