FILED
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
DEC 14 2015
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
ALWIN CARPENTER, No. 13-17585
Plaintiff - Appellant, D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01495-PMP-
GWF
v.
ALESSI & KOENIG, LLC, MEMORANDUM*
Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the District of Nevada
Philip M. Pro, Senior District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted December 9, 2015
San Francisco, California
Before: KOZINSKI, BYBEE, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.
The district court abused its discretion by awarding Alessi & Koenig, LLC
(“Alessi”) $5,843.75 in attorney’s fees.
1. Alessi constitutes a law firm retained by its clients to collect debts in the
usual course of its practice. See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 649.020(2)(g). As such, it is
*
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
exempted from the requirement that it obtain a license from the State of Nevada
before collecting claims on behalf of its clients. Id. § 649.075; see also Nev. Dep’t
of Bus. & Indus., Fin. Insts. Div., Advisory Opinion Regarding Attorneys Acting
as Collection Agencies (2012).1
2. However, given the ambiguity of the “conducting collection agencies”
language in § 649.020(2) and that clarifying guidance from the State was not
available until several months after Carpenter filed suit against Alessi, Carpenter’s
claim was not brought “without reasonable ground.” Nev. Rev. Stat.
§ 18.010(2)(b).
3. Additionally, the district court’s order awarding fees to Alessi did not
contain the mandated “find[ings]” necessary to support its decision. Id.; see also
Rivero v. Rivero, 216 P.3d 213, 234 (Nev. 2009).
REVERSED.
1
Available at http://fid.state.nv.us/AdvisoryOpinion/2012/2012-03-22_
OPINION_AttorneyActingAsCollectionAgency.pdf.