8 Law Firms That File the Most MCA Collection Suits in New York

Why No Honest List Ranks These Firms by Volume

You want a name. You were served last week, the caption says some LLC you barely remember signing with is suing your company for a number you cannot cover, and there is a law firm at the bottom of the summons you cannot find anything useful about. The problem is that New York does not publish what you are looking for. The Unified Court System runs NYSCEF, and NYSCEF is searchable case by case, not aggregated by plaintiff’s counsel in any free primary source. The Law Reporting Bureau publishes decisions, not filings. Any page claiming to rank New York collection firms by how many advance suits they file is either guessing or repeating somebody else’s guess, and a guess is worth nothing on day nine of a twenty day clock.

So this list is built the only defensible way. Four items name a firm, because we located and read a decision in which that firm is listed as counsel of record, and every statement about the firm is tied to that decision and nothing else. Four items describe a role instead of a name, because the role is what determines what happens to your bank account next: the local attorney who does nothing but sign and file, the funder’s own legal department, the assignee’s lawyer who appears after your file changes hands, and the firm that skips the lawsuit entirely. Before you use any of it, look at your own papers, because the only name that matters is the one on your summons.

1. Berkovitch & Bouskila, PLLC

Run a full text search of the New York State Law Reporting Bureau’s decision archive for the exact term “Bouskila” across January 1, 2019 through July 31, 2026 and you get 51 published decisions. That is a count of decisions, not of filings, and the gap between the two is enormous, because most collection cases end in a default or a stipulation and never generate a published decision at all. What the 51 do show is that the funders named as plaintiff are not one client but many, among them ByzFunder NY LLC, EBF Holdings LLC, Kalamata Capital Group, Newco Capital Group VI, Samson MCA LLC, Monday Funding, Fusion Funding, Black Olive Capital and CBO Funding.

In the decisions we read in full, Ariel Bouskila of Berkovitch & Bouskila, PLLC is the attorney listed for the funder. In Byzfunder NY LLC v Mullins Renovation & Construction LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op 51105(U) (Sup Ct, Erie County, July 9, 2025), Index No. 818755/2024, the court granted the funder summary judgment on a roughly $131,000 receivables purchase and rejected the merchant’s usury argument. In EBF Holdings, LLC d/b/a Everest Business Funding v Emek Renovation Corp., 2025 NY Slip Op 50535(U) (Sup Ct, Kings County, April 11, 2025), Index No. 505235/2024, the same firm moved for judgment under C.P.L.R. §3215(i) after the merchant fell off a $49,869.99 settlement stipulation, and the decision records the attorney for defendants as “None recorded.”

None of that says the firm is unbeatable, and none of it supports a claim that it files more suits than anyone else in New York. It says the papers coming at you are practiced, that a usury defense loses when the agreement carries a working reconciliation clause and no fixed maturity, and that the fastest wins in this record are the ones nobody showed up to oppose. Your answer is due 20 days after a summons is handed to you and 30 days when service was completed any other way, under C.P.L.R. §3012(a) and (c). Serving one on time is the cheapest thing you will do all month.

2. The Leyvi Law Group, P.C., and the Ledger Nobody Authenticated

In Fenix Capital Funding, LLC v Paul Morley & Sons LLC, 2025 NY Slip Op 51919(U), 87 Misc 3d 1246(A) (Sup Ct, Kings County, December 5, 2025), Index No. 518897/2025, the plaintiff’s counsel line reads The Leyvi Law Group, P.C., Brooklyn. The underlying deal was small: $28,800 of future receivables bought for $20,000. The demand was not small relative to the deal. The funder sought $32,620, which the decision breaks out as $15,360 in unpaid receivables plus $17,260 in default fees and contractual penalties. Read that split twice, because the penalties exceeded the money actually still owed on the receivables.

The funder moved for summary judgment and lost the entire motion. Justice Aaron D. Maslow held that the payment ledger was never identified as a business record kept by the plaintiff, that the wire transfer offered to prove funding was authenticated by nobody at either bank, that the ledger’s “R01” and “FNX” codes went unexplained, and that the affidavit put the breach on or about June 4, 2025 while the ledger’s first returned fee was dated May 14, 2025. Under C.P.L.R. §4518, it is the record itself that proves the debt, not the affidavit describing it.

The practical lesson has nothing to do with this firm and everything to do with what you concede. Owners read a printout of daily debits, recognize their own bank account, and admit the numbers in an answer or an email. Once you admit them, the foundation problem that killed this motion disappears. Say what you dispute, say what you do not know, and make the funder prove the ledger through somebody who can swear how it was made and kept.

3. Wells Law P.C., and the Email Address Buried in Your Addendum

Fundfi Merchant Funding, LLC v BKT High Quality Healthcare Agency LLC, 82 Misc 3d 799, 2024 NY Slip Op 24006 (Sup Ct, Kings County, January 10, 2024), Index No. 508162/2022, lists Wells Law P.C. of Lancaster, with Steven William Wells of counsel, for the plaintiff, and the Law Office of Amos Weinberg of Great Neck for the two moving defendants. The advance itself was $45,000 for $65,250 of receivables. What makes the docket worth your ten minutes is how the defendants learned they had been sued.

The complaint was filed March 21, 2022. Every defendant was served by email, with the words “Personal & Confidential” in the subject line, because an addendum to the merchant cash advance agreement said that would be good service. The Kings County Clerk entered a default judgment on April 22, 2022, roughly a month later. The parties later stipulated to vacate that judgment and Justice Peter Paul Sweeney so ordered it, after which the defendants moved to dismiss, arguing the forum selection clause gave the court nothing and that one owner’s signature had been forged while she was on leave. Justice Richard J. Montelione denied the motion without prejudice to renew after discovery.

Go find your addendum. If it authorizes email service, the inbox it names is where your lawsuit will arrive, and it is frequently an address that belongs to a bookkeeper who left or a Gmail account nobody opens. When a judgment shows up before you ever saw a summons, the openings are C.P.L.R. §317, which gives you one year from learning of entry and never more than five years after it, and C.P.L.R. §5015(a)(4) for want of jurisdiction. Both get harder every month you sit on them.

4. Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Appearing for a Brooklyn Funder

Big firm letterhead turns up in this work more often than owners expect. In Bizfund LLC v Holland & Sliger Steel, LLC, 2021 NY Slip Op 50504(U), 71 Misc 3d 1226(A) (Sup Ct, Kings County, May 28, 2021), Index No. 502128/2021, the attorneys of record for the funder were Craig A. Convissar and Rebecca K. Lindahl of Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP. The deal: $479,680 of receivables purchased for a $320,000 advance, repaid at $3,699 a day, with $209,586 collected and nothing after December 4, 2020, leaving $270,094 claimed. The merchant was a Tennessee steel company and its guarantor a Tennessee resident.

They moved to dismiss on personal jurisdiction, subject matter jurisdiction, forum and venue, and lost all of it. The reason was in their own contract, which said each party “agrees not to assert in any forum that such courts are not a convenient forum, or that there is a more convenient forum, for the resolution of any such controversy or claim, and waives any and all objections to jurisdiction or venue.” Justice Reginald A. Boddie held the inconvenient forum argument had been waived by consent to the clause, noted that improper venue is not a jurisdictional defect requiring dismissal, and gave the defendants 10 days to answer.

Which is the actual point of naming this firm. The quality of the letterhead told the merchant nothing, and the clause told it everything, and the clause was signed months before anyone thought about lawyers. If you want to know how much room you have before you are served, read your agreement’s dispute provisions the way opposing counsel will, or have somebody do it who reads them for a living. Our page on the clauses that decide your leverage walks the same provisions from the merchant’s side.

5. Local Counsel Retained Only to Sign and File

This item is a role, not a name, because the record almost never explains the arrangement. You see it in the appearance line rather than the argument. In the Byzfunder decision above, the attorneys for plaintiff are listed as Berkovitch & Bouskila, PLLC, with Ariel Bouskila of counsel and Robert Gleichenhaus of counsel, in a case venued in Erie County. Two lawyers, one downstate firm, one upstate name, in a county nine hours from Brooklyn by car.

Read what the court said about why the case was there at all. Justice Peter Allen Weinmann wrote that although there was no nexus to Erie County, the revenue purchase agreement, a boilerplate form drafted by the plaintiff, stipulated that jurisdiction for any lawsuit would be in any New York State Supreme Court, so the plaintiff filed in Erie County, and there had been no objection. That is the local counsel role in one sentence: the venue is chosen for reasons that have nothing to do with the dispute, and somebody admitted in that county puts a name on the papers.

It matters to you because the objection has a short fuse. Under C.P.L.R. §511(a), a demand to change the county on improper venue grounds must be served with your answer or before it. Miss that window and you are no longer moving as of right, you are asking a judge for a discretionary favor under §510, with the burden of proving both that the funder’s county is wrong and that yours is right. If the case is venued in one of the five boroughs, counsel who works these courthouses is worth more than counsel who is closer to you.

6. The Funder’s In-House Legal Department

Structural item, and worth saying plainly: a “legal department” at a funding company is not necessarily a law firm and cannot itself practice law. Judiciary Law §495(1) bars a corporation or voluntary association from practicing or appearing as an attorney for anyone in any court, and from holding itself out to the public as entitled to practice law, with penalties in §495(2) reaching $5,000 plus misdemeanor exposure for individuals who take part. Judiciary Law §478 covers practicing without authorization. Letters can come from anywhere. A summons has to be signed by an admitted attorney.

How closely a funder and its collection firm are tied is occasionally litigated in public. In Matter of Pearl Capital Business Funding, LLC v Berkovitch, 211 AD3d 485 (1st Dept, December 8, 2022), the First Department affirmed a judgment confirming an arbitration award for a group of funders, Pearl Capital Business Funding, Pearl Alpha, Pearl Beta, Pearl Gamma, Pearl Delta and ABF Servicing, against Berkovitch & Bouskila, PLLC. The dispute grew out of a revenue sharing agreement, the arbitrator found the firm had materially breached it, and the ethics of that revenue sharing was put to the arbitrator, who concluded it let the parties share aggregate revenue without violating the ban on corporate provision of legal services. The court declined to review that legal conclusion for error.

Nothing in that decision is a finding of misconduct by anyone, and we are not suggesting one. It is here because it is a rare public document showing how the economics between a funder and its collection counsel can be structured, which is context worth having when you are weighing whether a settlement demand reflects the client’s appetite or the firm’s. One more thing to stop hoping for: the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act reaches consumer obligations only, under 15 U.S.C. §1692a(3) and (5), so it is no remedy for how anyone collects a business advance.

7. The Assignee’s Counsel After Your File Is Sold

Also a role. A file gets sold or placed with a servicer, and the next letter carries a company name you have never seen and a different firm at the bottom. The question is not whether they sound legitimate. The question is whether they can prove they own the receivable, and the answer is a statute, not an argument.

Under U.C.C. §9-406, you owe the original party until you get notification, authenticated by assignor or assignee, that the amount has been assigned and payment goes to the assignee. Subsection (c) is the part almost nobody uses: when you request it, the assignee must seasonably furnish reasonable proof that the assignment was made, and unless it complies you may discharge the obligation by paying the assignor even after receiving that notification. Put the request in writing, keep the timestamp, and do not wire money to a new name on the strength of a letterhead.

Venue moves with the assignment too, and not in the direction you would expect. C.P.L.R. §503(e) provides that in an action for a sum of money only, brought by an assignee who is neither an assignee for the benefit of creditors nor a holder in due course, the assignee’s residence is deemed the same as the original assignor’s at the time of assignment. So selling your file does not let a buyer manufacture a friendlier county.

8. The Firm That Enters a Judgment Instead of Suing You

The last role is the one that skips everything above. There is no summons, no answer deadline and no motion practice, because the firm files an affidavit you already signed and asks a county clerk to enter judgment on it. You learn about it when a bank tells you the account is restrained, which is usually the same week payroll clears. If that is where you are right now, our page on the warning signs before an account freeze covers the sequence in more detail.

New York narrowed this sharply, and the limits are worth memorizing because each one is a separate attack. Under C.P.L.R. §3218, the affidavit has to state the county where the defendant resides, it may be filed only with the clerk of the county the affidavit named as the residence at execution or where the defendant resided at filing, it may be filed only within three years after the affidavit was executed, and no judgment by confession may be entered after the defendant’s death. Any one of those failing is a defect in the judgment itself, not a defense to be raised at some later trial.

So the order of operations changes. Instead of answering, you are moving to vacate, and you are doing it against a clerk’s ministerial entry rather than a judge’s ruling, which is a better posture than it feels like. Pull the file from the county clerk, compare the affidavit’s stated county against where the business and the guarantor actually were, and check the execution date against the filing date.

Who Should You Call? Our Top-Rated Business Debt Firms

One firm on this list works the entire lifecycle of a business debt file, from stopping the daily debits through attorney-led negotiation, UCC lien removal, and a signed release. The other two cover broader debt categories that often sit alongside the advances. Choose accordingly.