Corey L. McClain v. Rapid Recovery Agency, Inc.

── Corey L. McClain v. Rapid Recovery Agency, Inc. ── Case No.: 25-12600 Court: Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit Date: April 01, 2026 Category: NEW USCA11 Case: 25-12600 Document: 25-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2026 Page: 1 of 11 NOT FOR PUBLICATION In the United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit ____________________ No. 25-12600 Non-Argument Calendar ____________________ COREY L. MCCLAIN, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus RAPID RECOVERY AGENCY, INC., Defendant-Appellee. ____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida D.C. Docket No. 0:24-cv-60093-WPD ____________________ Before JORDAN, KIDD, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: USCA11 Case: 25-12600 Document: 25-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2026 Page: 2 of 11 2 Opinion of the Court 25-12600 Corey McClain appeals the district court’s grant of Defend- ant Rapid Recovery Agency’s (“Rapid Recovery”) motion for judg- ment as a matter of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Proce- dure 50 and denial of his motions for reconsideration pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 59 and 60. On appeal, he argues that the district court erred when it narrowed the scope of the term “breach of peace,” found that Rapid’s agent did not breach the peace when he continued repossession after being told that a pay- ment had been made, and found that the only damage was a “one- to-two foot scrape” on the driveway and superficial damage to the grass. Dist. Ct. Order Granting Defendant’s Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law, Doc. 81 at 7. 1 McClain also argues district court erred when it found that he did not show that Rapid Recovery is a debt collector under the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (“FCCPA”), Fla. Stat. 559.55 et seq. We write only for the parties who are already familiar with the facts. Therefore, we include only so many of the facts as is ap- propriate to understand our opinion. I. FACTS Rapid Recovery was hired by Ally Bank to repossess McClain’s vehicle, which was parked in the driveway at McClain’s 1 Actually, the district court’s characterization of a “scrape” may be generous. The pictures of the alleged “damage” attached to McClain’s complaint as Ex- hibit A appear to be more of light mark than a scrape. McClain’s girlfriend described it as “scuff marks.” USCA11 Case: 25-12600 Document: 25-1 Date Filed: 04/01/2026 Page: 3 of 11 25-12600 Opinion of the Court 3 girlfriend’s grandparents’ house. Upon seeing his vehicle con- nected to the tow truck in the driveway, McClain confronted the tow truck driver, stating that he had made a payment. The driver told McClain that that was between him and the bank. The driver did, however, allow McClain to retrieve all of his belongings from the car; McClain surrendered the keys to the driver. After the truck left, McClain noticed some damage to the driveway and yard. Specifically, he testified that there were long scratches on the pavers (a foot and a half ). He even testified that there were “deep gouges” in the pavers (notwithstanding that the photographs in evidence before the jury show none). He also tes- tifi