The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About06-5709 Ol- - S16i Gu;L'--r~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA AMY L. GRIV A, III Summer Lane Enola, P A 17025 Law Offices of Mitchell N. Kay, P.c. 7 Penn Plaza, 18th Floor New York, NY 1000 I 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 ( ) Sheriff. Deanna Lynn Saracco, Esquire 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, Pennsylvania 17025 Phone 717-732-3750 SaraccoLaw@aol.com A) 1M~~ Signature of Attorney Dated: 9 (~ 10 ~ WRIT OF SUMMONS TO THE ABOVE NAMED DEFENDANT(S): YOU ARE NOTIFIED THAT THE ABOVE-NAMED PLAINTIFF(S) HAS/H COMMENCED AN ACTION AGAINST YOU. Dated~~cob By: Deputy '!,<, ~ " "" "-,,'" '""\~" "- ,- ")..,. ." ~ ,;!::~ .> 4 J'. \J 1 -- (:) ^ 1t- ~ W (' o r ~ - ~ () -6g... ~ C> ~ 4::> +- --r:- o ~; -?- :---:> = ,::::.' 0-' (j') r'\ -'0 "." CP r Z :2. -a ,::> -r1 .-\ ::r:-n rnp ~~8, ;~ ~~), :~<. -'{"\ . .~~C) .:~~rr\ -..~ .'..0 -:..:::. -,~" _',:;,0 0-) ,l:"' ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA Amy L. Griva. Plainti n: v. Civil Action No.: 06-5709 Law Offices of Mitchell N. Kay. p.e.. Defendant. NOTICE TO PLEAD TO THE DEFENDANT NAMED HEREIN: You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this Complaint is served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses or objections to the claims set forth against 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 HAVE A LAWYER OR CANNOT AFFORD ONE, GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW TO FIND OUT WHERE YOU CAN GET LEGAL HELP. Cumberland County Bar Association 32 S. Bedford Street, Carlisle, P A 1-800-990-9108, 717-249-3166 NOTICIA ::3 ~:"-;I en ~a s LLEVE ESTA E. ABOGA I NO TIENE EL DINERO SUFICIENTE DE PAGAR TAL SERVICION, VAYA EN PERSONA 0 LLAME POR TELEFONO A LA OFICINA CUYA DIRECCION BE PUEDECONSEGUIR ASISTENCIA LEGAL. ~ IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA Amy L. Griva, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.: 06-5709 Law Offices of Mitchell N. Kay. P.c.. Defendant. COMPLAINT I. Plaintiff is an individual. residing in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. and consumer pursuant to 15 U.S.c. ~1692a(3). 2. Defendant is a law firm and business entity(ies) engaged in the business of collecting debts in this Commonwealth with its principal place of business located at 7 Penn Plaza, 18th Floor, New York. NY 10001. 3. On or about August and September. Defendant contacted Plaintiff by U.S. Mail and/or telephone calls in an attempt to collect an alleged consumer debt. 4. Defendant is a debt collector as defined by the state law and the FDCP A. 15 U.S.c. I I 692a(6 ). 5. Defendant sent letters and/or made telephone calls to Plaintiff in August 2006 and September. 2006. which are "communications" relating to a "debt" asdefined by 15 U.S.c. I I 692a(2). 6. At all pertinent times hereto, the defendant was collecting an alleged debt relating to a consumer transaction, pursuant to 15 U.S.c. ~ I 692a(5). (Hereinafter the "alleged debt.") 7. Defendant communicated with plaintiff on or after one year before the date of this action. in connection with collection efforts. by letters. telephone contact or other documents, with regard to plaintiff's alleged debt. 8. Plaintiff believes and theretore avers that Defendant's letters contained false, misleading, deceptive and/or confusing statements. 9. PlaintitT believes and theretore avers that agents of Defendant in its telephone communications made false, misleading. deceptive and/or confusing statements. 10. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that agents of Defendant, in its telephone communications, were rude, beligerent. insulting and harassing to the Plaintiff. 11. Plaintiff disputes the alleged debt and hereby requests proof of the manner in which the alleged debt was calculated, as is required by state and federal law. 12. Defendant is a law firm. that is not licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania. 13. Plaintiff believes and theretc)re avers that Delendant uses is position and title as attorneys in order to add heightened urgency and intimidation to its collection practices. 14. Defendant uses is attorney status to make false, misleading and/or deceptive representation and/or implications that it has authority to take legal action in Pennsyl vania. 15. Defendant failed to make clear to the Plaintiff that it has no authority to take legal action in Pennsylvania. 16. Consumers are hurt by these tactics. COUNT I - PENNSYLVANIA FAIR CREDIT EXTENSION UNIFORMITY ACT 17. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully stated herein. 18. Jurisdiction for this Action is asserted pursuant to the Pennsylvania Fair Credit Extension Uniformity Act, 73 P.S. ~2270 et seq. 19. Violating provisions of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act also violate the Pennsylvania FeEl). 73 P.S. ~2270.4(a). 20. That defendant engaged in unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices, as defined by FCEU and the regulations, including but not limited to. violations of37 Pa.Code SS303.3(3), 303.3(14). 303.3(18), 303.6 and 73 P.S. S201-2(4). 21. Defendant's acts as described herein were done with malicious, intentional, willful. reckless. negligent and wanton disregard for Plaintiffs rights with the purpose of coercing Plaintiff to pay the alleged debt. 22. As a result of the above violations, Plaintiff is entitled to statutory. actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's fees and costs. WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment on Plaintiffs behalf and against defendant for a statutory penalty, treble damages, punitive damages. attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P.S. 2207.5. COUNT 11- PENNSYLVANIA UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW 23. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the forgoing as if fully set forth herein. ~4. Jurisdiction !(J!' this action is asserted pursuallllo the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law. 73 P.S. ~201-l et seq. 25. That detendant engaged in unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices. as defined by UTPCPL. 26. As a result of the above violations, Plaintiff is entitled to statutory, actual, treble and punitive damages and attorney's fees and costs. WHEREFORE, plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court issue judgment on Plaintiffs behalf and against defendant for a statutory penalty. treble damages. punitive damages, attorney fees and costs pursuant to 73 P .S. ~20 1-902. COUNT III - FAIR DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES ACT 27. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the foregoing as if fully set forth herein. 28. Jurisdiction for this action is asserted pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 15 U.S.c. S1692, et seq. ("'FDCPA"). particularly 15 LJ.S.c. ~1692k(d) and 28 U.S.c. S 133 7. 29. Venue lies in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.c. 1391(b). 30. The FDCPA states that a violation of state law is a violation of the FDCPA. 15 U.S.C. S 1692n. 31. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that defendant does not have proper assignment of the claim. and is theretore, unable to collect the alleged debt pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. 973II(a)(I) and (2). 32. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that defendant does not have proper assignments and/or documentation permitting said defendants to charge interest, fees and/or costs. 18 Pa.C.S. S73112(b)(l). 33. The FDCPA states that a violation of state law is a violation of the FDCPA. 15 LJ.S.c. * 1692n. Defendant violated this section of the FOCP A. 34. Plaintiff believes and theretore avers that defendant added interest, fees and costs in violation of state and federal law. 35. Detendant in its collection etforts, demanded interest fees and/or costs in violation of the FDCPA. 15 U.S.c. SI692t(l) and I 692e(2)A and B. 36. There was never an express agreement by Plaintiff to pay any additional tees, cost or interest to Defendant or any of its agents. 37. The FDCPA states, a debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. 15 U .S.c. S 1 692f. Defendant violated this section of the FDCP A. 38. The FOCP A states, a debt collector may not use false, deceptive or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. 15 U .S.c. sI692e(5) and (10), SI692f~8) and s1692j. Defendant violated these sections of the FDCP A. 39. The FDCP A states, a debt collector may not discuss the consumers alleged debt with a third party. The Defendant violated this section of the FDCP A. 40. The FOCP A states, a debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. 15 U .S.c. ~ 1692d. Defendant violated this section of the FOCP A. 41. The FDCP A provides certain rights to the consumer regarding her right to dispute the alleged debt, IS U .S.c. S 1692g. Defendant violated this section of the FDCP A. 42. Any threat oflitigation is false if the defendant rarely. sues consumer debtors or if the defendant did not intend to sue the Plaintiff. Bentlv v. Great Lakes Collection Bureau, 6 F.3d 62 (2dCir. 1998). See also, 15 U.S.c. s1692e(5),15 U.S.c. sI692e(10). 43. Courts have held that the threat of litigation is present simply because the letter comes from an attorney; the letter need not explicitly threaten suit. Crossley v. Lieberman, 868 F.2d 566 Od Cir. 1989). United States v. Central Adiustment Bureau, 667 F. Supp. 370, 397 (N.D. Tex. 1986). 44. An attorney's interstate collection contacts must avoid misrepresenting the attorney's authority to sue where he or she is not admitted to practice. Crossley v. Lieberman, 868 F 2d 566 (3d Cir. 1989). 45. Defendant's contacts would easily confuse the least sophisticated consumer and cause the consumer to falsely believe that he/she could be sued in an out-of-state court. Rosa v. Gaynor, 704 F. Supp. I (D. Conn. 1989). 46. At all time pertinent hereto. the defendant was acting by and through 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. 47. At all times pertinent hereto, the conduct of defendant as well as their agents, servants, and/or employees, was malicious, intentional, willful, reckless, negligent and in wanton disregard for federal and state law and the rights of the Plaintiff herein. 48. The above mentioned acts with supporting cases demonstrates that the conduct of defendants rises to the level needed {or punitive damages. 49. Defendant. in its collection efforts, violated the FDCP A. inler alia, Sections 1692, b, c. d, e, f, g. h, and/or n. 50. Detendant, in its collection etIorts, used t~llse or deceptive acts and intended to oppress and harass plaintiff. 51. That, as a result of the wrongful tactics of defendants as aforementioned, plaintiff has been subjected to anxiety. harassment. intimidation and annoyance f()r which compensation is sought. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that his Honorable Court enter judgment for Plaintiff and against defendant and issue an Order: (A) Award Plaintiff statutory damages in 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 FDCP A. (B) Award Plaintiff general damages and punitive damages tor anxiety, harassment, and intimidation directed at Plaintitf in an amount not less than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), as well as the repetitive nature of detendants form letters. C) Award Plaintiff costs of this litigation, including a reasonable attorney's fee at a rate of$350.00/hour tor hours reasonably expended Plaintiffs attorney in vindicating his rights under the FDCP A, permitted by 15 U .S.c. ~ 1692k(a)(3). (D) A ward declaratory and injunctive relief. and such other relief as this Honorable Court deems necessary and proper or law or equity may provide. COUNT IV - FAIR CREDIT REPORTING ACT 52. Plaintiff hereby incorporates the toregoing as if fully set forth herein. 53. The Fair Credit Reporting at 15 U.S.c. S1681b prohibits the improper use ofa consumer's credit information. 54. Plaintiff believes and therd(we avers that the defendant reported false, misleading and/or inaccurate intormation on Plaintiffs credit report. without first validating the alleged debt. 55. Plaintiff believes and therefore avers that the defendant reviewed Plaintiffs credit report without proper authority or assignment of the alleged debt. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that his Honorable Court enter judgment tor Plaintiff and against detendant and issue an Order: (Al A ward Plaintitr statutory damages in the amount of One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) tor each violation of the FCRA or each separate and discrete incident in which defendants have violated the FCRA. 15 U.S.c. sI68In(a)(l )(A). (B) Award Plaintitlgeneral damages and punitive damages fl.H' anxiety, harassment, and intimidation directed at Plaintiff in an amount not less than Ten Thousand Dollars ($10.000.00). as well as the repetitive nature of defendants form letters. C) Award Plaintiff costs of this litigation. including a reasonable attorney's fee at a rate of$350.00/hour for hours reasonably expended Plaintiffs attorney in vindicating his rights under the FDCPA.en'tt by 15 U.S.c. 91681n(3)C). Dated: 10/4/06 By: /s/Dea co Deanna Lynn Saracco. Attorney 0 laintiff 76 Greenmont Drive. Enola. P A 17025 Telephone 717-732-3750 Fax 717-728-9498 Email: SaraccoLaw(Z~aol.com ~. .,1- 1~) -n :::! r;l ?J -~m -'-"~ I Cfl ;i i C.) U) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Amy 1. Griva, Plaintiff, v. Civil Action No.: 06-5709 Law Offices of Mitchell N. Kay, P.C., Defendant. PRAECIPE TO WITHDRAW WITH PREJUDICE And now comes Plaintiff, by and through her counsel, Deanna Lynn Saracco, and files this Praecipe to Withdraw the above captioned matter, with prejudice as the parties have amicably settled their dispute. This case should be discontinued and you may mark this case CLOSED. Respectfully submitted, Dated: (/-10-00 /J1A Deanna Lynn Saracco, Attorney for Plaintiff 76 Greenmont Drive Enola, P A 17025 717-732-3750 Certificate of Service: I hereby certify that I served, via electronic mail and U.S. Mail, a copy of the forgoing, on the defendant as follows: William Siegel Law Office of Mitchell N. Kay 7 Penn Plaza, 18th Floor New York, NY 10001. Dated: II -16-o(p ~ Deanna Lynn Saracco r-:> C:'-:"''':'' (~ <-....... -~,'.. ""'{,~- C) ~ - o --n -~ -;r:-n ;I'F :~t,:~, -:-- -\~ .~ -<; . ,~:~ (~:::) ~,-:c.:: crt ....j .--\ '?';; --< Cf' -0 ~ <..>:' t" -.l