Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-2374IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Gladis Lopez, Cumberland County, PA BRONSON & MIGLIACCIO, LLP, Attorneys at Law and L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire, and CACV of Colorado, LLC, 475 Market Street, First Floor, Elmwood Park, NJ 07407, Plaintiff(s) & Addresses Defendant(s) & Addresses PRAECIPE FOR WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE PROTHONOTARY OF SAID COURT: Please issue writ of summons in the above-captioned action. Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to ( X ) Attorney Deanna Lynn Saracco, Esquire 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, Pennsylvania 17025 Phone 717-732-3750 SaraccoLaw~aol.com ( ) Sheriff. Signature of Attorney Supreme Court ID# 7 9 ~//5/ Dated: '5~/ol P~/~ ~' WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HAS/HAVE COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. Prothonotary Dated: )?t~,t aG. ~trOff' By: ~ ~. ~ Deputy MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN BY: Barry Kronthal, Esquire Attorney Identification No.: 55672 3510 Trindle Road Camp Hill, PA 17011 (717) 975-8114 GLADIS LOPEZ, Plaintiff, BRONSON & MIGLIACCIO, LLP, Attorneys at Law, and L. PATRICK BERGMANN, ESQUIRE, and CACV OF COLORADO, LLC, Defendants. Attorney for Defendants, Bronson & Migliaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire and CACV of Colorado, LLC 1N THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY Civil Action NO. 04-2374 NOTICE OF HLING OF NOTICE OF REMOVAl, TO: PROTHONOTARY, COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, CUMBERLAND COUNTY In compliance with 28 U.S.C. Section 1446, you are hereby notified of the filing of a Notice of Removal for the above-captioned case to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, a copy of which is attached hereto. Date:~ Respect fally~mff~ed, Bronson ,&"Mi ,liaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Be~ ;mann, Esquire and CACV of Colorado, LLC M:\mdir\Carol~NoticeRemoval-GladisLopez,wpd. ~JS44 (Rev. 3/99) CIVIL COVER SHEET The JS-44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supp cment the fiIing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conferenca of the United States in September 1974, is r~quired for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet (SEE SEPARATE INSTRUCTION SHEET) I. (a) PLAINTIFFS Gkadis (b) County of Resident e o f First Listed Plaintiff (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION [] I U.S. Govemmen Plaintiff [] 2 U.S. Governme~X Defendant IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Refer to Instruction &eot) Please insert Nature of Suit Code Please insert Description 3 Federal Questim (U.S. Govemnent Not a Par~y) [] 4 Diversity (Indicate Citizenship ofParties in ltem lll) DEFENDANTS ~ror~son ~ MioJic~cclo LLF:" · 0 ~ ) ' L. emcr-_ 1 n, n% F 6,ce CACV- /orado County of Residence of First Listed Defendant ~l~ ~ ~ (IN U,S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY) NOTE: ~ LAND CONDEMNATION CASES,USE THE LOCATION OF THE LAND INVOLVE~. Attorneys [If Known) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES Citizen of AnotherState [] 2 0 2 ln¢orporatedandPrin¢ipa] [] 5 [] 5 of Business In Another State CitizenorSubjectofa 03 [3 3 Foreign Nation [] 6 [] 6 Foreio~ Count~/ V. ORIGIN (PLACE AN "X" IN ONE BOX ONLY) Appeal to  District [] 1 Original 2 Removed from O 3 Remanded from O 4 Reinstated [] 5 Transferred eom ~ 6 Mulfidlstfiet [] 7 Judge from Proceeding State Court Appellate Court or another district Magistrate Reopened (specify) Litigation Judgment VII. REQ UESTE D IN [] CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION OEM~kND $ COMPLAINT: CHECK YES only ifdemanded in complaint: UNDER F.R.C.E 23 JURY DEMAND: ~v., 0 No RELATE,, CASE(S) IFANY FOR OFFICg U~ ONLY RECEIPT # AMOUNT (See instructions): JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER 81ONATUREOF ATTORNE" RECORD APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE (Rev. 3/6/03 USDC-PAMD) UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA GLADIS LOPEZ, Plaintiff, BRONSON & MIGLIACCIO, LLP, Attorneys at Law, and L. PATRICK BERGMANN, ESQUIRE, and CACV OF COLORADO, LLC, Defendants. · CiVIL ACTION NO.: NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO: THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF THE Uh'ITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA Defendants, Bronson and Migliaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire and CACV of Colorado, LLC, hereby give Notice of Removal of this action from the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, where it is now pending under Civil Action No. 04-2374, to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1441, etseq. In support of this Removal, Defendants aver as follows: 1. Plaintiff, Gladis Lopez, commenced the within Civil Action Complaint against Defendants, Bronson & Migliaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire and CACV of Colorado, LLC, by filing a Writ of Summons in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, on or about May 26, 2004, and, thereafter, filing a Civil Action Complaint against said Defendants. (A true and correct copy of the Plaintiff's Complaint, Writ of Summons and without admission as to any averments therein, are attached hereto as Exhibit "A"). M:\mdir\CarolhN oticeRemoval-Gladis Lopez.wpd. 2. Defendants, Bronson & Migliaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire and CACV of Colorado, LLP, were served with Plaintiff's Complaint on June 4, 2004. 3. According to the Writ of Summons, Plaintiff is a resident of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and is a resident of Cumberland County. (See, Exhibit "A", Writ of Summons). 4. According to Plaintiff's Complaint, Defendants, Bronson & Migliaccio, LLP and L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire, is a Law Finn and an attorney, respectively, engaged in the business of collecting consumer debts in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a mailing address of 475 Market Street, First Floor, Elmwood Park, NJ 07407. (See, Exhibit "A", Paragraphs 2 and 3). 5. According to the Complaint, Defendant, CACV of Colorado, LLC, is a business entity engaged in purchasing consumer debts in default and t]hen attempting to collect said debts. Plaintiff failed to provide an address for Defendant, CACV of Colorado, LLC. (See, Exhibit "A", Paragraph 4). 6. In her Complaint, Plaintiff is seeking equitable and monetary relief under the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension UniformityAct ("PFCEU"), 73 P.S. §2270, et seq., the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), 15 U.S.C. §1692, et seq., and 28 U.S.C. § 1337 based upon alleged unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in connection with the collection of a debt. (See, Exhibit "A"). 7. In Cotmt I of the Complaint, Plaintiff sets forth a cause of action against Defendants for violations under the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act, 73 P.S. §2270, et seq., for alleged unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in an attempt to collect a debt. (See, Exhibit "A", Paragraphs 1 through 8). 8. In Count II of the Complaint, Plaintiffsets forth a cause of action against Defendants M :\mdir\CarolXNoticeRemova1431adis Lopez.wpd. under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692, et seq., and 28 U.S.C. § 1337, for attempting to collect a debt by using unfair or unconscionable means, including, but not limited to: (a) using false, deceptive or misled,ding representations or means in connection with the collection of any debt; (b) engaging in any conduct which is meant to harass, oppress or abuse any person in connection with the collection ora debt; (c) communicating with any person other than the consumer in connection with the collection of a debt; (d) adding interest, charges, fees or other costs not otherwise authorized by law or contract to the existing debt; (e) failing to inform the consumer of her rights to dispute the alleged debt; (0 forwarding collection communications which were intentionally confusing, misleading and otherwise deceptive to the Plaintiff; and (g) creating a false sense of urgency on the past debt of Plaintiff. (See, Exhibit "A", Paragraphs 9 through 54) 9. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331, "the District Courts shall have original jurisdiction of all Civil Actions arising under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States." 10. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1441(b), "any Civil Action of which the District Courts have original jurisdiction founded on a claim or right arising under the Constitution, treaties, or laws of the United States shall be removable without regard to the citizenship or residence of the parties." 11. According to 28 U.S.C. §1441(c), "whenever a separate and independent claim or cause of action within the jurisdiction conferred by Section 1331 is joined with one or more M :\mdir\Carol\NoticeReraovaI.Gladis Lopez. wpd. other~vise non-removable claims or causes of action, the entire case may be removed and the District Court may determine all issues therein." 12. As the Plaintiff has raised claims under the laws of the United States, this case is removable to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. 13. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1446(b), this Notice is filed within thirty (30) days after service of Pl~intift's Complaint upon Defendants, Bronson & Migliaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire, and CACV of Colorado, LLC. 14. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1446(d), a copy of this Notice of Removal is being filed with the Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County and is being served upon the Plaintiff. WHEREFORE, Defendants, Bronson & Migliaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Bergrnann, Esquire and CACV of Colorado, LLC, hereby remove this action now pending against them in the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. Date:~ Respectfully Submitted, Attorney tbr Defendants, Bronson & Migliaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire, and CACV OF Colorado, LLC M:~ndir\CarolhNoticeRemova1431adis Lopez. wpd. Gladis Lopez, Cumberland County, PA IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CLrl~E~-~w COUI~TY, ?~'.~rNSYLVA~TA, BRONSON & MIGLIACCIO, LLP, Attonleys at Law and L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire, and CACV of Colorado, LLC, 475 Market Street, First Floor, Elmwood Park, NJ 07407, · '~~]i~ Defendant(s) & Addre.seo- PRARCIPE FOR .WRIT OF SI_~!.Q~ To r~. PRO .~. ONOT*% OF S*~ CO~T: · Pl~ze ~SSue writ of summons in thc above-capfionezi action' Writ of Summons shall be issued and forwarded to ( X ) Attorney () Sheriff. ' De~.~ Lynn Saracco, Esquire 76 Crreenmont Drive Enola, Pennsylvania 17025 Phone 71%732-3750 SaraccoLaw~aol.com Signature of Attorney Supreme Court ID/42 9 f/~ ~' TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): YOU Am~ NO~mD Z~.AT ~rm ASOVm~AM~D pLA~crISF(S) HAS/aAVn CO--CED ~ A~ON AO~ST YOU. Pm~onot~ '~' ~ D~ RUE COPY FROM RE* ~,.~. Giadis Lopez, Plaintiff, ¥. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA BRONSON & MIGLIACCIO, LLP, Attorneys at Law and L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire, and CACV of Color~.do, LLC, Defendants. CIVIL ACTION - JURY TRIAL DEMANDED No.: 04-2374 NOTICE TO PLEAD .TO THE DEFR~DANT NAMED HEREIN: /~m~~n sued in Court. If you wis ent. r~n~ e o .owl~ng ges, ..... ~]ls compisint is served, by fili~~rance personally or by attorney and he Court your defenses or objections to the claims set f~m~inst you. You are warned that if you fail to do so, the case may proceed without further notice for any money claimed in the Complaint, or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property or other rights important to you. YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT ~AVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONe, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL EELP. Cumberland Cou.ty Bar Assciation 32 S. Bedford Street, Carlisle, PA 1-800-990-9108, 717-249-3166 N~OTICIA Le ban demandado a usted en la corte. Si usted quire defenderse de estas demandas expuetas en las paginas siquientes, usted tiene viente dias de plazo al partir de la fecha de la excrita o en persona o pot abogado y archivar en la corte en forma excrita sus defensas o sus objectiones a las demande, la corte tomara medidas y puede entrar una orden contra usted sin previo aviso o notificacion y pot cualquier queja o alivio que es pedido en la peticion de demanda. Usted puede perder dinero o sus propiedades o otros derechos importantes para Usted. LLEVE ESTA DEMANDA A UN ABOGADO IMMEDIATAMENTE. SI NO TIENE ABOGADO0 SI NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICION, VAYA EN PERSONA O LL4%ME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA OIRECCION SE PUEDECONSEGUiR ASISTENCIA LEGAL Gladis Lopez, Plaintiff, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA BRONSON & MIGLIACCIO, LLP, Attorneys at Law and L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire, and CACV of Color~do, LLC, Defendants. CIVIL ACTION -JURY TRIAL DEMANDED No.: 04-2374 .COMPLAINT And now comes Plaintiff, by and through her counsel, and files this Complaint and in support thereof, avers the following: COUNT 1 Jurisdiction for this Action is asserted under the Pennsylvani;t Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act, 73 P.S. §2270 et seq. Defendant Bronson & Migliaccio. LLP is a law, firm and business entity engaged in the business &collecting consumer debts in this Commonweahh with a ma/ling address 475 Market Street, First Floor, Elmwood Park. NJ 07407. Defendant L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire. is an attorney engaged in the business of collecting consumer debts in this Commonwealth with a mailing address 475 Market Street, First Floor, Elmwood Park, NJ 07407. Defendant CACV of Colorado is a business entity that in engaged in purchasing consumer debts in detb. ult and then attempting to collect on said debts, as such, is not a creditor as defined by 15 [J.S.C. a(41 and is liable under state and l~clera. I law. The mailing address for CACV of Colorado will be provided by defendant Bmnson & Migliaccio, LLP. 5. Violating provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act also violate the Pennsylvania FCEU. 73 P.S. §2270.4(a). 6. That defendant engaged in unthir methods of compeli[ion and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, as defined by FCEU and the regulations, including but not limited to, violations of 37 Pa. Code §§303.3(3), 303.3(14), 303.3(18). 303.6 and 73 P.S. §201-2(4). 7. Defendant's acts as described herein were done with malicitms, h~tentional, willful, reckless, negligent and wanton disregard tbr Plaintiffs rights with the purpose of coercing Plaintiff to pay the alleged debt. 8. As a result of the above violations, Plaintiff is entitled to statutory, actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's Fees and costs. WHEREFORE~ plaintiffmquests that this Honorable Court issue judgment on his behalf and against defendants for' a statutory penalty, treble damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P.S. §2270.5. COUNT !1 9. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §1692, et seq. ("FDCPA"), particularly 15 U.S.C,'. ~1692k(d) and 28 U.S.C. §1337. 10. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(bl. 1 I. Plaintiff is an individual and consumer pursuant td 15 U.S.¢'. § 1692a(6). 12. Defendant L. Patrick Bergmann is an attorney and a bt~siness entity engaged in the business of collecting debts in this Commonwealth and is a debt collector' as defined by 15 U.S.C. 11692a(3). 13. Defendant Bronson & Migliaccio LLP is a law firm and business entity engaged in the business of collecting debts itl this Commonwealth and is a debt collector as defined by 15 U.S.C. 11692a(3). 14. Defendant CACV is a business entity engaged in the business of' put'chased consumer debts in default and then attempting to co[iect those debt as sucb, is a debt collector as defined by 15 U.S.C. §1692a(3). 15. Defendant'~ letters to Plaintiff'are "communications" relating to a "debt" as defined by 15 U.S.C. 11692a(2) and 1692a(5). 16. At all pertinent times hereto, the del~:ndant was hired to collect a debt relating to a consumer transaction. (Hereinafter tile "alleged debt.") 17. Defendant comraunicated with plaintiffon or after one year befbt'e tile date of'this action, in connection with collection ef['brts, by letters, telephone contact or other documents, with regard to plaintiff's alleged debt. 18. On or about Februa~'y 6, 2004. defendant drafted and mai[ed, to the Plaintiff, via U.S. mail, collection or "dunning" letters, which attempt to coerce Plaintiff'into paying the alleged debt. 19. Plaintiff believes and theretbt'e avers that Bergmann did not review Plaintiff's account. 20. Plaintiff believes and therefbre avers that attorneys use their letterheads and status itl a way collection agencies cannot and that a letter fi'urn atturnc.v adds a heightened urgency to the claim. 21. Plaintiffbelieves and therefbl'e avers that most attorney debt collector rarely, il'evel-, file suit against consumers. 22. Courts have held that the threat of litigation is present sinq:~ly because the letter comes from an attorney; the etter need not explicitly threaten suit. Crosslev v. Lieberman 868 F.2d 566 (3d Cir. 1989). United States v. Ceatral Ac[iustment BL~rea~. 667 F. Supp. 370, 397 (N.D. Tex. 1986). 23. An attorney's interstate collection letters must avoid rttisrepresentil~g the attor~ey's authority to sue where he or she is not admitted to practice. C~'ossle¥ v. Liebermaa, 868 F 2d 566 (3d Cir. 1989). 24. It has long ~oeen held that the FDCPA does act pe~a~it attorneys to use f~.csimile signatures. Clomon v. Jackson, 988 F.2d 1314 (2d Ci~'. 1993). 25. ?laintiff believes and therefore ave~'s that the rationale behiad this rule was a concern that attorneys were not actively involved ia the collection process, and by at least requiring an actual signature, some degree of actual ,'eview was imposed. 26. Defendant's letter is clearly a mass-mailed fora~ letter at~cl i~ fact. was mailed Ii'om zip code 46~95, which is not ia. New Jet'sey whe~'e defenda~t is located. 27. Defendant's letter clearly contaias a tb~csimile signature. 28. Defendant's letter does not state that deft~adant is licensed to practice law in Pemasylvania. 29. Defendant's letterhead would easily co~ffuse the least ,,;ophi.~ticated consumer and cause the consumer to falsely believe that he/she could be sued i~ aa out-of-state court. Rosa v. ~qaynor, 704 F. Supp. I (D. Coan. 1989). 30. Plaintiffbelieves and the.'el'bre avers that defendaat's legal letterhead was used not in connection with the practice of law, but ratl~er as a debt collector lbr the sole purpose of intimidating the Plaintiff, as such, overshadowed the F'DCPA. § 1692g. 31. Plaintiff believes and therefbre avers that CAC'V of Colorado. L. LC mad Bronson & Migliaccio LLP and Bergmann acted in concert ill order to mislead, confuse and deceive Plaimiffas well as the least sophisticated consumer. 32. Defendants Bronson & Migliaccio LL and Bergmann and CACV ol'Colm'aco LLC. are liable ~br each other actions under principal/agent theories Els well as the FDCPA. 33. Defendant's letter states that CACV of Colorado LLC is thc owner of the alleged debt as such, Plaintiffbelieves and theretbre avers that neither: CAC'V or Bronson & Migliaccio nor Bergmann has the proper authority under Pennsylvania law to collect the alleged debt. 34. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use uni"air or unconsciotlab[e means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 15 U.S.C. §1692:~: Del'endant violated this section of the FDCPA. 35. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use I'alse. deceptive or misleading representation or means in connection with tile collection ol:any debt. 15 U.S.C. §1692e. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 36. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress or abuse any pel~on itl connection with the collection of a debt. 15 U.S.C. § 1692d. Del'endant violated this section of the FDCPA. 37. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt. with ally person other than the consumer. 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b). Defendant violated this section ct' the FDCPA. 38. The FDCPA states, it is unlawful to design, compile and I'unfish an)' ~brm knowing that such form would be used to create the thlse believe in a consumer that a person other than the creditor of such consumer it participating in tile collection of or in an attempt to collect a debt such consumer allegedly ()wes such creditor, when in f~ct such person is not so participating. 15 U.S.C. §169~j. De~-~ndant violated this section of the FDCPA. 39. The FDCPA states, it is unlawhtl m add interest, charges, li~es or other costs unless authorized by law or contract; Plaintiffdoes not have a contract with Defendant. 15 U.S.C. §1692fand §1692e(2)(A) and (B). Det'endant violated this section of the FDCPA. 40. The FDCPA provides certain rights to the consumer regarding her right to dispute the alleged debt, 15 U.S.C. §[692g. Defendant violated this section of the FDCPA. 41. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not communicate with a consumer at the consumer's place of employment if the debt collector knows or has reason to know that the consumer's employer prohibits the consumer from receiving such communications. 15 U.S.C. §1692c(a)(3). Defendant violated this section ol:the FDCPA. 42. Defendant's collection communications v, ere intentionally confusing, misleading and otherwise deceptive to the Plaintifl~, in violation ol'15 U.S.C. §1692e(5) mid (10), §1692f(8) and §1692j, see also, In re Belile~, 208 B.R. 658 (E.D. Pa 1977). 43. Defendant's communications created a t3.xlse sense of urgency on the past of Plaintiff in violation of the FDCPA. Tolentino v. Friedmam 833 F. Supp. 6g7 (N.D. Ilk 1993); Slurs v. Hand, 831 F. Supp. 321 (S.D.N.Y. 1993): and Rosa v, Gaynor, 784 F. Supp I (D. Conn. 1989). 44. Any threat of litigation is Paise if'the det~ndant rarely, sues consumer debtors or if the defendant did not intend to sue the Plaintift] Bentl¥ v. Great Lakes Collection Burmah, 6 F.3d 62 (2d Cir. 1998). See also, 15 U.S.C. ,{I 692e(51,, 15 U.S.C. § 1692e( 10}. 45. At all time pertinent hereto, the det'endant was acting by and tbrougb its agents, servants and/or employees, who were acting within the scope and course of their employment, and under the direct supervision and control of the defendants herein. 46. At all times pertinent hereto, the conduct of defendant as well as their agents, servants, and/or employees, was malicious, intentional, willt~ul, rockless, negligent and in wanton disregard for federal and state law and the rights of the Plaintiff herein. 47. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the Defendant's agents made false threats of litigation. 48. Defendants threat of litigation was tb. lse because det~adm~t does not rontinely file suit against consumer debtors, in violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) aad ( I 0). 49. Defendants letters were intentioually confusing and deceptive, in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1692e(5) and (10), §1692ff8) and §16~}2.j. 50. Plaintiff was confused, deceived and believed that litigatinn was imminent if settlement was not made. 51. The above mentioned acts with supporting cases demonstrates that the conduct of defendants rises to the level needed tbr punitive damages. 52. Defendant, in its collection efforts, violated the [eDCPA, inter ali~t, Sections [692, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, and/or n. 53. Defendant, in its collection eflbrts, used I'alse or deceptive acts and intended to oppress and harass plaintiff. 54. That, as a result of the wrongful tactics ot'del'enclants as al:~remcntinned, plaintiff has been subjected to anxiety, harassme~t, intimidation and at~noyance tbr which compensation is sought. WI'IEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that his I-Ionorahle Court enter judgment on her behalf and against defendants and issue an Order: (A) Award Plaintiffstatutory damages itl the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1.000.00) for each violation of the FDCPA or each separate and discrete incident in which defendants have violated the FDCPA and l'or which Plaintiff'could have filed a separate action but consolidated her claims tbr judicial economy. (B) Award Plaintiff general damages and punitive damages lbr anxiety, harassment, and intimidation directed at him in all amount not less than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), as well as the repetitive natm'e of del:endants tbrm letters. ©) Award Plaintiffcosts of this litigation, including a reasonable attorney's t~e at a rate of $300.00/hour for hours reasonably expended by his attorney in vindicating his rights under the FDCPA, permitted by 15 U.S.(.'. § 1692k(a)(3 I. (D) Award declaratory and injunctive relief, and such other reliel'as this Honorable Court deems necessary and proper m' law or equity may provide. Dated: 5/25/04 By: ~~ Dea~ Sm'acco. Attm'nev fT, n' Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola. Pennsylvania 17025 Telephone 717-732-3750. Fax 717-728-9498 Email: SaraccoLaw~?aol.com UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA GLADIS LOPEZ, Plaintiff, BRONSON & MIGLIACCIO, LLP, Attorneys at Law, and L. PATRICK BERGMANN, ESQUIRE, and CACV OF COLORADO, LLC, Defendants. CIVIL ACTION NO.: CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Notice of Removal was served upon the following named parties by United States Mail, First Class, Postage Prepaid, on the date indicated below: Deanna Lynn Saracco, Esquire 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 Respectfully Date:~ UMMY FILE\CertificateService. GladisLopezwpd ESQUIRE Attorney for Defendants, Bronson & Migliaccio, LLP, L. Patrick Bergmann, Esquire and CACV OF Colorado, LLC CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, the undersigned, do hereby certify that I have this, I~day of (~t~, 2004, served a tree and correct copy of the foregoing upon the person(s) and in the manner indicated below: Service by First Class Mail postage Prepaid. Addressed as Follows: Deanna Lyrm Saracco, Esquire 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, PA 17025 By: MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN C~ucol Moose