M.D. Fla. · No. 8:26-cv-03209
Full docket on CourtListener ↗
No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).
| Matter | Type | Practice area | Court | Date | Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sutherland Global Services, Inc.source ↗ filed by Sulaiman Law Group, Ltd. · No. 8:26-cv-03209 · 15:1692 Fair Debt Collection Act · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $2.40M–$100M ▾Minano v. DLJ Mortgage Capital shows FCRA furnisher claims are frequently dismissed for lack of private right of action or insufficient pleading, a close analog if Sutherland is a servicer/furnisher rather than a CRA. Askins shows some disclosure-based FCRA claims can survive on bare statutory violation theory, but that rested on California-specific standing law not binding in M.D. Fla. Comparable settlements $2.40M–$100M median $7.86M · n=10 Equifax $100M · Equifax $30M · Equifax Informatio $30M Per member (realized): ~$250 median · $25–$500 (n=5) Comparable verdict: TransUnion $60M · TransUnion, LLC $40M Key precedent: Minano v. DLJ Mortgage Capital, Inc. — most FCRA furnisher theories dismissed outright, signaling similar risk for Sutherland as a BPO/furnisher-type defendant. Main risk: Dismissal for lack of private right of action or failure to plead furnisher/debt-collector status, as in Minano. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $25K–$12.50M No direct precedent or settlement data specific to Sutherland; class size and theory viability are speculative given BPO business model mismatch with typical FCRA/FDCPA defendants. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 2 verdicts | Filing | Consumer Credit (FCRA/FDCPA) | M.D. Fla. | 2026-10-21 | $2.40M–$100M comparable settlements |