Felicia Wright, Petitioner: v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC.
── Felicia Wright, Petitioner: v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC. ──
Court: Supreme Court of Colorado
Date: May 26, 2026
Category: General
1
2026 CO 36
Felicia Wright, Petitioner: v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC. Respondent
No. 24SC585
Supreme Court of Colorado, En Banc
May 26, 2026
Certiorari to the District Court Boulder County District
Court Case No. 22CV30158 Honorable J. Keith Collins, Judge
Attorneys for Petitioner:
The
Law Offices of Gary Merenstein, P.C.
Gary
Merenstein
Lafayette, Colorado
Anne
Whalen Gill, L.L.C.
Anne
Whalen Gill
Castle
Rock, Colorado
Attorneys for Respondent:
Wheeler Trigg O'Donnell LLP
Frederick R. Yarger
Meghan
Frei Berglind
William P. Sowers Jr.
Denver, Colorado
2
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae ACA International:
Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP
Sarah
J. Auchterlonie
Courtney E. Bartkus
Denver, Colorado
Attorney for Amici Curiae Center for Responsible Lending,
National Association of Consumer Advocates, National Consumer
Law Center, Public Justice, and Towards Justice:
Rachel
Dempsey
Denver, Colorado
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Colorado Legal Services:
Jose
Vasquez
Alexa
Child
Joel
Minor
Denver, Colorado
Karin
Troendle
Fort
Collins, Colorado
Craig
Carmean
Colorado Springs, Colorado
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae National Creditors Bar
Association: Barron &Newburger, P.C. Kevin T. Crocker
Littleton, Colorado
Attorneys for Amicus Curiae Receivables Management
Association International, Inc.:
Bowlin
& Schall, LLC
John
M. Bowlin
Greenwood Village, Colorado
Maurice Wutscher, LLP
Donald
S. Maurice, Jr.
Flemington, New Jersey Maurice Wutscher, LLP
3
Erin
McCampbell Paris
Buffalo, New York
JUSTICE BLANCO delivered the Opinion of the Court, in which
CHIEF JUSTICE MARQUEZ, JUSTICE BOATRIGHT, JUSTICE HOOD,
JUSTICE GABRIEL, JUSTICE SAMOUR, and JUSTICE BERKENKOTTER
joined.
4
OPINION
BLANCO, JUSTICE.
¶1
The General Assembly enacted the Colorado Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act (the "Act"), §§
5-16-101 to -135, C.R.S. (2025), to protect consumers from
abusive debt collection practices. See Flood v.
Mercantile Adjustment Bureau, LLC, 176 P.3d 769, 776
(Colo. 2008). As pertinent here, the Act mandates that debt
buyers append certain attachments to each complaint that they
file against alleged debtors. § 5-16-111(2), C.R.S.
(2025). It also allows debtors who prove that a debt buyer
has violated the requirements of the Act to recover damages,
costs, and attorney fees. § 5-16-113, C.R.S. (2025).
¶2
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC ("PRA") is a
debt buyer seeking to recover a debt that Felicia Wright
incurred when using a credit card issued by Comenity Bank.
The complaint that PRA filed against Wright did not comply
with the Act's requirements. Specifically, the complaint
lacked a non-affidavit attachment establishing that PRA owned
Wright's debt from Comenity Bank. Accordingly, we hold
that the district court erred as a matter of law by upholding
the county court's ruling that PRA complied with the Act.
Because PRA violated one of the Act's requirements, we
hold that the district court erred in upholding the county
court's ruling that Wright did not prove her counterclaim
against PRA under the Act.
5
I.
Facts and Procedural History
¶3
PRA filed a complaint in county court against Wright
{# E23 (Nick, ruling section 1 answer 10): quoting a bill or a court opinion works
the way quoting a news article works. Select a passage above and the same panel
opens: the passage goes to the official you choose, with this document's own
address as its source and its own type. #}