## Facts

- Olivea Marx defaulted on a student loan, and General Revenue Corporation (GRC) attempted to collect the debt.
- Marx sued GRC under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), alleging harassment and improper communications with a third party.
- The federal district court found Marx failed to prove an FDCPA violation and entered judgment for GRC.
- The district court also found Marx brought the action in good faith.
- Despite the good-faith finding, the district court awarded GRC its taxable costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1).
- The Tenth Circuit affirmed, concluding the FDCPA’s cost provision did not displace Rule 54(d)(1).

## Issues

1. Whether a prevailing defendant in an FDCPA action may recover costs under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(d)(1) when the court does not find the plaintiff acted “in bad faith and for the purpose of harassment” under 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3).

## Decision

- The Supreme Court affirmed (7–2) the judgment upholding the award of costs to GRC.
- The Court held that 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a)(3) does not displace Rule 54(d)(1).
- A prevailing FDCPA defendant may be awarded costs under Rule 54(d)(1) even if the plaintiff did not sue in bad faith and for the purpose of harassment.
- Justice Sotomayor dissented, joined by Justice Kagan, concluding § 1692k(a)(3) should limit cost awards to bad-faith suits.

## Legal Principles

- Rule 54(d)(1) establishes a default presumption that taxable costs should be awarded to the prevailing party unless a federal statute “provides otherwise.”
- A statute “provides otherwise” only when it clearly limits, forbids, or alters Rule 54(d)(1)’s default cost rule; a statute that merely authorizes costs in a particular circumstance does not necessarily create an exclusive regime.
- FDCPA § 1692k(a)(3), which permits a court to award a defendant attorney’s fees and costs upon a finding of bad faith and harassment, adds a discretionary basis for awards in that circumstance but does not bar routine Rule 54(d)(1) cost awards in other circumstances.
- A court may award costs to a prevailing FDCPA defendant under Rule 54(d)(1) even when the plaintiff acted in good faith, subject to the court’s ordinary discretion under the Rule.

## Conclusion

The Court held that the FDCPA’s bad-faith provision for awarding defendants fees and costs does not override Rule 54(d)(1), so prevailing FDCPA defendants may receive taxable costs even when the losing plaintiff sued in good faith.


Marx v. Gen. Revenue Corp., 568 U.S. 371 (2013)