Alex Weisberg is the founding partner and managing attorney of the Weisberg Consumer Law Group, PA.
Mr. Weisberg has been practicing consumer protection litigation exclusively since November of 2000. Mr. Weisberg has participated in hundreds of consumer arbitration hearings and has tried to jury verdict dozens of consumer protection cases in Florida, Illinois, Texas, New Mexico, Colorado and Washington. Mr. Weisberg has also prevailed on appeal in Florida on such landmark issues as ensuring lessees of vehicles have federal breach of warranty rights throughout the State of Florida, ensuring consumers successful in Lemon Law arbitrations still have the right to pursue other legal damages in a court of law, and preventing automobile manufacturers from denying consumers their day in court by through adhesive arbitration agreements.
Mr. Weisberg was licensed to practice law in the State of Illinois in May of 2000 and was subsequently admitted to the United States District Court, Northern District of Illinois in December 2000 and the Central District in June of 2001. Mr. Weisberg was licensed to practice law in the State of Florida in May of 2002 and was subsequently licensed to practice law in the United States District Courts for the Middle and Northern Districts of Florida. Mr. Weisberg is currently licensed to practice in all state and federal districts in Florida and Illinois, as well as in the US District Courts in Colorado and the Western District of Oklahoma.
Notable Trial Victories
A Texas jury awarded a consumer $10,054 in damages for an automobile manufacturer’s violations of the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Judy Whitworth v. General Motors Corporation, Cause # A-124-134 (70th Judicial District, Ector County, Texas).
An Illinois jury awarded a consumer a brand new vehicle as a result of an automobile manufacturer’s violations of the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and state lemon law. Jenny Dow v. General Motors Corporation, Cause # 01 M1 103929 (Cook County, Illinois).
Notable Appellate Decisions
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s findings that a debt collector violated several provisions of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, that the debt collector was unable to take advantage of the bona fide error defense to the consumer’s claims, and that the consumer was entitled to the maximum statutory damage award available. Ponce v. BCA Fin. Services, Inc., 467 F. App’x 806, 809 (11th Cir. 2012).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit endorsed a broad interpretation of the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act in finding that a “debt,” as statutorily defined, is created where an obligation to pay arises from a transaction, even absent an extension of credit. Barry Oppenheim v. I.C. System, Inc., 627 F. 3d 833 (11th Cir. 2010).
Non-Legal Activities
• Member of the City of Cooper City Planning & Zoning Board
• Volunteer, Cooper City High School Sound of Pride band
Featured Cases and Matters
• Israel Ponce, Ponce v. BCA Fin. Services 467 F. 809 (11th Cir. 2012); Involved consumers successful claims against debt collector
• Barry Oppenheim v. I.C. System, Inc. 627 F. 3d 833 (11th Cir. 2010); Appellate Court upheld trial victory against debt collector
