HomeMy WebLinkAbout95-07095
'. ,> ~"-;l,
;)"
'/;f :,'
,,'>..
";,~
'''....,!;.i:~
';r:i
, "e{!
is''<-);
}~~~
,
~j
-:~.~
!
,
i .iJ'
j'~
'.
...,,' ~ i
';?f;t
" 'r
4.,."""
7. The above is true.
siqned and sworn to before
me thi. 4th day of
December I 1995.
1~;~t~;y ~~~i~~ M .H
In and for the state of Iowa
i'A"; JEANNE .... OAANr:n
.~. MYC~~~~l,p~RES_.
."...
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT r2 00
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA lr MAY 111995 U
EASTERN DIVISION
DEBTOR.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
CWlII, U,S. BAN,:tlUprCv COURT
o S MOINES IOWA
IN THE MATTER OF
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
BANKRUPTCY NO. 94-1003D
CHAPTER 7
~=."" I /)-/7 - qf
MARY ... WlIIIl
CUIIK U~ lllIUIT
BY EPUTY C ilK ~
ORDER ON MO~ION TO HOLD CR~OlTOR IN CON~iMPT
AND LIABLE FOR DAMAGES FOR VIOLATION OF THE
DISCHARGE INJUNCTION
This case coming on for hearing on the Debtor's Motion to Hold
CRA Security systems in contempt of Court for Violation of the
Discharge Injunction of 11 U.S.C. S 524,
IT IS FOUND that on April 7, 1995 the Debtor filed the
Petition in this case. Notice of commencement of the Chapter 7
case was sent to the creditors on April 20, 1995. The Court finds
that spencer Gifts, North Park Mall, Davenport, Iowa and
continental Collections, P.O. Box 40441, Rochester, NY 14604 were
listed on the mailing Matrix, and Notice was given to them on April
20, 1995. On July 26, 1994, Discharge was entered in this case and
Notice was given to Spencer Gifts and continental Collections.
On January 3, 1995 the Debtor filed a Motion to Reopen and the
Court approved it on January 26, 1995. The evidence now before the
Court shows that the Debtor received multiple letters from
1
'J7/~
. .
.'
CRA Security systems and from attorneys hired by CRA security
Syste~s. The amount of the original debt was less than $50.00.
upon receipt of the letters, counsel for Mr. Hamm, Martha Easter-
Wells contacted CRS security systems and advised them that the debt
had been discharged in bankruptcy. There were also telephone calls
to CRA security systems in which CRA security systems was advised
of the bankruptcy discharge and in which they responded that they
were not bound by oral notice of the DiSCharge.
Even after notice orally and in writing, CRA security systems
proceeded to contact counsel to collect the debt. Martha Easter-
Wells contacted counsel and advised them of the bankruptcy
discharge. Counsel stopped contact immediately. They were well
advised to so.
The Court finds that under 11 U.S.C. 5524(2) that the
discharge operates as an injunction against the commencement or
continuation of an action or employment of process or act to
collect any discharged debt as a personal liability of the debtor.
The Court finds in this case that the facts indicate that CRA
security Systems clearly and intentionally violated
11 U.S.C. 5524(2). They have continued process to collect the debt
even after being informed of the bankruptcy discharge. The record
will reflect that CRA security systems received notice of this
hearing and notice of the pending contempt proceeding and have not
responded. The first notice was for the hearing on March 17, 1995.
CRA security Systems and counsel for CRA Security systems
2
. .
. ,." ." ..'
did not appear. The second hearing Notice was for May 3, 1995 at
2:30 p.m. and they failed to appear and counsel failed to appear.
The Court rules that sanctions should be imposed.
Insofar as
Efron , Efron and Krevsky & Rosen, the Debtor has not asked for
sanctions because they terminated contact immediately upon' being
advised of the bankruptcy discharge.
Insofar as sanctions, the record will reflect that the debtor
is asking for feeD of $1,500.00. The Court finds attorneys fees in
the amount of $1,500.00 are reasonable.
Insofar as punitive
damages, local counsel will have to employ counsel in the U.S.
Diatrict Court in which LeMoyne is located unless counsel for the
debtor is willing to go there herself. To interest counsel in that
diatrict, the amount of the judgement will be determinative. In
addition, some of these businesses look at punitive damages as a
buainess expense. This Judge wants to put CRA Security System and
other businesses on notice that if there is a phone call indicating
that there is a bankruptcy, they need to stop and check it out.
punitive damages in the amount of $20,000.00 and attorneys
fees in the amount of $1,500.00 are ordered and Judgment is granted
therefore.
Date: Ma.'f /7, ,1995
ill:
Judge, U.S. ankruptcy court
Southern District of Iowa
3
~
.......
i-'"
-1
~ 0 ~ QI.f)
&n
.. $.,.
~~ - 8"' ........
:c ;?o
u.. (:l :;j l'-........J
~I.. ....-
~ N .~t:z
d.~
ff:iE u n~~ c::::,
IJl
c.J ~
~ in ()-<'
o~
-
'. ... . I I
"
~
I.)...
\
...\
........
,
.-.\
........
-L
- ~,
~
~
J
.J
...:>
": p
.J ~ ~-,J
..., M 't
b __ .
~~,-~~
\
~
lj
'-:r-
>.,J
.....
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
. , ~.
IN 'l1lE allRI' OF ~ PlEAS OF aMlERLAN> CXUfI'Y, PfJftiYLVANIA
CML DMSI~
File No. (6-7 Ci 1 t) (L1/, Il; C
I - .
. /\/TDunt Due $ 21! 500.00
V3,
Interest
. Atty's Coom
. Costs $180.00
CRA SECURITY SY5'l'F1'IS
ro THE PRO'lliOOOTARY OF THE SAID COURT.
The undersigned hereby certifies that the below does not arise out of a retail
installment sale, contract, or account based on a confession of judgment, but if it does,
it is based on the appropriate original proceeding filed pursuant to Act 7 of 1966 as
ST8ldedr and for real property pursuant to Act 6 of 1974 as arrended.
PAAEX:IPE FOR EXEXm'I~
Issue writ of execution in the above rmtter to the Sheriff of Cwnberland
County, for debt, interest and costs upon the following described property of the
defendant(s) ~ll personal crocertv includinQ office equipment, vehicles, cash and bank
accounts at 324 Market Street, LeMoyne, Pennsylvania.
PRAEX:IPE FOR A'l'I'AOfoRft' EXm1I'l~
Issue writ of attactJrent to the Sheriff of cumberland County. for debt,
interest and costa, as above, directing attachment against the above-named garnishee(s) for
the following property (if real estate, supply six copies of the description I supply four
copies of lengthy personalty list) all cersonal property including office equipment,'
vehicles, cash and bank accounts at 324 Market Street, LeMoyne, Pennsylvania.
and all other property of the defendantls) in the possession, custody or control of the
said garnishee(s).
(Indicate) Index this writ against the garnishee(s) as a lis pendens against
real estate of the defendant(s) described in the attached exhibit.
DATE. December 4, 1995
Signaturel~~~<>-' ~(o...~,
Print Name. Merth.. Eeeter-Wel1e ~
Address. 601 8redy Street, Suite 300
Oevenport, IA 52803
Attorney fon Jeremy Jem.... Hemm
Telephone.
(319) 322-0455
suprOlre Court ID No.. I A 483-62-4404
,.:\
v:>
~ k-) 5' E.
('.. "'"
'- ~ '-
~ <::I ,...
~ an ~ . --.J
..
i~ - g-.r \J~ !'"' d-.l
",I
:c ( :'-:., <r>
~.
"- c)':1 N
_ \,-
~~ N "'-~~ ~ 1\").
~,
-1...-
r.r:~ u fui';i
'".j ~c.. ~
F c::.
t'5 In ::5
0', (.) --
@
"H.IJo\ 4H..... ool:Jal1.Id a~t?.Illdas an~ 'H.IJo\ xapul OJ.
'~slT ~o saldoo .InoJ hTddns '~slT h~TI1UOS.Iad h4~6uaT ~I
'(6ZT( 'ON 'd'J'~l1d) dT4S.IaUMO ~o ~l^I1Pl~~11 ~o hdo:J pUll Tl1Ul6l.I0
Ul1 pUll s~uaua^O.IciIrr 6ulpnT:Jul uopdp:Jsap ~o saldoo x-rs hTddns 'hpooOJd Tl1a.I H Isa~ON
., "a
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS,
DEFENDAN~RESPONDENT
95-7095 CIVIL TERM
QRDEf' OF COURt
AND NOW, this 30th day of October, 1996, upon consideration of the foregoing
petition, IT IS ORDERED:
(1) A Rule Is Issued against respondent, CRA Security Systems to show cause
why the petitioner Is not entitled to the relief requested.
(2) Respondent shall file an answer to the petition within fifteen (15) days of
88lVlce,
(3) The petition shall be decided under Pa. Rule of Civil Procedure 206.7,
(4) Any deposltlon8 shall be completed within thirty-five (35) days of this date.
(5) Briefs shall be filed and argument shall be held on Tuesday, December 17,
1996, at 3:45 p,m., In Courtroom No. II, of the Cumberland County Courthouse,
(6) Notice of the entry of this order shall be provided to all parties by
petitioner.
//
,
By the CO,urt,
.I
:saa
~: N ;-
"-I. tn
F) .. J,...
- ..l~
~...
~~: -- '~) :e
~-
O_ J :=03
r.. .-.0:_
C CI . '.- Tn
II "1;1.
t.J_. C'"l
u:;l" .... :Irn
~; Ll ju.
c::
I~. _0 .J
l..' 0' U
, ,
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
Plaintiff/Petitioner
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS,
Defendant/Respondellt
No, 95-7095
ORDER
AND NOW, to wit, this _ day of
, 1996, upon
consideration of the attached Petition to Hold Evidentiary Hearing, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED AND DECREED that a Hearing in the above-captioned mailer on the issues raised
by the Petition shall be held before the Honorable Edgar B, Bayley at the Cumberland County
Courthouse, One Courthouse Square, Carlisle, Pennsylvania 17013, on
,1996, at
,M.. in Courtroom No,
Service of this Order to be made by Petitioner upon Respondent's counsel of record,
Mark D. Bradshaw, Esquire, by certified mall, return receipt requested.
BY THE COURT,
EDGAR B, BAYLEY, J.
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
Plnintiff/Petitioner
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY,PENNSYLVANIA
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
v.
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS,
Defendnnt/Respondent
No, 95-7095
PLAINTIFF'S PETITION
REOUESTING AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING
TO THE HONORABLE EDGAR B. BAYLEY, JUDGE:
AND NOW, comes Petitioner, JEREMY JAMES HAMM, by his Pennsylvnnia
counsel, Bruce A. Grove, Jr" and mnkes the following Petition requesting an Evidentiary
Hearing in the above-cnptioned maller, stating in support thereof the following:
1. Petitioner is Jeremy James Hamm, the Plnintiff in the nbove-captioned mailer nnd a
domiciliary of the State of Iowa.
2. Respondent Is CRA Security Systems, tlte Defendant in the nbove-captioned matter.
which hns its principal plnce of business locnted at 324 Mnrket Street. Lcmoyne, Cumberland
County. Pennsylvania,
3. Petitioner's Iowa counsel is Martha Easter-Wells of 601 Brady, Suite 300,
Davenport. Iowa.
4. Respondent's Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, attorney of record is Mark D.
Bradshaw. 213 Market Street, Hnrrisburg, Pennsylvania,
5, On February 13, 1996, this Court entered an Order striking a Judgment entered in
litis case, lite Judgment having been oblnined in lite Uniled Stnles Bankrupley Court for Ihe
Soulhern Dislriclof lownnnd lnmsferred to Cumberland County, Pennsylvnnia by Mnrlha
Eastcr-Wclls, 1I110rncy tilr thc Dcbtor, Pcthioncr hcrcin; 1I copy nf Judgc Baylcy's Fcbruary
13, 1996 Ordcr in this rcgllrd is allllchcd hcrctn, mlldc II pllrt hcrcof, lInd markcd Exhibit" A".
6, Thc Ordcr of Fcbruary 13, 1996, IIrllSC out of Rcspondcnt's Dcccmber 28, 1995
Pctition To Strikc Judgmcnt which, in csscncc, IIl1cgcd two "fundamcntal dcfccts which IIppcar
of rccord with rcgard to thc JUdglllclll," namcly:
a. Martha Eastcr-Wclls, Esquirc WIlS IIn unliccnscd Pcnnsylvania allorncy
when she tilcd the subject Judgmcnt; IInd
b, Rcspondent WIlS nevcr givcn "lIppropriatc noticc of the procccdings in
the Bankruptcy Court in Iowa, lind, thereforc, was dcprivcd of its
opportunhy to dcfcnd or bc hellrd in that forum. ..
7, The Rcspondcnt's "Noticc" issuc, IItilrcstated, was rcmcdied by thc United State
Bankruptcy Court, Russell J. Hill, Ollnkruptcy Judgc, by the Court's reentering its Order
(JUDGMENT) of May 17, 1995; Judgc Hill rccntered this Order (JUDGMENT) on January
19, 1996, with approprilltc Noticcs of its cntry being IlII1i1cd by thc Iowa Bankruptcy Court
Clerk's office to LlIwrcncc J, Roscn, Esquirc of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania and Richard Lyons
of CRA Security Systcms, Lcllloync, Pcn~sylvllnia,
Mr. Rosen was thc Respondent's allorncy during the time period involvcd hercin and
Mr. Lyons WIlS 1I membcr of the Rcspondcnt's Collcction Dcpllrllnent during this period,
Copies of Judgc Hill's Ordcr (H1DGMENT) datcd JlInuary 19, 1996 and the
BlInkruplcy Court's Noticc of Entry of Judgment of JlInullry 19, 1996, are IIl1l1ched hcrcto,
madc 1I pllrt hcrcof, lInd markcd liS Exhibits "0" IInd "C",
Copy of MlIrthll ElIstcr-Wclls. Esquirc JlInuary 23, 1996 Lcller to Mark Orudshaw,
2
Esquire regarding the Entry of Judgment by the Bankruptcy Court on January 19, 1996 Is also
attached hereto, made a purt hereof, und nmrked as Exhibit "D",
8, Subsequently, Attorneys Grove und Brudshuw discussed the Januury 19, 1996 Order
of the lowu Bankruptcy Court by telephone on January 24, 1996, und uguinon Februury 2,
1996, and specilica\1y discussed the Fcderul Bunkruptcy proceduml rights of the Respondent to
appeal this Order (JUDGMENT) within thirty (30) duys of Junuary 19, 1996; the Respondent
elected not to tile an Appeul even though this was u legal right it e1aimed to have been
deprived of (lack of NOTICE OF JUDGMENT) with regard to Judge Hill's original Judgment
and Order dated May 17, 1995; See: page two (2) of Respondent's Brief of December 28,
1995, as tiled with the Court,
9, The correspondence "evidence" in this mailer clearly shows that Respondent's
co\1ectlon efforts versus the Petitioner did not begin to occur until after the entry of Mr.
Hamm's Bankruptcy Discharge Order of July 26. 1994 -- (See: Exhibit "B" as uttached to
Respondent's December 28, 1995 Petition To Strike Judgment); therefore, Respondent was not
known to Petitioner us a party to receive "Notice" of his ongoing Chapter 7 Bankruptcy
proceeding-- I.e. prior to the Discharge Order of July 26, 1994,
In uddition, and by way of further evidence regarding Respondent'S "lack of Notice,"
copies of the lellers of Richard Lyons of CRA Security Systems to Jeremy Hamm, Lawrence
J. Rosen, Esquire to Jeremy Hamm, und Martha Euster-We\1s, Esquire to Respondent are
allached hereto, made u purt hereof, und murked us Exhibits "E", "F". "G", "H" and "I",
10, Finully, Petitioner's undersigned counsel, by investigation subsequent to the Court
Order of Februury 13, 1996, hus determined thutthe Respondent's stated objections to the
3
,,~\ '1 ," .
, .
, .
, .
; I I .
. .
VERIFICATION
I, Bruce A. Grove, Jr.. Esquire, as allorney for the Petitioner, do herehy verify on
behalf of the Petitioner, who Is unavailable and unable to make this Veritication on his own
behalf, that the facts set forth In this Petition Requesting an Evidentiary Hearing are true and
correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. This statement Is made subject to
the penalties of 18 I'a, C.S, fi 4904 relating to unsworn falsltication to authorities.
This Verification is also made pursuant to I'a. R,C.I', 1024 and Is based on interviews,
records and other investigatory material In counsel's life.
-
,~..D~""'I~'
Bruce A. Grove, Jr., Esquire
Date:~~b
5
!:
\/
;,-
~ ,'"
I ,
.
, 1 "'f'l' ft.()
1"- .mOJ'
Defendant
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 95-7095
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
Plaintiff
V,
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
~,
.~_ _Is:..? i
'__A_.
ORDER
AND NOW, this 13 day of JI/"'.....'d- ,199.k.., upon consideration of
Defendant CRA Security Systems' Motion for Rule Absolute Striking the Judgment In the
above referenced matter, and It appearing to the Court's satisfaction that Plaintiff was served
with the PetItion and had adequate opportunity to respond to the same but has not done so,
the Rule Is hereby made Absolute, and the Judgment stricken,
BY THE COURT:
'.!j/~13.~
J.
BlBIBIT "A"
9lUO,I
,.'
"
11N111'.n S"'M'BS BANKRIJll'I'f:Y CUUJ\T
I'OH 11m SOlrl1l1!RN ')IS'I'lUGI' O"IOWA
~
'JAN 'fa ~g3' I!J
C......,,~,I. IIc"1IU
~
Coun
IN 11 IF. I.lAT1'EfI ()I';
)[;RIiMY JM1ES HAMM
CASF. NO, 91.IOO:!-llH
CJlAI'TER 7
nrlllor
.l!lD!IMOO
The iuu~~ uf t1li!. prur,rding Iwving b,~,'n July wruldercd by tile flonorable RUSSEll. J. 1111.1" United States
n~nkruptcy Judge, anll a dccbion h."ing lll'rr, ren.hed wi:hc.UI trial or h~arlnll,
n"s ORDBRED AND A01Ul)(;F,O,
Ptr Older at Mny 17. 1\)95. ,hat Judgment be and L. lu~reby entered in favor for ,he Oebror, Jeremy James Hamm,
and against CIlA SC(lulry S}'!ormus lor P'IJlilivl' damages in the amounl of 520,000,00 and anomeys feet in lhe
amounr 0/ $1,500.00 1I1'~ nr..!." eel and Judl{lI\tnl is granted thr.rrJore,
Mary M, Weibel
Cleric (Jf (lanJuuptcy Coun
OllIe ofbsuance: JIHIII"tY 19. 1996
8y:------.-c, ~.- .--:-
JUDGMENT
10/1/92
ElBIllT "I"
l
. ,
, ,. I
" ,
, ..
Martha Easter-Wells
AtlnrnlY It lllw
1I0t Brlldy Sultl :l00
I1Av'lnpnrl. IA 52003
~ t 0- :121'.n45~
F~.. 31U-322-~300
llc.n~8d In PrlclIou .n "\'''11 I'a IIIInr,l\
January 23, 1996
sen t hv-I,ML"_..PY.tu' 11 \ 91\1:..MI\.0
Mark Brad.haw
Eckert , Seamans
p, O. BOl< l24A
Harrt.bur'il, PA 1'/106
Re: Jeremy Hamrn
Dear Hr, Bradshaw:
Enclosed in ~ co~V of Notice of Entry of Judgment entered by the
Bankruptcy Court.
A copy of thin W,Hl nont by the Bankruptcy Court to eRA Security
syatems/Richard r~onn on January 19, 1996.
Sincerely,
1) '7.t~,,1 h<f-, ~.~~.,1t1' ~U~Q;
Martha Elletor-Well/\
H!WJjmb
Enclosure
cc: Bruce A. Grove, Jr.
BlRIBIT "D"
, eRA
SECURITY
SYSTEMS
,. ,
.
324 MarktlSlI'Hl . 1',0, 80K G:lb . lama)"., PA 17043 . Tt'ftphon..: (117) 730.706J1 (1001 48e.095&
HIlE"' ""'04
110'1 14JLL5Jnl 001 VE
~ETT~NnO'F, fA ~?7't
S-=O\'''lh::lC' ? J, t't',,,
t't:. ; .) p < " t. r \..II I ;. ~
^CCJU"t '; -.. hit" I~-O.N
Or i Jillal l.'l~('" AI"..,\.III'.: ~J6.0~
o t': ~ U r U. 0 l. 'I \. ~,. t ...:
u!l.ou
IUTIIL A"I~u"r .'U::
~,,1.0,
DI~' JFRFMv 4A~~:
Thl' Is lo ~:lVI~. velU LIo4' I"e n.v~ "','1. .,:.~In." Dr
Spllnelr r.1't< fo' 'n~ ourp"~~ "I CI)",~ .ill~ to:
cn~ck YOu (lW~ lh~rn.
Pla~lI- be idvl,co th..l, 1"111",, t.u co..:. ." ,,:,< tl";ch Ollce
notl'I..o, ", Hnuwln\j'r w'!t1"9 .. ehGe. Ir..', , CIO.... ~eto<lIH In
e.cn~noe fnr go,,:!, or c1rvlc~. Ie >\j~I"'~ ~II' I..w, dnc: ~150 lIIav
10ve'II"'v .fhct. VIlU' cIPulL.
we U''ll ~ou ln '"sulv~ '.nl. llIol 'I of ~r Im",~ol~ lo IlIVrncnl 01 lne
'U... 'ltllteod Ibov. w lLhln t,,~ n. Mt t.1l (I r~. .r ".I.III.lll I. nOl r ece Ivad.
w, ,h," a1vllle 0<1' Cllenl \.hat tn! ILt...Ulll ..",..Ins ullp.lo, .nd wilt
further .e1vis. th".. 01 lllelr OIHlon. tv 0"'."< th~ d.ln, turtnar.
PI~..t be ,...ln~.Q th.t shoulu our .llcnt ~ecld. .0 unOertake
'ltl.utlon of :Inv ~o'l, VOU "'.V he ;,d::1 .lun..lIV I.."on$lllll for
IlInlllla. ~nlj/(lr ~tlnrno!V" f."., .I~ ~II u~<d 1'/ .0.. rtt I..nt I..,,, In
YOUr ju,IIl~lctlon.
Iol. bllij-yr tl."l vou ..I" 'Y'.' tn.'t yOur i~t"r.~l~ ..uuld be lle.l
.erv~e1 bv ",.klnll lull ~,," 1..,".<:" n. pavlnonl, PdVIU Ie 1.0 CIlA, in t.ha
fo,. of . ea,tlt le<1 enech or ",on,y or~.r, ~.nt L~ In. OlDOye lad,.,..
We fu,th~r tru't t~.t you Will rpvl"w In' .~lt'r "no ~O..th your~alt
leeo,dlnqlv.
Unl'!s. you nolllv L"l~ olflc" .it"ln lu Jl;' ,'ler r~c&"jn9
Ihl, "tltlco tn"l Vnu dl~"uI.. ln, .."li.:ll. 01 l"" "dot "' Iny po,tlon
t,,",.of, thlt; of'io:", wilt i''''!\\J''''~ tht-" 'i\Ot.l .., ......11(.'. Jt 'IOU noLlfy
this offlc- In w,l'ln~ ,,It''Ir' )\1 \I~)l '1~1' 1':.'I,,,n, Lt", nlltlcI, thl.
nlflc! willi oot.,ln v'rllle>li"n "' th', 'lout "' "o,a.n . COPV ul ;\
JU"9"'cnt 3'10 llI"il V\.IU a .nov 01 ,.It" I"J~",'"1 CH .."I'IC.1\lon. If vou
rlQU-lIt .,hlll offl..o In w"l'''Q Wlt''1'' 1., r.J,. ~Il... 'tcolvln9 tnlll
"otlce. thl" offlc'" wilt 1)'uVI"t: V"U ~I\." t.ll! n.J"I': "'IU lldur." 0' t.n.
nr.,lnrtl c,etiltu't tf daft-':ln'. f..flul l~'~ "oJrr.'t. l;tllOtJ,ttJr.
~'~,' ,).1 t ~ :If::__ A/
VtL~h ....I, ,...--
~ I en:.. 0 l YOI1S
en II', \ Ion "ellarl_enl
This Is An IIllilmol to l'Xllln," n dllhl Anv 111111,,0:.li'1" nhh.ln..d will hn ".0111 I,,, thAt nllmn"A
IlXUIBIT "R"
.eRA
SECURITY
SYSTEMS
,. .
\,
324 MarMI sueer. p,O OOl 62~ . ~Qor,oyne. "" 17043 . Tel~phoneG 1711) /30 7063/ (8QO) 41111.OV55
n."Il'Y HAI'I'"
ROft HI~L510E OR1Vl
R~T"NOO'F, tA ~272l
nctobcr lb, \',9~
atl ~pencer t,llts
AceOu"t .1 _OI922q7~-O~N
Or 191nal t;heck ',.uunU 136.0l
Returneo LlltCk F.el
'1".00
TOUI AI'I()yNT UU~ I
'~1.0l
O.lr J~R~"Y ~AI'I":
Our I.,t lett.r to you aovlsed you tn~t we wcre pr,plrlng to
con,ult wltll our clllnt aoout your unpa.d a~count, ;tno furtner
outllneo the le9" remltlC.llons of ~our fadu" to ml..e It,'tltutlon
ot ,our unoel<l c"eCk. Our r'cl)r~' Inolcal' tn3l ~ou hi'" l\1nored
our r,que,t for pay~.nt.
Th, ,uthr cu,,,ntly re~l~ Willi our ,t"nt wno ..Ill oeelelt Whal
"anl' Ie \1 1 I or cullectl'ln .clilllty will oe underta",n. "<lur Ipp,r,nt
unvllllnqne., to GOClpera',e ..3) aftect our client" o,e 1,lon IS to Its
.It,rn.tl,,"'. Failure ll' pa~ tn.. .O\oun\ ,l..ted Ibove fOal' con,tltute
prl.' teell .."Idenc. of lln ,nl.nt to Olltr,aUO If tn, "'litter U
prl,~nted In court.
You ..III receIve "0 furtla. nOllce. frulO out olf....,II tile ..;alter
Is not reliolved voluntarllv wltllln the 1I,.t ten C"Y". M' urgl l'OU to
spare yourself ""<lUt lI~rdshlP b1 "1;..ln9 l.nMedl;tU pay..nt 01 t.hl full
SUII bl' carll f 1.0 tn.(~ or mOlley orll.r p;;yao Ie to (;IlA ano sent to tn.
leldr,s, .bov~.
This Is 8n Ilttllmpllo collect B I1nhl
VH~ ~~
l( 1'"ltO Ll'on'
(Oltecllon Depart...nt
l"bOO-~6o-lJ9~!>
Any jl1lormullon oblillnnl1 Will 00 usod to. that purpOSII
EXHIBIT "F"
"
. "
1DUCY,B1rt.. ROSIN
^'l1'URNt'Y5 AT U.W
1101 NOR1'III'ROr-tl' SllU!:r:T
IIAJUUSBlJRQ,I'!NN!\\1,vAN.... 1'/IOl
TElZPlIONE 17171234,1311 "AX 1717) 23<l,38!JO
U"t..ni'Jtr
e, 1 'i~"
JEIlE"'Y HiP1P1
eOft HJLLS1~E O~!VE
ftETT~NnOPF. Yi )l12l
kf I $v""e.'r GI' ~5
laC, Q un 1. ,,:
un~,",~1 ~",o...ntl
~"~~r"~~ Ch~,~ Cc~l
,o1'la<J7c,-u1N
'lb.UZ
U!).OO
TnT~L ,~~u~T nuEI
. ~ 1. u2
Oelr JF.RfI'lY ~A"":
'I.a~. b- ~avI5.~ ~h.t I
5VI"~~S, Toc to coll.c!
C lien" r"'fOr -ne.~ Bon,,-,
.att.r a~lc.~ly h4V~ ~.~n
~'.V.: 0"'1:1"\ rt.'..ll.".... 0)' 1.ltA S"cur.t,
~ l1tOt 0...0 ,n It 011 uen'l I of the
~~ pr.vlnu~ ~tt.~~t~ ~n r.s~ly~ tnls
111'1 u c, ~ S! , u I .
Alt.II"uqll na riecl!lan hi' o"n "'.In. to I,I.lq.te ~hl' lO.t\er, vou
shoulll II" r,"lno-o ~hit wrltlnq an u",c'"lcetlol, ehuee is I serIous
YICll1tlon 01 DOth roivll Ino1 C!II~ln" laws, .Jno 'HOY ~ho Idvlrselv
Iffeet vnur a'ult. Shoul~ thl! molt\"1 tit :Junu.l1 tnroull" tne courts
chlllV. or tnrough erl",ln~1 pruHr.ut.on. yvu ....Y b. adCllllonlllV
Illb I, lor c"urt eor.h .Jnd .ltorr"v', I e.s. dep'''clln9 Ullon I.h. Ilw,
IPllllclOI.. In your s'.t~.
You ""V ~tll' lIyol~ tllP. hllr~h conH4uenc.~ v, PaUIDr. 1I\IVltlon
bV _,,"lnll 'ull p'y"un~ ~o L~..r'nc. kO~-". S,,"~ tn In. 100V' .ddt....
F~II..rl' '0 ",ak~ Day","nt as "tit~'" ..tlh.n tile n".t Ilft.en alY' _IY
r..ult lit tn~ ao;I,ln". "u~c..".d ~uov~. ! tru~t tnn you will rlYleW
th~ ~.ttfOr jn~ 90v~rn yours~11 accor~ln.lt.
V-,y trulv yuurs.
;<o...~ 7 (7-.h
"
llll wr" I\C l.' "I. i< 0 ')"11
Unl.ss you no:"1 UII' ""IC~ ..i~t"" ,0 "..y. aller reeclvlnt
tn.. notle. tlla', vou 01 souto Ill. va I III Ilt or ~hlS ~.DI., or .nv
portion tn'l.al. !nls "IlIc~ ..Ill '......"'" lPlh u~ut III vellet. If
you notHy lhl, O'''CO 'n ..relln9 ..I~nln 10 u~Y' "0" r.c.lvln9
tnl, no~le., !hls ulllc' ..tiP ubtOl1l ".rll,e..tloll 01 tne deD\ or
nbtaln. C?PV "' 3 Ju,;olO,-n' "n' "'all yo.. ~ <:opy 01 such jud..",.n" or
".rlfle..tI?lI. II yuu r.'l".st o,lIls ...'tlc. III ..r,~'h" ..Ithln 30 dey'
,ft,r rco;.'vlnq "Ills nollc-, Ihl, "ftl.' Will pruv,~, you with the
n."" .no a<1clress n' ~h. 0..1In.I cr.oltor. II "lIler,nt fro.. tll.
curr,nt cretfltol. Tnls I. "n ..tt.~IPt tu c~lI.ct a clebl. Anv
lnforw.tlon out;"n-o ..III b. u,." 'ot tn.t putp"".
EXHIBIT "Cn
~
~',., - ~~l"':: I ~ I
, J '"
- ._~.~
. II .
.. . .. t
Martha ea.'er.Wolls
AlIornllY at Law
SullO 504 Kalll Bulld.nQ
326 W. 3rd 5t,
Davenport. IA 52601
319-322-04~b
319-322-2300 FAX
nsed to Practice In Iowa & 1ll11\OIS
October !I, 1994
q
eRA Security sy.t.as
~Jlarket Str.et
~J I -fls -
Leaoyne, PA 17043
Re t Jereay HaUl
Bankrupt.cy 110. 94-1003
Chapter 7
Dear Creditor:
My cUent JerelllY IiUJll__ received a bill from you. .Perk.pa y~1.t did-,.
not! ""AU t,bat: tfV\ 'S ~ ~~ ~ b~
'f ) ..wy W8ru l!I'+,~d on t-bTi.. l::.eaRt ba.l\hl!~.p.tcy;
~o~
bt for w ~UU. aru collecti~iGtcd
rocen bankr~_--- '
Enclo..d 1. the Notice of Creditors'wtrttm"yml IIInoulOave
~.c.ivAd. Please dir~ct any turther correspondence to me,
SinCerelY~~ ~
Wo.J:t.~ f ~ ' wA
j;.J
~
Hartha B..t.or-Wells
HEW/jlllb
Enclo.ureo
-
EXHIBIT "0"
. ., .
. I wi"
Mlrthe Euter-Wells
Altornuy 8t Law
Sulll 504 Klhl Building
326 W. 3rd 51.
OIVlnport, 1/\ 52801
319-322-0455
319-322-2300 FAX
,nlld 10 Pr.ollc. In lowI & II11nol5
Nove.ber 3, 1994
eRA security sy.tea.
324 M.rket streit
~oyne, PA 17043
Rlt Jere.y Hama
Bankruptcy No. 94-1003
Chapter 7
DI.r Creditor:
"y client, ~ere.y HftMm received a bill trom you in .pita of hi.
bankrUptcy t il inCJ '
, .
anc1o.sd is another copy ot tho Notice of creditors, Please direct
any fUL'ther corre.pondencfl to ble. Thh 10 the second notiUcation
on thl. account.
,
, '
sincerely,
ry)\'c.. Ii{ }~-'1~
Hartha Ea.t'L'-~oll~
HEW/jab
Enolo.urea
,
.
IlIBIBIT "I"
~~
~
~
~
-1
i
~ l" ,..
IT; r..
1-- (.~ ''}
Q l)~
~1'1 :1: o~
~~ co.. \~;~
(.)
(~ (0 ..<'(n
u. (''oJ 'hG
\" 1-- :tii.IJ
,. (..) Ll: :1-
r= L.J 1":
15 l;.'1 J
a. U
. .. ,
. t ~ ..-
. .. I
,'i.n I tJ
I] P'" '
. ;.'.'..t'I
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
Plaintiff
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
)
) No, 95-7095
)
)
)
)
)
V.
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
Defendant
ORDER
AND NOW, this 11 day of ~~, 199.!., upon consideration of
Defendant CRA Security Systems' Motion for Rule Absolute Striking the Judgment in the
above referenced matter, and it appearing to the Court's satisfaction that Plaintiff was served
with the Petition and had adequate opportunity to respond to the same but has not done so,
the Rule is hereby made Absolute, and the Judgment stricken,
BY THE COU
/
/
I
( J,
./
91lJQ,1
~J;'.RTWlCATE OF SERVICE
I, Mark 0, Bradshaw, Esquire, hereby certify that I am this day servlna a
copy of the foreaolna document upon the person(s) and in the manner Indicated below, which
service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil procedure, by deposltina
a copy of the same In the United States Mall, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with fint-class
postlle prepaid, as follows:
Bruce A. Grove, Jr., Esquire
1513 Cedar Cliff Drive
Camp Hili PA 170\1
By:
Mark 0, rildshaw, Esquire
1.0, No, 61975
Christopher M. Clcconl, Esquire
I,D, No, 19331
One South Market Square Building
213 Market St,
P.O, Box 1248
Harrisburg PA 17108
(717) 237-6000
Attorneys for Defendant
CRA Security Systems
February 9, 1996
95UO.1
s
.... ~ --
tt-; ..:f 1--
d
;:.':: ;;... ,.
., ...,..1.1"
1f5":;: t,)~~
-' "~):- ..
{tt~ u- ._~
..-, ":J
.....t'- ~.~ ..
"!:C' N : 'Ii)
\~~~ - r-i-,:i
1._-
".,.\ C'~l '! l\.:J
\.0\ r'\"
\" ---.-
Ir- ",
\!.. ,0 :5
0 (.." f..)
"
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
Plaintiff/Petitioner
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA
v,
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
Defendant/Respondent
95-7095 Civil Term
DEFENDANT/RESPO~~~_!Ri ECAUTIONARY ANSWER
TO PLA~""~'~ .!!;TITIO~ Rm!!~!, NG AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING
AND NOW comes Defendant/Respondent CRA Security Systems ("CRA H), by and
through its counsel Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, and makes the following
Precautionary Answer to Plaintifrs petition Requesting an Evidentiary Hearing pursuant to
the provisions of Pa.R,Civ,P, 206,2, stating in support thereof as follows:
RsI~k,round
For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Brief, no Answer to Plaintifrs Petition
should be required under the circumstances, given that Plaintiff is now attempting to
relitigate an issue which was resolved against Plaintiff nearly one year ago, Plaintiff here
attempts to "re-open" issues of adequate notice and an opportunity to be heard by CRA in
certain bankruptcy proceedings in Iowa during the spring of 1995, As set forth in greater
detail herein below, and as explained in the accompanying Brief, ail such issues were
squarely raised by CRA Security System's Petition for a Rule to Show Cause ("CRA's
Petition to Strike") filed December 28, 1995, which Petition required Plaintiff/Petitioner
herein to demonstrate why the earlier tiled judgment should not be stricken, ~ CRA's
Petition to Strike and accompanying Order, attached hereto as Exhibit" A", Given Hamm's
tol;&\ fallure to respond as required by this Court's Order of December 29, 1995, this
judgment was subsequently stricken by Order of February 13, 1996, Notwithstanding the
above, in an excess of caution, and because preliminary objections are apparently not
"
authorized by the Rules of Civil procedure in response to a Petition, CRA Security Systems
raponds u follows:
1, Admitted upon information and belief,
2, Denied as stated, Defendant's proper designation is Capital Recovery
Auociates, Inc, tJdlb/a CRA Security Systems.
3, Admitted upon information and belief,
4. Admitted,
5. Admitted. By way of further answer, the Court Order made Exhibit "A" to
Plaintiffs Pctition fully and finally resolved any issues relating to the adequacy of "notice" to
CRA of the proceedings in the Bankruptcy Court, The Court Order made Exhibit" A" to
Plaintiffs Pctition wu entered only following the total failure by Plaintiff Hamm to respond
in lIl:COrdance with this Court's Order of December 29, 1995 (requiring that Hamm show
cause, if any he had, why the judgment should not be stricken),
6, Denied as stated, CRA's December 28, 1995 Petition to Strike Judgment is a
lepl document (which appears of record with the Court), which speaks for itself, S=
Exhibit "A" hereto, The two defects identified were among those identified by CRA, By
way of further answer Plaintiff Hamm, despite notice and an opportunity to respond to
CRA's Petition to Strike Judgment, declined to do so, As a result, the Order of February
13, 1996 hu now long since been final, and Plaintiff Hamm's atlemptto relitigate issues
such as "notice" at this late date are precluded by operation of law,
7. Denied. The averments of '7 constitute (erroneous) legal conclusions
requiring no responsive pleading, To the extent the same may be deemed averments of fact,
CRA responds as follows: It is specifically denied that the "notice issue" was "remedied" by
the re-entry of the Bankruptcy Court's Order, Indeed, Plaintiffs Petition evidences a
fundamental misunderstandinl as to the "notice" required under, Inter alia, the United States
Conltitution. CRA was entitled to an opportunity to participate in the proceedinls '....din' to
the judlmcnt, not merely to notice that a judgment had been rendered, The "re-entry" of the
Bankruptcy Court's Order (even arguendo adequate or timely notice to CRA of this sinlle
Order) did not remedy CRA's inability to participate in the earlier proceedings leadinl up to
the Court'. Order upon which judlment was ultimately entered, (for example, the hearinl at
which sanctions were Imposed), By way of further answer, CRA does not dispute that It
received timely notice of the January 19, 1996 entry of judgment, However, CRA's position
I. (and hu been) that this notice, standing alone, was insufficient to "remedy" the alarinl
earlier procedural defects and laclt of notice, Furthermore, by the time Hamm orchestrated
the "re-entry" of this Order In Iowa, Hamm was already under an obligation to respond
specifically to CRA's factual averments relating to laclt of notice in the earlier proceedlnls In
Iowa, by virtue of this Court's Order of December 29, 1995, For whatever reason, Hamm
chose not to respond to this Petition,
8, Admitted. By way of further answer, the undersigned explicitly advised
Plaintiff Hamm's Pennsylvania counsel that CRA had the option of either filing an appeal to
the Untied States District Court In Iowa or attacking the regularity of the judgment In
Pennsylvania. Having already undertaken the expense to attack the judgment in
Pennsylvania, the undersigned advised Mr, Grove that It was unlikely that CRA would
exercise Its r1lht of appeal In Iowa, and reminded Hamm's Pennsylvania counsel of Hamm's
obllption to respond to the factual averments contained In CRA's Petition, pursuant to this
Court's Order of December 29, 1995, When It became clear that Hamm did not Intend to
rapond 10 CRA's Petition before this Court, the undersigned tiled a Motion for a Rule
Absolute, resultinaln this Court's February 13, 1996 Order, Even following the entry of
this Order, Hamm took no further action until the tiling of the Instant Petition, approximately
ei&ht months followina the Issuance of the Court's February 13, 1996 Order.
9. Denied. The averments of 19 constitute legal conclusions requirlna no
responsive p1eadlna, To the extent the same to be deemed averments of fact, the same are
denied because, followlna reasonable investlaatlon, Defendant CRA is without Information 10
form belief IS 10 their truth or falsity, By way of further answer, the averments set forth in
19 constitute Plaintiff/Petitioner Hamm's attempts to relitigate issues resolved against him
throuah his failure to respond to CRA's earlier Petition to Strike as ordered by this Court on
December 29, 1995. Lastly, as set forth In arealer detail In CRA's earlier Petition (10 which
Hamm never responded) the "lack of notice" claimed related to the tiling of the Motion for
Sanctions, and the scheduling of hearing relating to the same, not only the entry of the
Bankruptcy Court Order as a Judgment,
10. Denied, The averments of 110 constitute legal conclusions requirlna no
responsive pleading. To the extent the same to be deemed averments of fact, the same are
denied because, following reasonable Investigation, Defendant CRA Is without Information to
form belief II 10 their truth or falsity. By way of further answer, however. CRA is at a
105110 undentand how any alleged telephone call to attorney Rosen on or about January 24,
1996 constituted "investigations subsequent to the Court Order of February 13, 1996," To
the extent Hamm believed the averments contained In 110 of the instant Petition constituted
a factual rebuttal to CRA's pleaded lack of notice as alleged in CRA's Petition to Strike, the
same should have been timely set forth in an Answer to CRA's Petition to Strike, Indeed,
i) OI~ u_ ...--~..
..
....-t
w~..
1-q"P'--=~-'--"
---,'^--"
_.7""'..,.____-a~~,._--.a-- _ .....,-.. n._ _...H'_
r ~i
, .
,.' .
3. Upon infonnatiOll and belief, attorney Euter-Wcl11 II not IicenlMld 10 practice law
in the Commonwealth of Pennlylvania, and hid no atandina 10 file lep1 documentl and
inatruct the Sheriff of Cumberland County 10 like any action on behIlf of her client. 'IbUl,
then are fundamental defec:tl whlch appear of record with reprd 10 the Judlment (I.e. the
11IM havina been purportedly filed by an unllcenaed attorney).
4. FUIldamcntal defectl, auch u that act forth above, are, llandinl alone, adequate
&1OUIldI1O aupport the striklna of a judlment.
5. However, u set forth in &reater detail below, there are far more seriouIlssues
which support the strildna of the Judament.
6. AttIl:hed hereto is the Affidavit of Mr. Hap Seiders, President of Capital
Recovery Auociates, Inc. tJdlb/a CRA Security Systems,
7. As act forth in areater detail in Mr. Selders' Affidavit and the Exhibits attached
thereto, the Bankruptcy Court records relatinalO this Judament demonstrate that CRA
Security Systems was never aiven appropriate notice of the proceedinas in the Bankruptcy
Court in Iowa, and therefore was deprived of its opportunity 10 defend or be heard in that
forum.
8. AI a result, the Iudament which was rendered in Iowa and subsequentiy
transferred 10 this Court is unenforceable and void, and cannot support valid execution
proc:edUI'eS.
2
..
'. .
3. Upon Information and belief, attorney EuIer-Welll il not Ilc:cnaed to pnctice law
in the CommonWClllth of Pennlylvanla, and hid no IlIIIdlna to file lqal documenll and
ilIItnIct the Sheriff of Cumberland County to like any action on behalf of her client. ThUl,
there are fundamental defecu which lIppeII' of record with rqard to the Judament (i.e. the
ume havilla been purportedly fIlod by an unlIc:cnaed attorney).
4. Fundamental defecll, IUCh u that let forth above, are, ltandlnl alone, adequate
&roundI to IUpport the strildn& of a judlment.
S. However, as set forth in lrealer detail below, there are far more serious issues
which IUpport the strildnl of the Judgment,
6, Attached hereto is the Affidavit of Mr. Hap Seiders, President of Capital
Recovery Auoclates, Inc. tJdJb/a CRA Security Systems,
7, As let forth in lreater detail in Mr, Seiden' Affidavit and the Exhibits attached
thereto, the Bankruptcy Court records relatinl to this Judgment demonstrate that CRA
Security Syllems was never liven appropriate notice of the proceedings in the Bankruptcy
Court in Iowa, and therefore was deprived of its opportunity to defend or be heard in that
forum.
8. AI a result, the Judgment which was rendered in Iowa and subsequently
transferred to this Court is unenforceable and void, and cannot support valid execution
procedures,
2
V.
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
Defendant
) IN 1lIE COURT OF COMMON PLE.AS
) CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
)
) No, 95-7095
)
)
)
)
)
JBRBMY JAMES HAMM
Plaintiff
AFFIDAVIT
HAP A. SEIDERS, having been duly sworn, hereby states on the basis of his
knowledge u follows:
1. My name is Hap A, Seiders, I am the President of Capital Recovery Associates,
Inc., tJd/b/a CRA Security Systems, a Pennsylvania corporation having its principal pIKe of
business at 324 Market Street, I..emoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17043. I am
over the aae of ei&hteen (18) and am competent to testify in the above-referenced matter.
2. In late June of this year (1995), I first became aware of a bankruptcy proceeding
in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Iowa involving Plaintiff
herein, Mr. Hamm.
3. Specifically, I received, through my counsel, Stacey Alien, concspondcnce from
an Iowa attorney named Martha Easter-Wells (hereinafter 'Easter-Wells') dated June 19,
1995 which IIdviscd that a judgment (the 'Judgment') had been entered against CRA Security
Systems in the Bankruptcy Court, A true and correct copy of the June 19, 1995
correspondence is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit . A' (hereinafter the
'Correspondence'),
, .
4. 1be CorreIpOndcnce from Easter-Wells wu conveniently directed to Ms, Allen
euctly 31 day. followin& the entry of the Judament in the Bankruptcy Court.
5. 1be ConeIpondence from Easter-Wells to Ms. Allen was the first notice I had
reaardina the entry of any Judament ..alnst CRA Security Systems by the Bankruptcy Court
in Iowa, and in fact, repraented the tint notice I received concernina this proceedina at all.
6. Followina my receipt of the Correspondence, I requested Harrlsblll'l counsel at
Eckert Seamans Cherin " Mellott to contact the Iowa Bankruptcy Court in an effort to
ascertain the procedural bacqround of this matter, and to obtain copies of relevant court
documents in an effort to W1derstand how the Judgment could have been entered against CRA
Security Systems.
7. 'Ibrou&h Eckert Seamans' efforts, I was able to obtain copies of the Bankruptcy
Court documents, (including the Order and Notice for the hearing which resulted in the
Order) directly from the Bankruptcy Court, These documents are attached hereto and made
a part hereof as Exhibit "B".
8, The Certificate of Service which is attached to the Order Indicates that the Court's
Order was served on a number of panies, not includln~ CRA Security Systems. Included u
having received notice per the Certificate of Service are four typewritten names, attorney
Easter-Wells, Plaintiff Hamm, Burton Fagen (identity unknown), and the United Slates
Trustee, Additionally, handwritten below these typewritten names were the names of two
attorneys who had directed correspondence on behalf of CRA Security Systems to Mr,
Hamm: Effron &. Effron, and Lawrence J, Rosen, (each of which Is mentioned In the
Bankruptcy Court's Order of May 17, 1995, however, neither of which represented CRA in
any capacity In this matter, and neither of which were sanctioned), <S<< Exhibit B),
9, Furthermore, the CertIficate of Service attached to the Notice and Order for
Hear\ni lChedulina the hearin& In this matter indicates an identical service list, once Ipin,
IKll includina CRA Security Systems. Here lIaln, the typewritten material indiCllel that four
Notices were ICIIt to the III'IIC four parties above-referenced, and there are IwIdwritten
entries reIatina to Effron " Effron and Lawrence J. Rosen.
10. 'lbe documents received from the United States Bankruptcy Court in Iowa
explained, to me, why I wassurpriscd to receive Attorney Baster-Wells' June 19, 199'
Correspondcncc, inasmuch as CRA Security Systems had never received formal notice from
the Bankruptcy Court of the entry of the Order, or notice of the scheduling of the hearina
which led to the entry of the Order,
11. Apin, the timing of the June 19, 199' Correspondence (exactly 31 clays
following the Bankruptcy Court's Qrdcr) leads me to question the manner in which this
Jud&mcnt was obtained in the Bankruptcy Court in Iowa.
12. In any event, CRA Security Systems never made any deliberate decision not to
defend the Bankruptcy matter in Iowa, rather, it never had the opportunity to make any
decision reprdina this matter, not having received either Notice of the hearing, or timely
notice of the entry of the Court's Order such that any appeal would have been possible.
13. In addition, CRA Security Systems was never a party to the underlying
Bankruptcy procecdina, and was never formally served, whether in person, by certified mail,
or In any other formal manner with service of the Debtor's Motion to find CRA Security
Systems In contempt, Consequently, I believe the Bankruptcy Court never had personal
jurisdiction over CRA Security Systems In the first instance,
......;-..
-- "'-..-
..,"~r~ru r.~
, .
Martha Euter-Wells
Attorney It Law
1101 Brldy Suite 300
Dlvenport, IA 521103
3111-322-0455
Fill: 3111-322-2300
LIcenMcI to Pr.ctlc. In 10wI . IIIlnoll
Jun. 1', 199!l
A~<< *
/ ~ z,2fH/f
s~acay All.n
,P.(). Box !l6l5!l
Lutherville, MO 21094
ReI Jer..y Hamm
D.ar M.. Allen I
I under.tand that you repre..nt CRA Security By.tems.
Inclo.ed i. an Order by Judge au..ellJ. Hill, of the BankrUptcy
Court in the Southern Di.trict of Iowa, granting judgement to .y
cli.nt Jeremy H... in the a.ount ot $2l,!500.00.
. I .. .eeking payment ot thi. a.ount. I am diracting thi.
corre.pondence to you .0 that you will have the opportunity to
di.cu.. it with the appropriate per.onnel of eRA Security sy.t....
sincer.ly,
~~~~V~
Martha Beater-Wells
MEW/dg
Inclo.ure
Exhibit lOA
......-
. . . 0 0
... ..
" ,
. .
UNITED STATES BANJ(RUPTCY COURT ~
rOR THE SOUTHBRN DISTRICT or IOWA MAY I 7 1995
EASTBRN DIVISION
IN THE MATTER OF
JERDIY JAMES HAMH
)
)
)
)
)
),
)
BANJ(RUPTCY NO.
CHAPTER 7
94-.P.WJD
'" 't,"" .....
r .1, "'I :.
~""".~l':'~'.',\ .~., J':: ~''i'/';''','';
JUL 3' .- '.'i!,.,. '
If. ~ lDSS .
llf'.!>I." ,
"~Q'I'
w,',',
~.t J~ J'
.",
DEBTOR.
~ER O~i':rig: 'l'o HOLD CREDITOR IN CONTEMPT
LI DAMAGES POR VIOLATION OF THE
DISCHARGE INJUNCTION
Thi. case coming on for hearing on the Debtor'S Motion to Hold
CRA Security sy.tems in contempt of Court for ViOlation of the
Di.charge Injunction of 11 U.S.C. 5 524,
IT IS FOUND that on April 7, 1995 the Debtor filed the
Petition in this case. Notice of commencement of the Chapter 7
ca.e was sent to the creditors on April 20, 1995. The Court finds
that Spencer Gifts, North Park Mall, Davenport, Iowa and
continental Collections, P.O. Box 40441, Rochester, NY 14604 were
li.ted on the mailing Matrix, and Notice was given to thelD on April
20, 1995. On July 26, 1994, Discharge was entered in this case and
Notice was given to spencer Gifts and continental Collections.
On January 3, 1995 the Debtor filed a Motion to Reopen and the
Court approved it on January 26, 1995. The evidence now before the
court shows that the Debtor received multiple letters from
1
if5/~
Exhibit "B
, ..
\.
o
c>
'.
'J:'
CRA Security systems and from attorneys hired by CRA security
Sy.tem.. The amount of the original debt was less than $50.00.
U~on r.ceipt of the letters, counsel for Hr. Hamm, Martha Ea.ter-
Well. contacted cas Security systems and advised them that the debt
had be.n diacharqed in bankruptcy. There were also telephone call.
to CRA Security systems in which CRA security systems was advi.ed
of the bankruptcy discharge and in which they responded that they
were not bound by oral notice of the Discharge.
Even after notice orally and in writing, CRA Security System.
proceedsd to contact counsel to collect the debt. Martha Easter-
Well. contacted counsel and advised them of the bankruptcy
discharge. Counsel stopped contact immediately. They were well
advised to so.
The Court finds that under 11 U.s.C. 5524 (2) that the
discharge operates as an injunction against the commencement or
continuation of an action or employment of process or act to
collect any discharged debt as a personal liability of the debtor.
The Court finds in this case that the facts indicate that CRA
Security systems clearly and intentionally violated
11 U.S.C. ~524(2). They have continued process to collect the debt
even after being informed of the bankruptcy discharge. The record
will reflect that CRA security Systems received notice of this
hearing and notice of the pending contempt proceeding and have not
responded. The first notice was for the hearing on March 17, 1995.
eRA Security systems and counsel for CRA security systems
2
. . ,
..
..
()
I.)
, '
did not appear. The second hearing Notice was for May 3, 1995 at
2130 p.m. and they failed to appear and counsel failed to appear.
The Court rule. that sanctions should be imposed. Insofar as
Efron , Efron and Krevsky , Rosen, the Debtor has not asked for
.anction. because they terminated contact immediately upon being
advised of the bankruptcy discharge.
Insofar as sanctions, the record will reflect that the debtor
i. a.king for fees of $1,500.00. The Court finds attorneys fees in
the amount of $1,500.00 are reasonable.
Insofar as punitive
damages, local counsel will have to employ counsel in the U. S.
District Court in which LeMoyne is located unless counsel for the
debtor is ,.,il11ng to go there herself. To interest counsel in that
district, the amount of the judgement will be determinative. In
addition, some of these businesses look at punitive damages as a
business expense. This Judge wants to put eRA Security System and
other businesses on notice that if there is a phone call indicating
that there is a bankruptcy, they need to stop and check it out.
Punitive damages in the amount of $20,000.00 and attorneys
fees in the amount of $1,500.00 are ordered and Judgment is granted
therefore.
Date: /VIlli /7, .1995
~
~-~~
Russ 11 J. Hilr
JUdge, U.s./aankruptcy Court
Southern District of Iowa
3
C.....IITInCATE OF SERVICE
I, Mark D. Bradshaw, Esquire, hereby c:crtlfy that on this 28th day of December,
199', I aerved a true and correct copy of the forqolna via United States flnt-clus mail,
postqe prepaid, upon the followina:
'I
Martha Easter-Wells, Esquire
601 Brady Suite 300
Davenport IA 52803
By:
EOd SEAMANS CHERIN " MEU.OIT
~~
Mark D, Bradshaw, Esquire
I.D. No, 61975
Christopher M. Cicconi, Esquire
I,D, No. 19331
One South Market Square Building
213 Market Street
P,Q. Box 1248
Harrisburg PA 17108
(717) 237-6000
Attorneys for Defendant
CRA Security Systems
"161,1
7i C') r
.:3 ,-
.;! .z
"" i3~
, -
-
.9- ;:l ;:.l
.- n~
t',
t:: If'> ,,'m
l-'- - .JZ
6:\',) ,.j: '11
..." ,.1\
r-:-. ~.~. C!o..
." ~:
,~ .n ':;:J
~ c;, (,)
.
PEl. (il] 1095t1-
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
Plaintiff
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
)
) No, 9~-709~
)
)
)
)
)
V,
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
Defendant
DEFENDANT'S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT'S PETITION TO STRIKE
I. ""lruound
On or about December 12, 199~, Plaintiff, Jeremy Hamm, through his Iowa counsel,
transferred a judgment (hereinafter the "Judgment") obtained in the United States Bankruptcy
Court for the Southern District of Iowa to this Court, Plalntifrs Iowa counsel also Inslnlcted
the Cumberland County Sherlfrs Office to Immediately undertake execution proceedings
upon the Judgment, Including a levy by way of inventory on Defendant's property at its
princit'81 place of business in Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania, As Is set forth
In greater detail in the accompanying Petition to Strike the Judgment, Plaintifrs Iowa counsel
Is not licensed In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the judgment would be properly
stricken for this reason alone,
However, as is also set forth in greater detail in the Petition itself, this judgment
should be stricken because of the fundamental unfairness involved in the manner in which it
was obtained, to wit: the Court records from the Bankruptcy Court in Iowa demonstrate a
I
.....
The circumstances under which the instant Judllment was obtained lead one to
question the aood faith of Plaintiff and his counsel insofar as their duty to ensure that the
Defendant have appropriate notice and an opportunity to defend, In this rellard, the
proceedina is very reminiscent of that described by our Superior Court in Perkins v, TSQ,
~, _ Pi, Super. _, 568 A,2d 665 (1990), In Perkins, the Superior Court held that a
Maryland judament had been rendered without jurisdiction and was not entitled to full faith
and credit where Plaintiff's counsel did not ensure proper service of a Complaint prior to
taldna a default judament and then, exactly 30 days following the entry of judllment in
Maryland, corresponded with Defendant, notified Defendant of the entry of judllment, and
requested payment. As the Superior Court slated,
"[W)e are convinced that Appellees, through their counsel,
attorney Spivok, failed to make a good faith effort to serve any
person expressly or impliedly authorized to receive service of
process,
.
.
.
30 days after the entry of default judgment, attorney Spivok,
suddenly able to remember oPposinll counsel's address, mailed
Notice of the Default Judgment to Attorney Spiegel...
Perkins at 666,
In a footnote to the messaae cited above, the Superior Court sarcastically noted that a
Maryland Rule of Procedure permitted in Maryland Court to revise a judgment within 30
days after entry. As the Superior Court ryly noted, "this may account for the timing of
attorney Spivok's letter to attorney Spiegel", III at 667,n,2,
3
While the undersigned is not in a position to speculate as to the good faith or bad
faith of Plaintifrs counsel in this matter, the parallel between the P~rkins case and the timing
of attorney Easter-Wells' June 19, 1995 correspondence to CRA's counsel (precisely 31 days
following the entry of judgment) do raise questions in this regard, However, it is totally
unnecessary for the Court to concern itself with this factual inquiry, inasmuch the Court
records themselves, which are now of record (having been attached as Exhibit to Defendant's
Petition to Strike the Judgment) make it clear that no meaningful notice or opportunity to be
heard was ever afforded CRA Security Systems in the bankruptcy proceeding in Iowa.
Additionally, there is no suuestion that proper service of original process was ever
effectuated which would have rendered CRA Security Systems subject to the jurisdiction of
the Bankruptcy Court in the first instance, Thus, questions of good or bad faith aside, it is
clear that the Judgment which is sought to be enforced was awarded in derogation of
Defendant's constitutional due process rights, and, consequently the same should be stricken
forthwith.
At a minimum, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court direct the Sherifrs
Office to cease and desist from any further enforcement actions pending a resolution of the
issues raised in Defendant's Petition to Strike, This Court has the authority to issue such a
stay of execution pursuant to Pa. R, Civ, p, 3121. Such a stay will result in absolutely no
prejudice to Plaintiff, because, should Defendant's Petition to Strike ultimately be denied,
Plaintifrs Writ may simply be reissued pursuant to Pa, R, Civ, P. 3106(b) (although
presumably a Praecipe to Reissue would be properly filed by an allorney licensed to practice
law in this Commonwealth, as opposed to Plaintifrs Iowa counsel),
4
CF..RTlFlCATE OF SERVICE
I, Mark 0, Bradshaw, Esquire, hereby certify that on this 28th day of December,
1995, I served a true and comet copy of the foregoing via United States first-class mall,
polllie prepaid, upon the fol1owlna:
Martha Easter-Wells, Esquire
601 Brady Suite 300
Davenport IA 52803
HERIN &. MELLO'IT
By:
Mark 0, Bradshaw, Esquire
1,0. No, 61975
Christopher M, Cicconi, Esquire
1.0. No, 19331
One South Market Square Building
213 Market Street
P,Q. Box 1248
Harrisburg PA 17108
(717) 237-6000
Attorneys for Defendant
CRA Security Systems
tIl61,'
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V.
CRA SECURI1Y SYSTEMS,
DEFENDANT~ESPONDENT
,
,
: 95-7095 CIVIL TERM
gftDER OF COURT
AND NOW, thll 12th day of November, 1996, paragraph 5 of thll court'l order
of October 30, 1996, IS VACATED and replaced with thll paragraph:
"Briefs lhall be filed and argument lhall be held on Monday, December 23,
1998, at 3:45 p.rn" In Courtroom No. II, of the Cumberland County Courthouse."
By the ~ur? /'
/
Bruce A. Grove, Jr" Esquire
For PIaIntifflPetltloner
Mark D. BradlhaW, Esquire
For DefendantlReapondent
~ ~( /llp,I'It..
..6. /p,
:ua
. " ."
_ f'.'" i
..
"^'
,
\
-_\--
.....~. 0:"
.
"
, ,
!
\
'.
.
,
I,
.
i'c!......,.
.}::t~:
. ,,";[ - q . <)
.; . :'~l;~ ~i ,'~
..! Ll :: ~ ' " ~; 1
ECKERI' SEAMANS OIERIN ok MELWIT
0111' 511111/. AllHL" 5.,. Hm'ldmg
2lHt.rUt SI,.,.,
n.,offk.U'" IUS
/lam,bll,!:, 1\-\ mus
Bruce A. Grove, Ir., .&qui",
1513 Cedar Cliff Drive
Camp Hill Pa 17011
-- rl"llinTllrr~i1""~"-""'~-;';~-
,
.
..
I
I'
'1
"
I
I
I
. : I g~tJgB '
. ,
JIlRBMY JAMBS HAMM,
PlalntlfflPetitloner
IN THB COURT Of COMMON PLBAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA
V.
CRASBC~SY~S
Defendant/Respondent
95-7095 Civil Term
ORDER
AND NOW, thI. _ day of
, upon conslderaUon of PlalnUfr. Petition
requeatlna an evidentiary hearina and Defendant's response thereto, Plaintifrs Petition Is
DBNIBD. Any and ail Issues Plaintiff attempts to raise In Its current Petition were resolved
..ainst Plaintiff by this Court'. Order of February 13, 1996, which Order was Issued as a
result of Plaintiff's failure to respond to CRA Security System's December 28, 1995 Petition
as required by this Court's Order of December December 29, 1995,
BY THE COURT:
Edgar B, Bayley, 1.
120111,1
!
,.,.,....,.....
,.-
.
,
\
\
.
"
r'
'.
.-
iJ.
.
F1:KERT SEAMANS OiERIN&rviELl.CJ!T
~ i
OlltStIIl"I.\fll,J.I.tS".lII1IMI".~
2UMarL.'rStrl'l"I
""tOffi<" 1I"t IllH
"..,ri$I,",,;. 1M 1710$
Mark D, Bradshaw, Esquire
P.O. Box 1248
Ramsburg PA 17108
~f~:'. '
"1
~~
,oj
1;/
y
~1~f.
fH;:
I,J
"1
Iii
.;j
1
;{
~_'I
'.It:
t,!
,.
.
,
.
.
\
. ''/ ,'j .. l'.;UJi'
\
JBRBMY JAMBS HAMM,
PIalntiff/Petitloner
IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA
V.
CRA SBCUJUTY SYSTEMS
Defendant/Rapondent
95-7095 Civil Term
ORDER
AND NOW, thi. _ day of
, upon consideration of Plaintifr. Petition
requatina an evidentiary hearing and Defendant's response thereto, Plaintifrs Petition i.
DBNIBD. Any and all issues Plaintiff attempts to raise in its current Petition were resolved
qalnlt Plaintiff by this Court's Order of February 13, 1996, which Order was issued as a
result of Plaintirr. failure to respond to CRA Security System's December 28, 1995 Petition
as required by this Court's Order of December December 29, 1995,
BY THE COURT:
Edgar B, Bayley, 1.
11011I,1
WRIT OF EXECUTION Ind/or ATTACHMENT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA)
COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND)
TO THE SHERIFF OF CUMBERLAND COUNTY:
To NUSly the debt, Interest and costs due J oremy J limes
NO. 95-7095 CIVIL 19
CIVIL ACTION. LAW
Hlimm
PLAINTIFF(S)
lrom CRA Security Systems, 324 Mlirket Street, Lemoyne PA 17043.
DEFENDANT(S)
(1) You are directed to levy upon the property ollhe defendant(s) and to sell All personlil
property inCluding office equipment. vehicle~ clish lind blink liccounts.
,
(2) You are also directed to attach the property of the defendant(s) not levied upon In the possession ot
GARNISHEE(S) as follows:
and to notHy the garnlshee(s) that: (a) an attachment has been Issued; (b) the garnlshee(s) Is/are enjoined from paying any
debt to or for the account of the defendant(s) and from delivering any property 01 the defendant(s) or otherwise disposing
thereof:
(3) If properly ofthe defendant(s) not levied upon an subleclto attachment Is found Inthe possession of anyone other
thana nemedgarnlshee. you are directed to notify him/her that he/she has been added as agarnlshee and Is enjoined as above
stated.
Amount Due$21, 500.00
Interest
Ally's Camm
Atty Paid $32.50
Plalntll1 Paid
L.L.
$.50
%
Due Prolhy
Other Costs
$1.00
ome: December 12. 1995
Lliwrence E. Welker
) ''''''T''i' eM' '''~
'. tl~l f j~ll~LL'()
i I 1/ /
\
Depuly
by:
REQUESTING PARTY:
Name Mlirthli Elister-Wells. Esquire
Address: 601 Brlidy St.. Ste. 300
olivenport IA 52803
Attorney for: Plliintif f
Telephone: ( 318) 322-0455
Supreme Court 10 No.
R. Thomas Kline, Sheriff who being duly sworn according to law,
eays this writ is returned per Order of Court.
Sheriff's Costs:
Docketing
Law Library
Prothonotary
Surcharge
18.00
.50
1.00
2.00
21.50
Advance costs 150.00
Sheriff's Costs 21.50
$ 128.50
$
refund to atty 2-15-96
So an_s~er,,:
~_... l '.
,.'
'. '~.~"I.
:-:I.r.'
R. Thomas Kline, Sheriff
Sworn and Subscribed To Before Me
By ~_'.dIoJr
Deputy Sheriff
~.
-- .
Giii.
IN\l
'tl
,:"
...
,
.., 1
This ~ - Day of ~e'''1
1996, A.D.s;;;.", (] ~~1'
Prothonotary
..
i :-~
\'\ ~1n
cr \"1 en [J , 1I
I ~ \ i !\
:L1
.\J
""iJ.lO
\~ ~'V
,0
0""
~ ..:J" 6
-
t cO .t..-_
.. J,,_
C) .'.
.... c)?;
(o, :c
.~ '-'l: 1-:13
n .... '"
(~. \.0 ::'~{Jl
ft~ - .- .....
- Il:-....
--,~ 1!.Iru
r-: ..-:: ~SIt.:L
-,
~ <0 ~
c,
.,
~ - ~
I=:
j.::: . .
.. ::)
I~ - o;os
-
-.. l.-_)~
~'. .
r-: C;; :..)~
'-' a.> :':jS~
~~ I
e:> tilil]
I:': L,J .::JL'..
LL. ~:
u.. o.n :'.j
0 C'\ U
.,
. - .
.;. .
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY . PENNSYLVANIA
vs.
NO. 95-7095
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS,
Defendant
PRAECIPE
TO THE PROTHONOTARY:
Please enter the appearance of BRUCE A. GROVE, JR.. ESQUIRE as attorney for
Plaintiff, Jeremy James Hamm, in the above-captioned matter.
To Cumberland County
Prothonotary
Dated: Februa-:y 8. 1996
. ~~--.:. j.",
Bruce A. Grove. Jr. I -
Attorney 1.0. #15502
Attorney for Plaintiff
I S I ~ Cc..J.,~ C:...l:fI L\.\A.~
C"""'^i\ J.ki.c , 6~-, /10 "
(111) "'~3-",,'(.'1
~ - ?::
-,
.'-
1- .. 3f~
0 -
~f; -
.- l~):,~
r ..~ r;:1;?
<;'.' c:> . ~.' ((")
L::' -J;;'~
,(..;... I ~1)Q
~!.l C-:1
t..;...i
1-'" u.. ::;
Ll- ,0
(,) C' 0
.. .
V.
CRA SECUIUTY SYSTEMS
Defendant
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) CUMBERLAND COUNI'Y , PENNSYLVANIA
)
) No, 95-7095
)
)
)
)
)
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
Plaintiff
DEFENDANT'S PE....nON TO STRUCR JUDGMENT
AND NOW comes Defendant, Capital Recovery Associates, Inc" tJdIb/a CRA
Security Sylteml (hereinafter "CRA "), by and through its counsel, Eckert Seamans Cherln Ir.
MeIloU and maka the following Petition to Strike Judgment in the above-referenced matter,
Itatina in IUpport thereof u follows:
1. On or about December 12, 1995, a certain judgment (hereinafter the "Judgment")
which hid been obtained in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of
Iowa wu tnnaf'erred to this Court by an Iowa-based attorney, Martha Easter-Wells
(hereinafter "Euler-Wells").
2. TOIether with purporting to transfer the Judgment and have the same filed in this
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Iowa attorney Easter-Wells instructed the Sheriff of
Cumberland County to immediately bqin execution proceedings, including a levy and
inventory at CRA's place of business in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania.
1
,. .
3. Upon information IDd belief, attorney Euter-Wdlsls not lIccnled to pnctice law
in the Commonwealth of PennlylVlllia, and had no standinl to file lepl documents and
inatruct the Sheriff of Cumberland County to take any action on behalf of her client, Thus,
there are fundamental defects which appear of record with rqard to the Iudlment (I,e, the
aame havinl been purportedly filed by an unllcenled attorney),
4. Fundamental defects, such u that set forth above, are, standlnl alone, adequate
aroundI to IUppOft the striIdllJ of a Judament,
5. However, u set fOlth in lreater detail below, there are far more serious issues
which IUppOl1 the strikin& of the Judcment.
6. Attached hereto is the Affidavit of Mr, Hap Seiders, President of Capital
Recovery AuociaIes, Inc, tJdIb/a CRA Security System..
7. A. set forth In lrater detail in Mr. Seiden' Affidavit and the Exhibits attached
thereto, the IIulJaupCcy Court record. relatinl to thll Iudlment demonstrate that CRA
Security Syllcml wu never liven appropriate notice of the proceedlnl' In the BanlaupCcy
Court in Iowa, IDd therefore wu deprivccl of Its opportunity to defend or be heard In that
forum.
8. A. a rault, the Iudament which wu rendereclln Iowa and subsequently
tranafemd to this Court Is unenforceable and void, and cannot support valid execution
procedurea.
2
JIlItBMy JAMBS HAMM
Plaintiff
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
)
) No,95-7095
)
)
)
)
)
V,
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
Defendant
AnlDA VIT
HAP A. SEIDERS, havlna been duly sworn, hereby statea on the buI. of hi.
Imowled&e u follows:
1. My name II Hap A, Selders, I am the President of Capital Recovery AuocIatea,
Inc., tldlbla CRA Security Systems, a Pennsylvania corporation having Its principii place of
buslneu It 324 Market Street, Lcmoyne, Cumberland County, Pennsylvania 17043, I am
over the . of elahteen (18) and am competent to teatlfy in the above-referenced matter.
2. In 1aIe June of this year (1995), I first became aware of a bankruptcy proceed1na
in the United SIIta Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Iowa involving Plaintiff
herein, Mr. Hamm,
3, Speclfic:ally, I received, through my counsel, Stacey Allen, correspondenc:e from
an Iowa attorney named Martha Easter-Wells (hereinafter "Easter-Wells") dated June 19,
1995 which lIdvlsed that a judgment (the "Judgment") had been entered ..unst CRA Security
Systems In the Bankruptcy Court, A true and correct copy of the June 19, 199.5
correspondence I. atlIChed hereto and made a part hereof u Exhibit "A" (hereinafter the
"Correapondence").
4. The Corrapolldcnce from Euler-Wells wu conveniently directed to Ms. Allen
tlUCtly 31 clays following the entry of the Judgment In the Bankrupu:y Court.
5. The cormpondence from Easter-Wells to Ms. Allen wu the flnt notice I had
reprdlng the entry of any Judgment qalnst CRA Security Systems by the Bankrupu:y Court
In IOWI, and In fact, represented the flnt notice I received c:oncemlng this proceecllllll! all.
6. Followilll my receipt of the Correspondence, I requated Harrhbura counsell!
Eckat s.mans Cherin " Mellott to contact the Iowl Bankrupu:y Court In an effort to
ucertain the procedural bKkaround of this matter, and to obtain copies of relevant court
documents In an effort to undentand how the Judgment could have been entered &pinlt CRA
Security Systems,
7. 11Irouah Eckert Seamans' efforts, I wu able to obtain copies of the Bankruptcy
Court documents, (Including the Order and Notice for the hearing which resulted In the
Order) directly from the Bankrupu:y Court. 11Iese documents are attached hereto and made
a part hereof u Exhibit "B".
8. The Certificate of Service which Is attached to the Order Indicates that the Court's
Order wu served on a number of parties, not Inc1udinl! CRA Security Systems. Included u
having received notice per the Certificate of Service are four typewritten names, attorney
Euler-Wells, Plaintiff Hamm, Burton Fllen (Identity unknown), and the United States
Trustee. Additionally, handwritten below these typewritten names were the names of two
attorneys who had directed correspondence on behalf of CRA Security Systems to Mr,
Hamm: Effron " Effron, and Lawrence J. Rosen, (each of which Is mentioned In the
Bankrupu:y Court's Order of May 17, 1995, however, neither of which represented CRA In
any caplClty In this matter, and neither of which were sanctioned). ~ Exhibit B),
9. F\IIthemIOIe, the Certificate of Service attached to the Notice and Order for
HcarinllChedullna the hearin& In thll matter Indlcatel an Identica1scrvlce lilt, once apIn,
IIIllncludlna CRA Security Sysleml, Here ..a1n, the typewritten materIallndlcatel that four
NotIca were IIIlt to the IIIIlC four put\cI above-referenced, and there arc handwritten
entriel relaIina to Effron" Effron and Lawrence J, Rolen.
10. 'Ibe documentl received from the United StalCI Bankruptcy Court In Iowa
apIaIned, to me, why I wu surprised to receive Attorney Easler-Weill' June 19, 1995
eonespondence, Inasmuch u CRA Security Systeml had never received formal notice from
the Ban\InapIcy Court of the entry of the Order, or notice of the schedullna of the hearina
which led to the entry of the Order,
11. ApIn, the timllll of the June 19, 1995 Correspondence (eucUy 31 daYI
foUowin& the Bankruptcy Court'l Order) leads me to question the manner In which this
Judament wu obtained In the Bankruptcy Court In Iowa,
12. In any event, CRA Security Systems never made any deliberate decision not to
defald the lIIIlJauptcy matter In Iowa, rather, It never had the opportunity to make any
decision reprdina thll matter, not havlna received either Notice of the hearina, or timely
notice of the entry of the Court's Order such that any appea1 would have been possible.
13, In addition, CRA Security Systems was never a party to the underlyina
BankruJ*:y proceedlna, and wu never formally served, whether In penon, by certified mail,
or In any other formal manner with service of the Debtor's Motion to find CRA Security
Systemlln contempt, ConllequenUy, I believe the Bankruptcy Court never had penona1
jurild\ctioll over CRA Security Systems In the tint Instance,
12121/1& 1&:&1 "111 2376UII
ESC'1l
~UOI
. .
14. Ala rault 01111 of tI:e Ibovc, C1lA Security 5,.. aeva' hid lilY formal
aatIce or IIIJ ~..I"IM oppartIIIlIy to appear and cIefead dill 1l-',(......1l1 'V"I... to die
fIIIII'J oldie JudI~ wtdda tallOW IOUIht to be eafclcced.
f1Irk .,-... ~, DOt.
'j~
A. SElDIDlS
SWlIIII to IIIIll ~ befon me
dd1~ciay ~~..199::l-
~''"'.. ~
NoIaIy PubIie
NOTARIAL SEAl
DWlELENlG. NcUIY POOIIc
l.-nG\,.lIcJoUUh ~Co.
My CoomIIlI'W &pIres Dec.21. 1997
_.1
DEC-21-1995 15:59
p,og
717 2376019
~u~c,-!~ ~l~
CWITR.. RECOJERV ASSOC.
71m~7m0 P.02
Martha Euter-Wells
Attorn.y It Law
1101 Br.dy Suit. 300
UctnHCI to Practlc. In Iowa. IIIlnoll Dav.nport. IA 521103
3111-322-0455
Fax: 319-322-2300
June 19, 1995
A~_e:r ~
/ ~ z21 q7tf
S~.cey Allen
'P.O. Box 5665
Luthervl1le, MO 21094
ReI Jer..y Ha_
Dear M., Allen:
I under.tand that you repreeent CRA security Systems.
Inclo.ed i. an Order by Judge Ru..ell J. Hill, of the Bankruptcy
Court in the Southern Di.trict of Iowa, granting judgement to .y
client Jeremy Ha_ in the a.ount of $21,500.00.
I a. .eelcing payment of this amount. I am clirecting this
corre.pondence to you .0 that you will have the opportunity to
di.cu.. it with the appropriate per.onnel of eRA security sy.t....
Sincerely,
/)/V)wt~~\J~
Martha Ea.ter-Wells
MEW/dg
Enclo.ure
, ..
Exhibit "A
./ ,.......,.
,
. '. . 0 IJ
.. ,
'.
UNITED STATES BANRRUPTCY COURT ~ rn
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA MAY I 7 1995
EASTERN DIVISION
DEBTOR.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
BANRRUPTCY NO.
CHAPTER 7
94-,&;Q03D
-\ ,."
,....., ."1
.
IN THE MATTER OF
JEREMY JAKES HAMM
. .
~ERL O:B~~TION '1'0 HOLD CREDITOR IN CONTEMPT
I FOR DAMAGES FOR VIOLATION OF THE
DISCHARGE INJUNCTION
JULJ; ....
. :J::tr:
/-Jet. 'I" , ~;)
i ...':If\.lil
..J;Nil '
J ,.i;,
. -~
Thi. ca.e coming on tor hearing on the Debtor's Motion to Hold
eRA Security systems in contempt ot Court tor violation ot the
Di.charge Injunction ot 11 U.S.C. 5 524,
IT IS FOUND that on April 7, 1995 the Debtor tiled the
Petition in this case. Notice of commencement ot the Chapter 7
ca.e was sent to the creditors on April 20, 1995. The court tind.
that Spencer Gitts, North Park Mall, Davenport, Iowa and
continental Collections, P.O. Box 40441, Rochester, NY 14604 were
li.ted on the mailing Matrix, and Notice was given to them on April
20, 1995. On July 26, 1994, Discharge was entered in this case and
Notice was given to spencer Girts and continental Collections.
On January 3, 1995 the Debtor tiled a Motion to Reopen and the
Court approved it on January 26, 1995. The evidence now betore the
Court shows that the Debtor received multiple letters trom
1
(}5/~
Exhibit "B
t. . J
i
()
~)
'.
:::r~
CRA security sy.t.m. and trom attorney. hired by CRA security
sy.t.... The amount ot the original debt was less than $50.00.
upon receipt ot the lett.rs, coun..l tor Mr. Hamm, Martha Easter-
Well. contacted CRS Security Systems and advised them that the debt
bad b.en d!8charged in bankruptcy. There were also telephone calls
to CRA Security sy.tems in which CRA Security systems was advi.ed
ot the bankruptcy di.charge and in which they re.ponded that they
were not bound by oral notice ot the Di.charge.
Ev.n att.r notice orally and in writing, CRA security system.
proceeded to contact counsel to collect the debt. Martha Easter-
Well. contacted counsel and advised them ot the bankruptcy
di.charge. Counsel stopped contact immediately. They were well
advi.ed to so.
The Court tinds that under 11 U.S.C. 5524(2) that the
di.charge operates as an injunction against the commencement or
continuation ot an action or employment ot process or act to
collect any discharged debt as a personal liability ot the debtor.
The Court tinds in this case that the facts indicate that CRA
security Systems clearly and intentionally violated
11 U.S.C. 5524(2). They have continued process to collect the debt
even atter being intormed ot the bankruptcy discharge. The record
will reflect that CRA security Systems received notice of this
hearing and notice ot the pending contempt proceeding and have not
responded. The first notice was tor the hearing on March 17, 1995.
CRA Security systems and counsel for CRA Security systems
2
, .
'.
"
()
r)
.;
4i4 not appear. The second hearing Notice was for May 3, 1995 at
2130 p.m. an4 they faile4 to appear and counsel faile4 to appear.
The Court rules that sanctions shou14 be imposed. Insofar as
Efron , Efron and Krevsky , Rosen, the Debtor has not aske4 for
sanctions because they terminate4 contact immediately upon being
advised of the bankruptcy 4ischarge.
:=--
Insofar as sanctions, the record will reflect that the debtor
18 asking for fees of $1,500.00. The Court finds attorney. fees in
the amount of $1,500.00 are reasonable.
Insofar as punitive
damage., local counsel will have to employ counsel in the U.S.
District Court in which LeMoyne is located unless counsel for the
4ebtor is wUling to go there herself. To interest counsel in that
district, the amount of the judgement will be determinative. In
ad4ition, some of these businesses look at punitive damages as a
business expense. This Judge wants to put CRA Security System and
other businesses on notice that if there is a phone call indicating
that there is a bankruptcy, they need to stop and check it out.
Punitive damages in the amount of $20,000.00 and attorneys
fees in the amount of $1,500.00 are ordered and JudlJ1llent is granted
therefore.
Date: MlI.'1 17,./ q9S
4.-40
Russ 11 J. /HUf
Judge, U.s./Bankruptcy Court
Southern District of Iowa
3
CS'IITlIi'ICATE OF SERVICE
I, Muk D. Bradshaw, Esquire, hereby certify that on this 28th day of December,
1995, llIerVed a true and correct copy of the foreaoina via United States first-class mail,
posta&e prepaid, upon the followina:
Martha Easter-Wells, Esquire
601 Brady Suite 300
Davenport IA 52803
By:
Eel! SEAMANS CHERIN " MEI.LOIT
~\\b~
Mark D. Bradshaw, Esquire
I.D. No. 61975
Christopher M. Cicconi, Esquire
1.0. No, 19331
One South Market Square Buildina
213 Market Street
P.O. Box 1248
Harrisbura PA 17108
(717) 237-6000
1<',
t ,;
Attorneys for Defendant
CRA Security Systems
95261,1
"
~ C"... ?::;
0
I~ C", .!-
C.....
sti:
:r.: ~,
.:-:
-r" Ll.. C);:j
B: '", .....
n;) ;'il?
N "J -<~
~rl t.J lil;d
F L<I !:1:1...
C;I
ll. In :j
0 en u
~ 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
(:) 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
:II
21
22
Zl
:at
25
"wi
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
JEREMY JAMES HAMM. : IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:
VS
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS, :
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:
NO, 95-7095 CIVIL TERM
DEPOSITION OF: HAP SEIDERS
TAKEN BY: PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER
BEFORE: ANTHONY J, BALSHY, REPORTER
NOTARY PUBLIC
DATE: DECEMBER 2 . 1996, 10:30 A.M,
PLACE; ECKERT, SEAMANS. CHERIN & MELLOTT
213 MARKET STREET
HARRISBURG. PENNSYLVAN~ ,.0 ()
a, "
-of'" 0 1
,.,
C'Jl}' n "\~
~~.;! to) "
(j~ l.. 0 -'J
~ ,. . ~:B
~Lj ~
..;,c: - -~O
;,--:: c.' N ;;jm
APPEARANCES: ,;"c:
~~ .. .",
- ~
BRUCE A, GROVE, J R.. ESQUIRE -. t" ....
FOR - PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER
ECKERT, SEAMANS. CHERIN p, ~ELLOTT
BY: MARK D. BRADSHAW, ESQUIRE
FOR - DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT
GIUIIN . LOftlA 1"'ORrING IlftVICI, UOI 'Alii" Oft.. IUITI .. Hla., 'A 17110 717,"""'501 Oft "loo.:ua.."71
g
1
2
3
4
II
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
0 13
14
111
16
17
18
19
:lJ)
21
22
Zl
24
25
V
fOR PLAINTIFF
Hop Seiders
IABLE OF CONTFNTS
lliT.NE..S.S.
DIRFCT
4
FXHIBITS
PlAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NO.
No, 1: Letter doted September 23. 1994
No, 2; Letter doted October 5.1994
No.3: Letter doted October 28. 1994
No, 4: Letter doted November 3. 1994
No, 5; Letter doted November 15. 1994
No, 6: Letter dated November 29,1994
No, 7: Letter doted December 8. 1994
No.8; Let ter do led January 23. 1996
No, 9; Notice and Order for Hearing
No. 10: Notice and Order for Hearing
2
PRODUCED
AND MARKED
15
28
30
40
48
49
49
57
75
78
GilGER. LORIA REPORTINQ SlRVICI:, UOI "ARK DR" SUITE I. "IG., 'A 17110 71"UH501 OR "loo.aU'U17
~
1
2
3
4
2 5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
0 13
14
15
t6
17
18
19
:I)
21
:ll
ZI
24
25
\."J
HAP SEIDERS. called o~ 0 witness, bf!lng
sworn, testified os follows:
MR, BRADSHAW: I Jus t wont to pu tone
thing on the record, Mr, Grove, and that is that as
you know from the response to your petition that we
filed in the brief. it is eRA's position that any of
these so-called notice issues in the cose have been
foreclosed now for eighi months or so, Nevertheless
we hove made Mr. Seiders available this morning in
light of the fact that I hod requested that the court
stay any discovery obligations and the court did not
see fit to execute that order, So it is our
understanding thot there is on obligation to engage
in discovery and mindful of that we hove presented
Mr, Seiders, We do not by presenting him. \.,e
certainlY do not waive or acquiesce any ideo that the
discovery is appropriate under the circumstances,
MR, GROVE: I think your recent answer
and petition hove you protected along that line. but
since you raised that. that's prohoblY 0 good place
to start after I get Mr, Seiders' nome.
GllalR . LO"!A IUPO"TING SIRVICE, UOII PARK DR., IUllI eo Hla., ft" 17110 717.UHISQI OR 1'100'122'.1177
3
4
.,
[;;J
1
DIRECT EXAMINATION
2
3
4
7
BY MR, GROVE:
a Mr, Seiders, Hould you \live your full
nome please?
A Including middle?
a Well. Initial.
AHa p A. S el (j e r s .
a And could you spell your lost nome?
A S-E-I-D-E-R-S.
a Are you cunnected Hith 0 business
entity knOHn os CRA Security Systems?
1\
6
8
9
10
11
o
12
t3
A
a
Yes.
14
And whot is your copocity Hith CRA
m Security Systems?
ffi A My capacity at this time or Hhat time
n frame ore He talking about may I ask?
18 a Let's go bock to 1994, We Hill soy
19 January 1994, At that time. were you on officer Hith
~ eRA Security Systems?
21
22
A
a
Yes,
And whut officership for Hont of 0
~ better phrase were you holding?
24 A I IWS till) -- I bel ieve I wus the
25 president in 1994.
.,;"J
GIIGIER a LORIA "(PORTING SERVICE. 2.08 !lARK DR., SUITE e. Hla., PA IlIlO 717.UH801 opt 1-100'222'."77
Ld
1
2
3
4
1\
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
111
16
17
18
19
:I)
21
rz
:l3
:at
2li
o
v
5
a Well. let's come forward to calendar
year 1995, Were you the president of CRA Security
Systems in 1995?
A Yes, I LJelieve so.
a Well. let's come into 1996 for purposes
of clarHication. We're now, what. December 2,1996.
Hove you been president throughout this calendar year
of CRA Security?
A No. I hove no t ,
MR, BRADSHAW; If I may for purposes
of clarification. I notice that the caption refers to
the defendant as CRA Security Systems, The actual
corporate designation of the entity is Capitol
Recovery Associates, Inc" which trades and does
business as CRA Security Systems,
BY MR, GROVE:
a I was obout to osk you thot, The
caption of the cose has consistently been CRA
Security Systems. but your attorney Just clarified
what that is,
A I'm ulod that wos clarified because at
one time there lias a separatl! corporation, CRA
Security Systems. ond I hoven't been too involved in
the corporate books or so forth for 0 while. so I
don't r!!Call lillat 1I1l1t wn..,
allGIN . LO"'A ft.,OftTINa _."VICI, 2.08 r."tc Oft_. IUllI .. Hla" PA 17110 '17.a"HaOI 0" ,'Ioo.au,..n
6
r]
L..:J
1
MR, BRADSHAW:
I Just wunt to make
2
sure the record is cleur becouse you osked him If he
was president of CRA Security Systems,
3
4
BY MR. GROVE:
a
Who fuunded Capitol Recovery
1\
6
Associates, Inc,?
7
A
I believe it was Ston Morkowitz, the
8 entity wos whenever I first become -- what wus that
9
10
11
word you used -- connected with the company, The
onlY -- Stan Markowitz was the owner at that point
and I don't know if he was the incurporator or not,
12
a
A
You did not incorpurate this business?
I don't think so. We hod incorporated
()
13
w or reincorporated in approximately somewhere in the
15 late' 80s or maybe 1990, and I' m not sure of the
ffl reason why and I don't wunt to suy something that's
u not true, I JU5t honestlY -- I didn.t research that
m in preparation for the discussiun here today,
19
a
Well, I don't want to go on and on, I
~ think it's important to know the correct designation
~ of the business which you hove indicated it's
~ correct, what its correct designation should be,
~ Correct me if I'm wrong. You hove indicated that you
24 have been in 1994 oml 1995 YOIJ \~ere the pres ident of
~ this designated business, is Lhat correct?
I..,)
GIIGIR . LORIA REPORTING IIRVICI. 2..08 PARK DR_, SUITE eo HIQ., PA 17110 7l7'UHBOI OR "loo.aU'.'11
Q
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
t2
0 t3
14
15
16
17
18
19
\l)
21
22
Zl
24
25
J
things that Mr, Sei(lers hod in the CRA file relating
to Mr. Hamm were LronsmiLtol letters from me,
pleadings thot hud been filed ei t11er in bonkrupLcy
court in Iowa or here in Cumlwrlund County, and
pursuant to your document reques L, I hod asked
Mr. Seiders Lo search his office and determinB
whether there were additional documenLs available,
What he has brought with him this morning is 0
printout from their computer system that shows all
activity -- welL you con ask him what it shows, but
it. s the cOlllputer pr in touL rela ting to Mr, Hamm, and
we can make additional copies of this, PresumablY
you may want to review it or mark it,
BY MR, GROVE:
a So the short onswer to my question is
he has brought with him who Lever he has at the office
relative to the Homm matter?
A That is correct,
a One or two more short questions on
background here, I believe you indicated that this
business was founded by an individual by the nome of
Markowi tz. is that corrBC I:?
A To the best or my knowledge, yes, I
hod indicaLed specifically that Mr, Morkowitl was the
owne r I~ hen eve r T Cll 10 l' on bOll rd. I 110ve no know ledge
GEIGlR a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK DR_. SUITE I. HIIG., PA 17110 1n'UH~O' OR "800'222."877
8
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
1JI
21
22
Zl
24
25
o
u
10
corporation as yaur profession since 1984 ta the
present?
A Yes, In varying copaci ties, yes,
a Within CRA Security Systems, varying
capacities within that company?
A Or Capital Recovery or whatever it
might be,
a Capital Recovery what?
A Associates, Again, the corporate
structure I Just didn't prepare for anything on that,
Mr, Grove. but as I mentioned beforfl, there was I'm
pretty sure the corporate nome is Capitol Recovery
Associates, and it mayor may not be an inc, on the
end of that. and at one time there was CRA Security
Systems which was a separate corporation,
a Also founded, if I could interrupt you,
by Mr, Markowi tz or incorporated by Mr. Markawi tz?
A It wasn.t incorporated by me,
a And you don't know who incorporated it?
A I personallY do not know, I could
only you're talking about CRA Security Systems
now, cfJrrect?
a Correct,
A I personally don't recall. That wos
probably in the '80s some time.
Ollal" a LO"IA lu,aRTINGi nRVICI, 2..08 ,ARK DR., IUllI I. Hla" ,. 17110 717'Ul-IISO' OR ,'IOO'::Iu.n17
o
1
2
3
4
1\
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
13
14
11\
16
17
18
19
:Il
21
22
ZJ
:M
211
<.)
4
v
11
a What is the business purpose of CRA
Security Systems or CRA Recovery?
A Or Capitol Recovery?
a Copital Recovery. What is their
primary business purpose?
A To collect -- today or over the years?
a Well, we'll start with today,
A To collect bod checks,
a Is that their sole purpose?
A That's probably speaking from 0 revenue
standpoint, that probably comprises the majority of
the revenue,
a Now, you hove been with them since
1984, That's approximately 12 years, Are you saying
that the business purpose is to collect bod checks in
the last 12 years? In other words, some business
entity who has received 0 bod check would contact you
for the specific purpose of collecting this bod
check? Is that what you're saying?
A Well, to answer your question there, it
began as -- whenever I Joined UP or whenever Stan
Markowitz hired me, It wos a collection agency,
a And what by definition, your
definiUon, is () collection uu(!ncy?
A An en I:i t Y tllU t colle c t s - - 0 l III r d
Glial" I LORIA ItIlPOJlTINQ .."Vlel, 2408 "'"K DR., SUITE I. HIG., ,A 17110 717'''.1-1508 0" l'IOQ'2U'41517
12
~
L:::J
1
party entity that attempts to effect collection for
the first party,
2
3
a
Sa to use an example in this cuse, I'm
4 talking about Mr, HamnJ's case, where he -- and I'm
7
8
saying this for point of argument. We're not going
to indicate whether it's fact or not -- where he owed
a business known as Spencer Gifts some money, by your
definition eRA -- and I'm shortening it,
II
6
9
10
A
a
Okay,
Would at the request of a Spencer
11 Gifts, to use that as an example, that business
~ entity, attempt to collect money owed Spencer Gifts
o
13
In this case by one Jeremy James Hamm?
14
A
If I could Just clarify briefly, we
15 started as a collection agency which handled debts
ffi among other things, Today we specialize in handling
17 bad checks, My feeling on this Hamm to clari fy it.
~ Spencer did not extend him credit, He took
W merchandise from the Spencer store and gave them 0
~ bogus or counterfeit negotiable instrument to gain
n that merchandise for his own lise, There was no
~ credit extended or anything like Lhat,
ZJ
a
So you ore familiar with Mr, Hamm and
u his involvement with Spencer Gifts by virtue of your
~ answer there?
v
GIIGIR . LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2..08 PARK OR.. SUITI I. HIO.. PA 17110 7l7'S"H!SOI OR l'loo.au.un
r;]
1
2
3
4
II
6
7
6
9
10
11
12
0 t3
14
III
16
17
18
19
:II
21
22
ZI
:u
25
U
13
A From what r have reviewed on the notes
and documents. yes,
a And your review of your file that
you've indicated you hod here I assume that you have
indicated you looked it over before camino here
today, Am I correct in stating that your business.
CRA. made on effort in September of 1994 to collect
certain monies owed Spencer Gifts by Jeremy ~amm?
Maybe your attorney could ossist you with that if you
can't see,
A We mode an effort to correct. you know.
a bogus check that he had passed, if thot falls into
the definition, I don't believe that falls -- and
this may be beyond the scope here. but there is a
distinct in the FDCPA, there is a distinct difference
between collecting 0 debt where someone extended
someone credit and said they could pay them later and
going into a store ond taking merchandise out of
their store ond givino them some sort of deceptive
instrument so that they could get the merchandise out
of the store, There is a distinct difference there,
MR, BRADSHAW: I om Doing to advise
you to constroin yourself in your answers to
onswering Mr. Grove's quesl.lon, I think Mr, Grove's
question to you HO, 1"lwlher or not Mr, Hamm's account
GIIOI" I LOftlA RIPORTING SERVICE. ;UOB PARK DR., IUITE I. Hla., I'A 17110 117-5'*1-1'501 0" 1'IOO'ZZZ"D11
~
Q
\J
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
al
21
:12
ZJ
24
25
was placed with CRA in September, And I dan't know
if you could tell from revIewing this document
whether or not that's the case, That was his
question,
BY MR, GROVE:
Q September of 1994.
A If that was the question, accarding to
this, he had a there was a bod check that was
placed with us on September 22, 1994,
a September 227
A Accord1ng to our notes, yes,
Q And do your notes indicate that on
September 23, 1994, CRA Security Systems of 324
Market Street. Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, wrote
Mr. Jeremy Hamm regarding this check situation?
A These notes do not indicate that, but I
guess I would assume that normally whenever a check
is placed that the next day, the next business day
that a letter is generated.
Q To try to keep this on track so we
don't meander allover the place, I am going to have
this marked, I am looking at a letter doted
September 23. 1994, on a letterllead of CRA Security
Systems directed to Jeremy Homm of Bettendorf, Iowa.
correcL. with 0 mailing llddress, dealing with a
GIlGER I LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2..08 'ARK DR., IUITI: .. HIG., PI. 17110 717.5otH&a. OR "100'222'.1577
~
L.J
.:)
5
.~
2
:J
4
5
Ii
7
8
o
III
11
12
1:1
1-1
Iii
III
17
18
III
:!I)
21
~
ZI
21
2fi
15
returned check the tutol omollnt due ond signed IJY
Richard Lyons. Collection Deportment. Who is Richard
Lyons?
A To the best of my knowledge, Richard
Lyons is a desk nome that we use which Is registered
in 0 few states,
(Letter doted September 23. 1994.
marked os Plaintiff's Exhibit No, I.J
BY MR, GROVE:
Q So you ore saying thot there is 110 live
real breathing individual at CRA Security Systems in
Lemoyne. Pennsylvania. who goes by the name of
Richard Lyons?
A That's correct,
Q I ShOH you the letter I Just referred
to which is Plointiff's No, 1, Does that appear to
be your letterhead doted September 23, 1994?
A Yes,
Q Do you see the signotllre of one Richard
Lyons collection department at the bottom of the
letter?
A Yes,
Q Whu at eRA HaS responsible for the
sending of that letter to Mr. Hamill?
A TtH!se ure genl!rotecl by -- they're
_ GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK OR. SUITE S. HBG. PA 17110 717.~,nl~08 0" 1'800,222-4517
16
- ._-.-._--------~ --.-------
'"
2
a
~
5
II
7
Il
9
III
\I
12
0 1:1
H
15
u;
17
IH
l!l
~l
21
2.!
:1:1
\!'l
2!i
V
computer generated,
At whuse direction?
a
A
a
The CUIIII.lU tel'.
Who usks the computer to generate a
let leI' to Mr, Jeremy Hamill of Bettendorf. Iowa?
I don't -- YOll mean whu is in charge of
A
the
What individual at CRA would have seen
a
to it that the computer generated that exhibit,
Plaintiff's No, 1?
I hunestly don't knuw who was in charge
A
of the programming at that time,
You were the president in 1994?
I think so.
Who formulated or hod office poliCY at
a
A
a
CRA in 1994?
A
Q
I honestlY don't knuw,
You're saying that os president of CRA
in 1994 on on account such os Mr, Hamm's here, you
hove no idea what the campany poliCY was with regard
to the issuance of such 0 letter?
I know whot the cumpany poliCY was.
A
That's not whol you hod osked me,
What is or whot was the company poliCY?
a
\ A The compony pul icY -- should I ge t into
_ GEIGER It LORIA REPORTltlG SERVICE 2"'08 PARK DR., SUITE B. HBG. PA 11110 711'~"H500 OR 1'800'ZZ2'4~71
~
:!
:\
4
Ii
II
7
II
!l
10
II
12
~ 1:\
.f.
1-\
15
III
17
III
1!l
:!II
21
:!:.!
:!:I
~I
2f)
'..J
17
the volllme, and so forth?
a What was the company policy with regard
to 0 collection account that you have indicated come
into CRA on September 22, 1994. that led to the
genera tion 0 f tho t September 23 let ter to Mr, Homm?
A Well. first of 011, this lias 1I bad
check. It wasn't 0 collection account,
a We understand that, All I am asking
you is how did it come about that CRA after September
22, they opened the Spencer GiFts account with regard
to Mr, Hamm that one day later that letter was sent
to Mr. Hamm?
A Well. should I go bock to
a Very simple question, Mr. Seiders. You
have indicoted that your company records indicate
we are going to have to some way or another get this
on course and not be evasive which is exactly what's
happening here, Now. if you want to soy you don't
know how that Septembec 23, 1994 letter was sent by
CRA. at whose ins tance or reques tit was put into tile
computer to be sent. then jus t say I don't knol1.
A I thought I'd clarified that, The
computer. the programming is set up to automatically
mail this. As I had mentioned earUer, wp. recpl.ved
it on 9/22/94. and the next business day IJarring (Jny
_ GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2406 PARK DR, SUITE B. HOG. PA 11110 717.!l41.I!lOB OR 1'80Q'222'4!171
/""',
1
2
:\
.1
5
Ii
7
R
9
\U
II
12
,.....'.... 1:\
,
'-'
1-1
Iii
Hi
17
IH
l!l
21)
21
22
Zl
2\
~)
li!
____,___~.._._____.__.______m._.._ ._.__._ ------------
computer downtime 01 nnylh1ng, Lhe letter is
generoted and moiled.
Q And that is company policy or was
compony policy at thot time when you were president?
A Yes.
Q Let's toke it one step further. Thot
letter is moiled to Mr, Hamm for po1nt of argullwnt ut
his address lhece 1n 101'10, SOY Mr. HllInm would call
CRA after he received that letter and would say I
would like to speok with R1chard Lyons from whom I
just got a letLer, What would he be told?
A I honestly don't know thut, Thot is
something the collection munager could nnswer,
a All riyh t. Wtwn that 1 et tel' \'/Os sent
on September 23, 1994, \iho was the collec Liun manager
for CRA?
A I don't know,
Q You ore saying thot 05 president of eRA
in September 1994, you do not know who your
collection manager wns?
A I knoli 1./l11l Ile 1 s todDY, I don't know
who Iw was then, YOll" anSliel' is correc t:.
Q YIlU l\IIve 1111 idea who till! gentlp.mlln 1'105
t hat 11 e ode d yo II r co 11 e c II un rJ e port 1Ill? n l inS P. p t (! mlJl! r
of 1991~?
..' GEIGER III lORIA REf'OHTtNG SERVice, HOlt PARK DR. SUITE D. HOG. PA 17110 717-e.H!lOR OM HtOO'Z22'''!I17 -
D
.:.)
6
.-.J
2
:I
4
Ii
Ii
7
II
o
III
II
12
1:1
'"
15
\Ii
17
III
I!l
:!II
21
Z!
:!:I
2t
2!i
19
Not off the tall of my head, sir.
Well, toke 0 guess,
Well. tll15 is sUPllused to be trutllful
A
a
A
under oath,
Q You Just soid you really don't know off
the top of your head, Could you toke 0 guess?
A 1'11I tllinking riuht now I really
couldn't take a guess os to who was the collection
manager,
a
A
Can't cOllie Ull with any names at all?
And tllen beside that. the -- there
should I get into corporate structure at all?
a No. I would nppreciote it if you Just
answered tile questio"s.
A I con't tnke 0 guess.
a Would the individual who was collection
manager at thot time in 1994 whose name you can't
recoll or you Just don't know who thot individual
was, if MI'. Hamm coiled in, would he reach someone
when he asked for Richurd Lyons?
A As opposell to whot?
o Is thut u difficult question? You sent
ale t t e r !. 0 IIW h 0 \~ 0 I' 0 III e r I~ ear ego i nut 0 no il
this down, I lhlnf: it's a very silllpln question,
There is 011 Udlllissioll lhnl (] leU!!ris sent, computer
i s
._ GEIGER & lORIA REPONTlNG SERVICE, 2408 pARK DR. SUITE D. HUG. PA 17110 717'~41'ISOB OR I'BOO'2;U'4~77 -
,~-....
2
:I
4
5
II
7
8
II
10
11
12
, 1:1
,......
1.\
Ifi
IIi
17
IH
I!l
:!l
21
2'.!
Zl
24
2:'1
-'......
20
generated Lo Mr. Homm doted Sept ember 2,. 1994.
That' 5 not n problem, The letter wenL out:. lJid JI.
not. sir. nccording to your records?
A
Q
Sure,
Now. I'm uiving Lhe hypothetical. I'm
not going to keep uoing on. and I assume this hoppens
all the time when you send letters to individuals on
bod checks or whatever, I'm giving the hypotheticol
Mr. Hamm on the 25th -- this is 0 hypothetical -- of
September. 1994. receives this letter, goes to his
telephone and calls eRA Security Systems ot the
number indicated, telephone number on this letterhead
and asks for Mr, Richard Lyons from whom he Just
received 0 letter, WhoL would he be told?
A
a
A
a
As I snirl before, I don't know,
You hove no ideo?
I could only engage in conjecture.
Did you not Just soy that he would be
referred to the collection monager?
A
I don't think I said thot.
MR. BRADSHAW:
I'm noL sure LhnL's
what Mr, Seiders soid. I believe what Mr, Seiders
said, ond. of course, \tw record will spl!ok for
itself, but I believe what he sold was that the
collections manager lillulll he involved or In charge of
., GEIGER" LORIA REPORlING SERVICE. 2400 PARt( OR. 5UITE B. HBG, PA 17110 717'!i41'1~08 OR I'BOO'222'4~71
:J
.J
--'
71
2
the routing of such a call,
BY MR, GROVE:
Q You would accept and route such a
telephone call from Mr, Hamm, would you not? I'm
talking about -- I om using Mr. Homm since he's the
one that.s involved in this case. Let's soy I hove
you send me 0 letter.
.'
A Are we still talking hypothetical? I
know fairly well what happens today, This is two
years ago,
Q Well, we liiH Just keep -- you're
indicating you don't know who the collection manager
was, I om asking a very simple question. Would he
be told, Mr, Hamill, thot there is no such individual
os Richard Lyons working for CRA?
A I'm not that close to that deportment.
Q There is no such individuaL is there;
you know that?
A I know from my knowledge I know that in
the collection business you con hove desk names,
Q And Richard Lyons os I understand your
prior answer to 0 prior question is a desk nome?
A Yes,
Q In the 12 years you hove been with CRA,
'84 to pres~lnt, you never tlOd on individual llll.ve ond
a
"
5
II
7
Il
lJ
III
11
12
1:1
\.\
In
\II
\7
III
I!l
:al
2\
22
ZI
2-\
2!")
_ GEIGER A LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2408 PAn I< DR, SUITE B. HBG, PA 17110 717'~4H!108 OR 1'800'jz22'''!!l71
~
.
2
:I
,I
5
Ii
7
8
9
III
II
12
<) 1:1
H
15
iii
17
18
HI
:ill
21
22
:1;\
:b1
2.1
22
breathing by the nallle of Rlcl1l1rtl l.yons working there,
is that currect?
A
1'11I not fumiliur wIth 011 of the
employees, but to lilY knuwle(jge, I knew of none,
a
How big a business Is eRA? How mnny
employees do you have tudoy?
A
Today we unly have about 60 or so, I
think at one point we had considerably more, but we
have done some outsourcing over the post year or two,
(Discussion held off the record,)
MR, GROVE: Mr, Brodshol'l, this is sort
of a gratuitous or whatever the word is, statement on
my part, but I would appreciate you're telling your
client to attempt to be as responsive as possible to
questions so we're not here until 10:00 tonight.
MR. BRADSHAW:
Mr, Seiders, you
understond that it's impartunt to answer Mr. Grove's
question as directly as possible, and if you can't
answer, perhaps you con indicate to Mr, Grove why you
can't answer 50 that we can 1II0ve through this.
A
BY MR, GROVE:
Q
Yes, I understand that.
Or yes or no when I ask 0 question,
Now, with regul't1 to Exhibit L Just one or t\'IO mort!
questions on thut, then hopefully we cun move faster,
-- GEIGER ft LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2.08 PARK OR. SUITE B. HBG, PA 17110 117'~4H~08 OR '-800-222''''71
d
2
:I
"
5
II
7
8
9
\0
II
12
i:.)
\:1
II
15
IIi
7
23
17
IH
I!l
That's the letter of September 23 if your vision
doesn't permit you, 1994. to Mr, Homm, When CRA
accepts a client such us Spencer Gifts or an
account which do you call them. lIccount or client?
A A client,
Q And you've indicated thllt Spencer Gifts
requested your ossistance regarding Mr, Hamm on
September 22. 1994. My question is this: Does CRA
make an effort either by u written form that would be
sent to Spencer Gifts or by telephone or any other
means to ascertain. determine. \~hether the individual
Spencer Gifts is asking you to collect from has. in
fact. filed for bankruptcY?
MR, BRADSHAW: So that I'm sure I
understand the question --
MR, GROVE: A llltle long-winded.
MR. BRADSHAW: Your question is when an
account is first referred to CRA. does CRA before
contacting a debtor in any manner attempt to learn
whether or not the subject of the contact. the person
who is supposed to hove passed a bod check. is in
bankruptcy?
:ll
21
2:.!
M R, G R 0 V E : A 5 f (J r (J s t11 e c 11 en t
knows. the CRA client knows,
MR, BRADSHAW: Do you unrJerstoncl the
\':1
24
2.'")
_ GEIGER ft LORIA REPORTiNG SERVICE. ~..on PARK DR, SUITE B. HUG. PA 11110 711.~"H~OB OR 1.8DO'222...en
(')
2
:I
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
\I
12
,"'" 1:1
)
.~..-t
\.1
15
IIi
17
IH
IU
~)
21
:!:.!
21
21
2,'")
~
2'.
---..-----.---
question?
A
So if the client gives us checks and we
do not ask them oga1n if any of these ore bankrupt,
if lhat's what you're saying,
BY MR, GROVE:
Q
You and lore struggling a bit here,
I'm going to have to learn to be very, very clear I
con see in my questions to you, Let's see if we can
agree on one thing which I believe we have, CRA, did
it not, accept Spencer Gifts os a client with regard
to Mr, Hamm according to your records on September
22. 1994? Yes or no?
A Yes.
Q At the time that CRA agreed to pursue
for want of a better phrase Mr, Hamm with regard to
his financial obligations to Spencer Gifts, did CRA
on September 22 inquire of Spencer Gifts either
orally or in some written form as to whether Spencer
Gifts was aware of any bankruptcy proceeding of which
Mr, Hamm was the debtor?
A
Q
Not to my knowledge,
Does eRA have a policy today thut they
will attempt to verify whether 0 new account. 0 new
client, the collection account. whether the
individual that 1s going to be done in this cuse.
GEIGER It lORI,. R[PORTlNG SERVICE. 2408 PARK DR. SUITE U. HBG. PA 11110 717.!i"H~OB OR "80a';l22.A!l77
~
2
a
.,
5
Ii
7
8
9
to
11
12
0 1:1
"'"
J.t
Ui
16
17
1M
I!)
:!I)
2\
22
:1:1
2-1
2!i
V
25
Mr, Hamm, whether such on individual has, in fact,
filed for bankruptcy?
A
That's not something that I'm, you
know, in chorge of, lwt to the best of my knowledge,
I don't know of anyttling like ttlOt outside of ttle
notice on the first letter to the check writer. It
gives them 30 days to dispute the claim,
MR, BRADSHAH;
Let the record reflect,
if I may, that Mr, Seiders tlos referred to the final
paragraph appearing at the bottom of Plaintiff's
Exhibit 1 directlY above the signature of Richard
Lyons,
BY MR, GROVE:
a
But with regard to my specific Question
os I unders tand his answer, he's unaware of any
policy.
A
a
That's correct, sir,
A follow-up Question to that, Exhibit
1 is moiled to Mr. Homm, Say Mr, Homm writes bock
and you receive it, again 0 hypothetical, You
receive his letter first of O.ltober, 1994, soying,
Dear Sirs: I am in bankruptcy, Enclosed is
pertinent proof of my ongoing bankruptcy or the fac t
I was discharged from bankruptcy, Hod Mr, Hamm sent
such 11 letter in response to Extllbi l 1, wllllt would
_ GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK DR. SUITE B. HOG. PA 17110 117'!I.tH!iOB OR l'BOQ'222'4!117
........
\
2
a
.,
5
Ii
7
8
9
10
11
12
J 1:1
.c_
\01
15
\Ii
17
1M
\!l
~I
21
22
:!:l
:!II
2J)
26
__.__....__. __.. .~_..._~._._._.u....__"..._.__..________~..._..______
eRA policy have heen Hith regord to Mr, Hamm?
A Agoin. 1'10 speaking -- I don't hundle
that area, My main job is sales. but from Hhat r
think is done. the hod check Hould he stotused BKR
Hhich means bankrupt and no fur tiler pursuit Hould be
mode and He Hould. you knoH, notify the client in
bulk in our monthly status report that it was
bankrupt and He Here no longer going to pursue it,
a
Would that hove been your poliCY in
September and October uf 1994?
A
r believe. yes, I Hould believe so.
yes,
a
And the same policy pertains toduy.
November-December 1996?
A
To t.he best of my knoHledge. yes. And
I'm not struggling Hith you. r am just honestly
removed from a lot of the doy-to-day stuff. sir,
a
I would note. sir. tllat you did file an
affidavit in this case indicating your knowledge os
to Hhat had transpired with regard to the Hamm matter
insofar as eRA is concerned,
A
Yes. Thot come from studying the
documentotion,
a
Your nfrillovit mnde no allegations
about ulllers in the business Hho might hove been
_< GEIGER ft LORIA R[PORTlNG SERVICE. 2400 PARK DR. SUITE 0, HOG, PA 11110 717'I!I.H508 OR l.aOQ,;uZ"I!I77
CJ
,:)
8
2
:\
,t
5
1\
7
8
9
10
II
12
1:\
H
15
Iii
17
III
I!J
al
21
2:.!
2:\
2-1
~
27
-.--...--..--------------------.--
involved or that you didn't know anyttJing about ttlis
particular case.
MR. BRADSHAW: If I could interject
for a moment before we go too much farther down this
path, I think the affidavit is directed primarily
towards bankruptcy proceedings that transpired in
Iowa and when CRA first had notice that those
proceedings were ongoing. I don't know that the
affidavit mokes any specific representations as to
Mr, Seiders' involvement in the account at 011 prior
to the rendering of the Judgment in the bankruptcy
court in Iowa, So I'm not sure that it's entirely
fair to suggest that Mr. Seiders has previouslY
represented that he has familiarity that he's now
denying. I don't know that stUdYing the affidavit
would bear that out, I'm not arguing with you. I
Just wont to make sure before we go down a rood that
we're clear between ourselves os to what he has and
has not previously represented to the court,
MR. GROVE: That's 0 fair statement,
BY MR, GROVE:
Q Now, by way of follow-up to the very
lost question ond answer which dealt with if CRA
become aware ttJat someone such os Mr. Hamill \~lIS in
bankruptcy, the file \~ould be put to tled ond Sp(~ncer
._ GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 24011 PARt< OR, SUITE B. HUG. PA 17110 117.54\-1508 OR l'BOO-222'4!H7
...~
l
2
3
4
5
II
7
8
9
10
11
12
~, 1:1
J
14
15
U;
17
IH
\!J
20
21
Z!
:!;l
24
2f)
J
-'
28
Gifts would be so notified, is that correct?
A Yes,
a The (lient, Spencer Gifts?
A Yes,
(Letter dated October S. 1994. marked
as Plaint! ff' s Exhibit No, 2,)
BY MR, GROVE:
a I would show you what has been marked
as Exhibit No, 2 which is 0 letter doted October 5,
1994. to CRA Securi ty Systems. 324 Market Street.
Lemoyne. re Jeremy Hamm. Bankruptcy No, 94-1003
Chapter 7. and it's from Martha Easter-Wells.
Esquire. of Davenport. Iowa, and I would shorl you
that No.2 and ask if your file that you brought with
you indicates receipt of Ms, Eas ter-Wells' October 5.
1994 letter,
A I do not recall ever receiving this.
Q Let me ask you this, The letter you
sent to Mr. Hamm dated September 23. 1994. has on the
letterhead your address of 324 Market Street,
Lemoyne. PA, 17043 Exhibit No, 2 has that precise
address for CRA Security Systems. Since I guess we
better get technical. I assume you were at 324 Market
Street, Lemoyne, PA, \~hel1 t.his let ter was sent to
Mr, Hamm in SeptellllJer of 1994, is ttlOt correct?
__ GEIGER 8- LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2408 PARK DR. SUITE B. HBG. PA 17110 717'!l.H,oe OR 1'800'222-.'77
~
2
a
"
5
,:)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1:1
H
15
U;
~
\"J
29
A
Would it be appropriate for me to
17
18
I!l
expond?
a No, Just yes or no, Were YOII at 324
Market Street or weren't you?
A Yes,
a That letter from Attorney Easter-Wells
to your business dated October 5, are you indicating
that to your knowledge as president of CRA in October
1994 that eRA did not receive that letter?
A I do not believe that CRA received this
letter.
Q Even though it is the business's
correct address?
A Yes,
Q And the lust follow-up Question to
that, and this is based -- this Question is bosed on
a prior Question and answer. had you received this
letter that is Plaintiff's No, 2, As I understand
your answer to a prior Question. you would have
immediately, CRA would have, ceased collection
efforts against Mr, Homm and would have notified
Spencer Gifts of Mr, Homm's bankruptcy?
A Yes.
MR. BRADSHAW: If I could interject
again. we ore going to need someone else's testimony
21
22
2:1
20\
2fi
GEIGER 6 LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, ;UOB PARK DR. SUITE B. HBG.. PA 17110 "117-15""1508 OR 1'800'2Z2'.~77
--
2
:I
4
5
II
7
II
9
10
11
12
0 1:1
11
15
iii
17
III
I!J
~)
21
22
~l
:!-I
2fi
V
30
if we get tho t far in this case as to whether or not
this document that you hove marked os Exhibit 2 was
ever actually sen t, but it appears at least to my
eyes to be 1II0re in the nature of 0 draft of a letter
that might be sent rather than {] final letter that
would have been sent,
MR, GROVE: WelL I can indicate quite
clearly that the pleadings in the bankruptcy court as
filed by Martha Easter-Wells, that letter was one of
the exhibits attached to the subject contempt
proceeding with her affidavit. and I can certainly
see that you get such a COpy,
MR, BRADSHAW: I have reviewed those
documents and I alii aware of Attorney Easter-Wells'
representation that the letter was sent,
BY MR. GROVE:
Q So Just for verification, the file you
brought with you at my request does not indicate any
such letter having been received by eRA?
A That is correct,
(Letter dated October 28, 1994. lIIarked
as Plaintiff's ExlllbIl No, 3.)
BY MR. GROVE:
Q As a result of not receiving that
letter that is Plaintiff's No.2, what I'm holding
- GEIGER.I LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK DR. SUITE 8. HBG, PA 17110 11Hi.H50B OR "800'222'4517
31
-------.----...---------------
0
2
:I
'.
r,
il
7
R
\l
10
II
12
.'''''''' 1:1
\..J
H
15
Iii
17
IH
\!J
:al
21
22
:':1
2-1
2!i
here marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit No, 3 is 0 letter
dated October 28, 1994, Hi th the some coption ns
Exhibit No.1 from CRA Security Systems to Jeremy
Hamm at the very same address that Exhibit 1
indicates again requesting that his unpaid account be
brought up to date. thut contact be mnde CRA Security
Systems. and that this Hould be -- you will receive
no furUler notices signed Richard Lyons, Does your
file indicate that that letter was sent?
A
My file doesn't reully indicute the
letter Has sent. but I would not contest that it
appears to be our letter. and I would agree that a
fallaH-UP lettl!r IWS, you know. routinelY sent.
a Let me usk a Question I haven't asked
you, Does your file that you're holding or that is
before you have copies of Plaintiff's Exhibits 1 and
3? In other words. when you sent the letters to
Mr, Hamm Sl!pternber 23 and October 28, are lhere file
copies maintained by CRA of those two letters?
A No,
a So you're lellinu us no copies ore kept
by CRA of letters sent In t 11 i s regnrd?
A Yes,
Q Is tl101. !>tondllrd business practico?
A Yes,
_ G[IGER a LOR,A REPORTING 5ERYICL. 24011 PARK DR. SUITE O. HBG. PA 17110 717'!l4H~OO OR 1-800'222,,,&77
.'"
9
()
2
:I
4
5
II
7
H
o
10
11
12
1:1
H
15
\Ii
17
1M
I!l
20
21
2:.!
~l
:!ol
2,"')
32
--.--------------..---..-
a So if Mr. Humm would call in respunse
to either of those two letlers, Plaintiff's 1 and 3,
is it your testimony that eRA sitting at the other
end of the line in your offices in Lemoyne would not
hove copies of those tHO letters to refer to when
talking to Mr. HalJlm in Iowa?
A Yes,
MR, BRADSHAW: Your question is
directed to whether or not there would be specifiC
hard COpy photocopies of these correspondence in u
particular file, is that correct? I Just wont to
make sure I understand the question that you hove
asked,
MR. GROVE: I om assuming from his
testimony that he indicated that on September 22
I'm not trying to go on and on -- 1994, he opened 0
specifiC client file titled Spencer Gifts versus
Jeremy Hamm,
MR. BRADSHAW: My only question Just by
way of clarification is that your Question is ore
there physical photocopies in 0 file.
MR, GROVE: Right, And my Quest ion
would be they huve this file. Do they or do they not
lJIoke copies or keep copies in the file, the Jeremy
Hal1ll1l file in this cose of every letllH sent on tile
_. GEIGER iii lORl. REI'ORfI~~G SERVICE. 2400 PARK DR. SUIT[ D. HOG, PA 11110 717-"1'11508 OR 1'800'222"~71
':J
2
:I
4
Ii
Ii
7
8
9
\()
11
12
..~) 1:1
'."J
\.\
\fi
\Ii
17
18
\!I
:!II
21
22
~I
2>\
2!i
33
Jeremy Hamm matter. and apparentlY he's indicated if
I'm correct. Mr, Seiders, that yuu hove or keep no
copies of such collection letters.
A Routinely we do not keep copies. no,
BY MR, GROVE:
a How if this matter wos pursued in a
court of law ogainst Mr. Hamm for collection. would
CRA prove to a court of competent Jurisdiction that
Mr, Hamm was, il1 foct. notified obout his delinquent
obligation to Spencer Gifts?
A Thot rests with the client. CRA i.tself
does not initiate any litigation, It always rests
with the client,
Q Well. soy you turned this collection
matter over to your attorneys for further legal
action ogainst Mr, Hamm. What would YOll give your
at torneys wi th regord to tile delinquency 0 f Mr. Hamm?
Would you give him. the ot torney. copies of
correspondence so if you don't hove copies. you can.t
give him that? What proof do you indicate to 0
lowyer that we contocled Mr, Hallllll on September 23.
1994, by letter. agoin on Octuber 7.8. 1994, and by
pertinent 101'1 gave hilll the statutory notice of his
right to respund unlf plead Hhutever his defense HOS.
how w 0 U I d y l) U r [) t L (] I' n e y k n tHI f; h 0 1 h u d bel! n t1 u n e i f
~_ GEIGER" lORIA RtPORTI~tG 5ERVICt. ;!4011 PARK OR. SUITE D. HOG, PA 17110 711-!I"H!lOO OR H10o.:za:Z."!I77
"
2
:I
'.
5
Ii
7
II
II
10
II
12
0 1:1
II
15
\Ii
17
IH
IiI
:!II
21
:!:!
~I
~I
2fj
V
,II
-----_.~---_._.-- ---.----------
you keep no letter copius?
A Again, that's not something I have
firsthand knowledge of, ~o I am answering here ta the
best of my recollection, We have 0 listing which
shows when the lost contacts were made, how mony
contac ts, how mony phone colI s were mode, if any, and
also the attorney hos, you knoli, lIccess to our
computer files, access to the original source
document, the original bod check. I don't know if
that answers your Question or not, but that's the
best of my knowledge,
Q I think your answer is we could not
give that attorney copies of Exhibits 1 and 3?
A Right, No.
Q Because He don't keep copies of such
letters,
A That's right,
Q Does your master sheet there -- I'm
referring to it as a master sheet -- file master
sheet indicate on it that these two letters were sent
to Mr, Homm on the dotes indicated on the letters?
A No, it does not indicate it on this
sheet,
a May I see thot sheet? Whose writing is
there on this sheet here?
_ GEIGER 4 LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARI( DR. SUITI: g. HUG. PA 11110 11,.!l.U.l!lOB OR ,.80Q'111...!nl
~
()
v
2
:\
,t
5
Ii
7
8
II
III
11
12
1:\
f.I
15
Ui
17
1M
I!J
:Ill
21
to!
2:1
~I
2!i
35
A I do not knoli,
Q You hove no ideo os president of this
company in 1994 whose wrlting that is?
A I do not know. That writing does not
look familiar to me.
a Is it your writing?
A No,
a Would it hove been your collection
manager in 1994?
MR, BRADSHAW: Mr, Grove, I om 90ing to
object. I think Mr, Seiders has answered the
question, He doesn't recognize the writing.
Mr. Seiders earlier testified that there are some 60
employees at the company now and there were
considerably more earlier, I understand your
confusion over his inability to identify the
handwriting, but I think it's understandable, I
think he's answered the Question,
MR, GROVE: Whoever wrote this whosever
handwriting it is. if I'm reuding this correctly os
an example. it has 9/22/95 account placed with CRA,
We're discussing 9/22/94.
MR, BRADSHAW: Con you help where
you're referring to? Yuu're referring to the
handwrilten notulions at the hottom?
_ GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING S[ffVICE, 2408 PARK DR. SUITE B. HBG. PA 11110 711'~.U'1~08 OR 1-800.222..1577
t"""\
2
:1
"
5
Ii
7
8
9
10
t1
12
1:) 1:1
\01
15
IH
17
1H
I!J
:!I)
:!I
Z!
:!:l
:bt
2!l
~I
36
MR, GROVE: Wherever it is. Who t does
that say. account placed 9/22,
A Is there a question. sir?
BY MR, GROVE:
a Well. YOll Ilove testified that the
account Has placed Hith CRA by reading off of that
sheet on September 22. 1994. and looking at that
sheet. it says in Hriting and I assume you were
reading from that handwritten note,
A No, Here is the dote placed.
a Where is that?
A He bounced two checks. The first one
was 9/22 date placed. and he bounced another check
that was placed on November 18,
MR, BRADSHAW: So lie don't get lost.
let the record reflect that Mr, Seiders is referring
to the computer generated typeface near the top of
the document rather than the handwritten notation
appearing at the bottom,
A I hove no idea what that is.
BY MR. GROVE:
a That's not Hhat your own sheet states
what you hove jlJst staled.
MR, BRADSHAW: 1'11I not sure I
understand lihat you'l'e f'llfell'lng to. Could you ask a
._ GEIGER a L.ORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 20&00 PARK OR. SUITE B. HBG, PA 17110 111'~"H~08 OR I'DOO'iZ;.!a,"~77
:J
2
:l
"
5
Ii
7
K
0
III
\I
12
:) l:l
1-1
m
\Ii
17
IK
I!J
:!I)
21
U
~I
21
2!")
37
--.---.-.--.-.--.---
specific question?
BY MR, GROVE:
Q From reading off of this. this master
sheet that he's indicated he brought with him today.
he hod previously indicated that according to his
company records reflected on this sheet. the Hamm
Spencer Gifts account was received by CRA and os he
notes here whoever wrote this. account placed with
CRA --
MR. BRADSHAW; I think you're
mischaracterizing his testimony, A moment ago he
said that he was referring when he gave you the 1994
number to the typewritten material appearing at the
top of the page,
MR, GROVE: We] L but that typewritten
material at the toP of the page, that information is
there is not when the account was placed os reflected
on this sheet, They are noting UP there the two
insufficient fund checks come in. and undoubtedlY it
would appear that's what it is from Spencer Gifts on
9/22/94.
MR, BRADSHAW: If I IIIUY suggest rather
than you and I trying to decipher what the document
IIwans, perhaps you con ask Mr, Seiders to explain it
further,
GEIGER D LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2400 PARK DR, SUITt B. HDG, PA 11110 711.ft"H~OB OR l'800.az;z.,t571
.~
2
:I
,t
5
tl
7
II
9
IU
11
12
,:) 1:1
\-I
15
III
17
III
I!l
~)
21
2!
:!;l
~I
~
38
BY MR, GROVE:
Q It's very simple, SomebodY in
handwriting wrote on here that the account was placed
with CRA 9/22/95, I assume that's a typo or 0
mistake rather?
A Obviously or he wouldn't have received
the letter 0 year earlier,
n And you hove no idea whose writing that
is?
A No.
Q Now. appacently we hove acknowledged
that Plaintiff's Exhibits 1 and 3 were sent. although
no copies of them are maintained by CRA, P1aintiff's
3 was 0 letter doted October 28 to Jeremy Homm from
CRA,
Mr, Seiders. os they say. here we ga
a9ain, You hove indicated that your October 28. 1994
letter. CRA's letter. to .Jeremy Homm you hove no copy
of. but it was undollbtedly moiled, You hove
indicated as I understand it that Plaintiff's Exhibit
No, 2. the Dc tober 5. 1994 letter from Martha
Easter-Wells to CRA Security regarding the Hamm
bankruptcy was not received or you hove no record of
it. is that correct?
A Yes.
_ GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2400 PARK DR. SUITE D, HUG.. PA 17110 117.t1CHtlOB OR I.BOO.Z:U'4!117
:J
\
2
:J
4
5
II
7
R
9
\0
11
\2
."-'" \:1
'.J
\.\
15
IIi
17
IH
\!I
:al
2\
Z!
~J
2t
m
39
-----
a
Now I SllOli you a lelter dated November
3, 1994. six days after your eRA October 28 letter to
Mr, Hamm. and this is sent IJY Attorney Easter-Wells
to CRA Securi ty Systems. 324 Market Street. Lemoyne,
PA, This is short and sweet so I will read it since
your eyes are not good, Dear Creditor:
-- again
refers to Mr. Hamm's bankruptcy -- My client. Jeremy
Hamm, received a bill from you in spite of his
bankruptcy filing, Enclosed is another COpy of the
notice of creditors, Please direct any further
correspondence to me, This is the second
notification on this account,
Do you have that letter or is it
reflected on your file index as having been received?
A
WelL according to the notes on the
computer here, on December 15 we received notice that
Mr, Hamm had filed bankruptcy, Whether that was this
or some other notice. I don't know,
a
A
Q
December 15 of what year?
1994.
But your file does not indicate that
such a letter, Plaintiff's Exhibit 4. was received
from Mortha Easter-Wells?
A
I don't have tlla t. I don't tlelieve I
hove 0 COpy of Ihot individuul letter in the file.
_ GEIGER Il LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK OR, SUITE S. HBG. PA 17110 717-'41-11)08 OR 1-800'222-4571
'1
2
a
4
5
II
7
8
9
10
II
12
.:) 1:1
\01
15
\Ii
17
tK
l!l
~l
21
22
2:1
2\
2!i
,J
40
(Letter dated November 3,1994, marked
as Plaintiff's Exhibit No, 4,)
BY MR, GROVE;
Q Well, now you say you don't believe you
hove 0 copy. I thought you indicated here earlier
that CRA dues not keep copies of letters of this
type,
MR, BRADSHAW: r f I may, I think what
Mr, Seiders suggested was that they don't keep copies
of their own correspondence,
MR, GROVE: But they do keep copies of
correspondence --
MR, BRADSHAW: If I could further
explain what may be Mr, Seiders' confusion on this
point, This letter, and please correct me if I'm
wrong, this letter has been attached to 0 number of
pleadings in the case, His file does contain the
pleadings, and so that moy be the source of the
letter in his file, I don't know,
A Yes,
MR, GROVE: Mr, Brndsllaw, all I am
trying to ascertnin since the central issue in this
case, the Judgment that is clIrrently outstanding, 1s
that CRA did not receive -- now you ore talking there
are two forms of notice here -- did not receive
._ GEIGER" LORIA REPORTlUG SERVICE. 24011 PARK OR. SUITE 0, HBG, PA 17110 717'5"H!i08 OR l'SOO.222.n17
~
2
:I
of
5
Ii
7
8
9
10
11
12
<:) 1:1
H
15
\Ii
17
lH
19
~)
21
22
2:\
24
25
41
notice of the contempt proceeding. and I am trying to
establish that CRA was well aware of this ongoing
bankruptcy of Mr, Hamm and by virtue of the
correspondence thot was exchanged thot led to the
comtempt proceedings, Now, in a nutshell as I
understand your client's position. the exhibits
before him currently were sent by CRA to Mr. Homm but
CRA as 0 matter of company policy does not keep
copies of such letters,
Secondly the reply letters to the
letters CRA sent. the reply letters from Attorney
Easter-Hells. ore not in the CRA file or have not
been so noted as having been received on for want of
a better phrase the file sheet,
BY MR. GROVE:
Q Is that correct what I have Just said.
Mr, Seiders?
A I sort of lost track.
MR, BRADSHAW: I am going to object.
I think I followed it. but I think it was somewhat
long and maybe we can ask specific Questions,
BY MR, GROVE:
Q Mr, Seiders. is it your position
looking ot your file on the Hamm Spencer Gifts case
that you had no idea that Mr. Homm wos in bankruptcy
_ GEIGER 6 LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK DR. SUITE D, HOG.. PA 11110 117-541'1508 0" 1.800'222'4577
('I
2
a
,I
5
II
7
8
9
10
11
12
:J 1:1
1.1
15
III
17
18
\!J
:!)
21
to!
:1:1
~I
2[)
42
until when?
A Until December 15. 1994.
a So you ore. therefore. soying according
to your file that these letters that are Exhibits 1
through 4 which predate December 1994 did not or were
not registered with your company os a filing by
Mr. Hamm of bankruptcy in the state of Iowa?
A I missed that Question agoin. They ore
two different
MR. BRADSHAW; Let me help, Your
Question is is it CRA's position that all four of
these letters were directed before CRA hod notice
that Mr, Hamm was in bankruptcy, Is t11at your
Question?
MR, GROVE: Exoctly.
MR. BRADSHAW: Do you understand the
Question?
A
Yes, These letters predated December
15. yes.
BY MR, GROVE:
a And your company's first knowledge was
December 15. is that COI'rect?
MR. BRADSHAW: Let me clarify because
there ore two separate issues 05 yuu remorked 0
moment ago. One W05 notice that there HaS 0
~ GEIGER 1\ LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2408 PARK DR, SUITE e. HUG. PA 17110 117.Ii"H!l08 OR ,.800.222."'71
d
.'
2
:I
"
5
II
7
8
9
\()
\I
12
'..... 1:1
.~
1,1
15
Hi
17
18
I!l
:Ill
21
22
~I
21
2fi
,J
113
,~-,~---'--'~'-- --_..-~_._,._--------
bankruptcy ond the second is notice that there hod
been proceedings commenced oooinst CRA, 50 if I
understand your question, your Question is was it
December 15 that CRA first hod notice that Mr, Homm
was in bankruptcy,
MR, GROVE: That's what I om trying to
establish,
A The answer is yes,
BY MR, GROVE:
a And does YOllr sheet that you're
referring to there indicate how you became aware on
December 15, 1994, that Mr, Homm hod filed for
bankruptcy?
A The notes soy received bankruptcy
notice filing chapter seven with 0 case number and
then the person' 5 ini tials, LCS, that made that
entry,
a Who is LC5?
A I haven't the slightest ideo,
a You don't hove any idea who worked for
your company, CRA, with the initials LCS that would
have been authorized to make such 0 notation?
A I am sorry, but tllllt is correct.
a No idea? Can't even glless?
MR, BRADSHAW: Objection. Asked and
GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2"08 PARK DR, SUITE B. HOG. PA 11110 117'~"H!lOB OR 1'800'222'''!l11
~.
.')
111+
2
answered.
BY MR. GROVE:
Q The lost exhibit that we discussed was
No, 4 which is Ms, Easter-Wells' Novemher 3, 1994
letter to CRA, Does your file, Mr, Seiders. indicate
that at some point subsequent to November 3. 1994,
that you turned the case over to on attorney, the
file over to on attorney?
A Prior to what dote did yoU SOy?
Q Subsequent to.
A Yes,
Q And when was that?
A ]1/16 according to these notes,
Q And what attorney was it turned over
:I
.t
5
Ii
7
8
9
10
11
12
1:1
H
In
to?
Itl
A Efron and Efron,
Q And Efron and Efron is what according
to your understonding?
A They ore lawyers,
Q Where?
A Indiana I believe or Illinois. I'm not
sure,
Q Has CRA used Efron and Efron in the
post on other matters?
A Yes,
17
18
1!1
:J)
21
22
:1;1
201
21i
GEIGER iii LOAIA RtPORTltW SERVICE. 2..08 PAR"' DR. SUITE B. HUG, PA 17110 717'~"I'lS0B OR 1'800'222'.'"
:J
2
:I
,I
5
Ii
7
II
0
III
II
12
,.-" 1:1
,.)
II
Hi
Iii
17
III
I!l
~l
21
2:.!
:1.:1
~I
:!!)
115
-.-...---.. - ..-------.-----.-------
a WU5 CRA tile entity tllut turned the Homm
mutter over to Efron und Efron in November of 1994?
A
a
Ye~ ,
Wllo Hould have sent the pertinent
paperwork to Efron and Efrun un Mr, Hamm from CRA?
A
a
I honestly don't know,
Wllo at CRA in 1994 November would have
been authorized to turn the Hamm collection matter
over to Efron anu Efroll in Indiana for collec lion?
A
Again, I uon't knuw, We've hod
turnover and I don't remember exactly Hha HaS the
general manager at that time,
a
Would it Ilove been someune wllo held a
Jab title known as general manager Hila would have
prabably don~ it?
A I don't knoH Hho was in chorge of that
at tllat time, Again, I tlUve very 11 tUe con toe I: with
the aperatiuns, sir, I could prObably find out by
looking througll -- have 50llleone look through payroll
record5,
Q
But you ore lIware that Efron and Efron
did do legal Hork for CRA ill November of 1994?
A
Vp s .
MR, BRADSHAW:
So the record is clear,
r Hant it to be nol:ed on the record thut r am giving
- GtlGER 1\ LORIA REPORTING SCRVICE, 2408 PARK OR. SUITE fI, HOG, PA 17110 711'~.U'1~OO OR 1.000.222...511
.']
2
:I
.f
n
Ii
7
H
!l
III
II
12
i -) 1:1
'...,..,
II
l!j
lli
17
IH
l!l
~l
21
'>l
-
~I
24
~
-...)
11(,
YOU leeway to go through 011 of the facts and
circurllstonces I.IHlt leud up to the f.illnu of the
proceeding in bankruptcy, but my understunding of the
specific matter that is before the Court of Common
Pleas of Cumberlond County ot this time is notice of
the bankruptcy proceedinu itself. not 011 the
antecedent events, I am giving you leeway to go
through 011 of that.
MR, GROVE: I ,'/Uuld differ on that,
There is 0 proceeding in Cumberland County for on
evidentiary hearing filed by Mr. Homm in order that 0
common pleas judge in Pennsylvania can determine from
the evid!!nce whether tile contempt petition filed in
the stote of IUlw against CRA WllS, A. justified, and
B, whether under 011 the facts addresses
correspondence, and so forth. CRA did. in fact, have
notice of not only Mr, Hamm's bankruptcy filing in
1994 but the contempt petition and hearings.
MR, BRADSHAW: I won' t further delay
the deposttion by arguing the point now, but I
believe that the petition that you filed will speak
for i tsel f and t~101 I t addresses the issue uf noticl!
of till! contempt procl!edinu ulune and not -- find ltlOt
it would be improper at 1.I1b jllncturll fur 0
Pennsylvonio cUllr t 10 1'551!n1 lolly relit itlllte Ii I If! I her
G[IG[R " LORIA REPORTING SERVice. 2"06 PARK DR. SUIT[ 9. HaG. PA 17110 1IH~.H!108 OR l'OOO,222'''!I77
[J
2
:I
,I
5
II
7
R
!l
to
\I
12
') 1:1
-...;
H
Iii
III
17
18
I!I
~l
21
t.!
~l
21
2!)
It 7
.------.-----.-------.-..-.--..---..........
or not the contempt proceeding in Iuwo wos proper,
My understanding is -- and again this is not the
MR, GROVE: I understand that,
MR, BRADSHAW: My understanding is tlHlt
the proceeding is whether or not the specific
evidentiary issue is whether or not CRA hod notice of
a proceeding against it in the United States
Bankruptcy Court for the District of Iowa,
MR, GROVE: Couec t, and I guess,
Mr. BradsllOli. and I won't go on and on, tile notice
argument is that in a nutshell we, CRA, never
received formal legal notice of these contempt
proceedings, and my position is vis-a-vis an
evidentiary request is what, who were the players
involved, what addresses would the court normally
hove in Iowo, the bankruptcy court been aware of,
and, therefore, to l'lhom were these notices logically
sent,
MR, BRADSHAW: Understood, ond that's
why I'm giving you the leewoy, Let's get on with it,
MR, GROVE: I didn't reolize it would
be such 0 struggle,
MR, BRADSHAW:
T om going to object to
that because I think you hove characterl~ed
Mr. Seiders' reSpllnSl?S \Ilrollgllllut lIlis morninu ns
GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2<100 PARK DR. SUITE D. HOG.. PA 17110 711'5..H508 OR 1'800'2Z2."'~77
t]
2
:I
.,
:;
Ii
7
R
9
10
11
12
'0 1:1
t.I
I:;
\Ii
17
\8
1!l
~)
21
:?2
\!;I
2-t
2f)
48
----~-_._------~---+~-----------
being at one point I think you lIsed the word evasive,
You've referred to a constant struggle, I think
Mr, Seiders is trying to answer your questions. If
you can put the questions to him. we can get on with
this,
MR, GROVE: And lhat.s what we will do.
I will try to speed it up,
BY MR. GROVE:
Q I believe. Mr. Seiders. you Just
indicated November of '94 this matter was referred to
Efron and Efron of Indiana for collection against
Mr. Hamm. I show you Plaintiff's Exhibit No,S which
is 0 letter doted November 15.1994. to Mr. Homm
signed Morlon L. Efron, and I would ask you if that.
A. is the low firm you were referring to in Indiana?
A Yes,
Q And. B, if your file. tile eRA file. has
a copy of that November 15. 1994 letter to Mr, Homm?
A The answer lo that is no,
Q One quick follow-up question, Here you
aware from the Efron low firm that they hod. in fact.
sent such a letter at your requesl to Mr, Hamm?
A
Yes.
(Letter doted November 15. 1994. marked
os Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 5.)
GEIGER III LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 24011 PARK OR, SUITE B. HUG. PA 17110 111-!l4H!108 OR l'OOO'222'''~11
:J
2
:I
"
5
Ii
7
8
II
10
11
12
:) 1:1
"
Hl
lIi
17
18
III
21)
21
22
:1;1
21
2!i
'._.-C
lj9
----------.-- ._-_..~ -.------- ---------"-.-
(Let tel' doted Novelllber 29, 1994, marked
os Plaintiff's Exhibit No, 6,)
BY MR, GROVE:
a By way of follow-up on the Efron and
Efron motter, I show you Plaintiff's Exhibit No, 6
which is 0 letter doted November 29, 1994, from Efron
and Efron to Mr, Hallllll on the subject Spencer Gifts
motter, Some Questions os the prior exhibit, Do you
hove 0 copy of such 0 letter from Efron and Efron to
Mr, Hamm in your file?
A No,
a Were you aware that the Efron low firm
sent it to Mr. Hamm?
A Yes, from my notes here,
a So your master file does indicate that
you're aware that letter was scnt?
A Yes,
(Letter elated December 8, 1994, marked
os Plaintiff's Exhibit No, 7.)
BY MR, GROVE:
a Along the same line, I om looking at
another letter, Plaintiff's Exhibit No, 7, and this
letter is doteel December 8, 199/1, to Mr, Hallllll on the
Spencer Gifts account and signed by Lawrence J,
Rosen, Attorney ot Low, of IInrrisburg, Pennsylvunin,
u GEIGER'" LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 20108 PARK OR. SUITE O. HUG. PA 11110 711'~"H~08 OR I'BOO'222.4!Hl
:J
2
:I
4
5
Ii
7
8
9
10
\I
12
:) 1:1
H
15
iii
17
18
l!l
:!)
21
2:.!
~I
24
2!i
51
policy depending on the oge of the file of purging
it. is thot correct?
Yes,
And whot is your definition of purging
A
a
o file?
A
a
A
a
A
a
is gone?
A
a
To delete it,
Get rid of it?
Yes,
In other liords. no file?
Uh-11Uh,
So if letter copies were kept, the file
Letters copies were not kept,
What is eRA's policy with regards to
how old is 0 file before it is purged?
A I do not knoli.
a WelL you 110ve no ideo?
A No.
a You hod storted to soy here when you
answered 0 prior Question that since this matter is
two years old, it probollly ~lCls purged,
A I know it's probablY -- it could be
within on area -- perhaps more than 0 yeor. but
again, thot's !iomething that's d[!legoted or relegated
to someone else bestdes myself,
_.. GEIGER a LOAIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2401t PARK DR. SUITE S, HBG., Pol 17110 717-541'HIOO OR 1-000'2:22-4511
,..
2
:I
4
Ii
6
7
8
0
10
\I
12
f,:) 1:1
H
Iii
III
17
18
I!J
aJ
21
Z!
:!;l
~1
:!.!i
I.wJ
52
Q When you were subpoenaed to come here
today and were asked to bring with you the file that
you had before you, the HUIlIII1 file, if the file had
been purged, would there be any record whatsoever of
the fact that you had hod Spencer Gifts os an account
relevant to Mr, Hamm?
A 1'111 talking about the computer files
are purged, I'm sorry, I don't --
Q Where did you get the paperwork yoU hod
before you?
A This I got from my corporate attorney,
Deanna Smith, my corporate counsel,
a Are yoU saYing -- and I'm Just confused
here, Are you saYing that you got from your
corporate attorney the paperwork dealing with
Mr, Hall1m?
A Yes, This file here,
MR, BRADSHAW: Maybe I can clari fy.
The single page document that Mr, Seiders has been
referring to which is the cOIl1Puter log with the
handwritten entries on it, according to what he Just
said. was obtained from Deanna Sm! ih, Deanna Smi th
was the in-house lawyer at CRA,
BY MR, GROVE:
Q Obviously she's still employed by CRA?
- GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2"08 PARK DR. SUITE B. HBG, PA 11110 717'~~H~DB OR 1'800'222-4'"
~
1
2
:I
4
5
II
7
8
9
10
11
12
o
1:1
f.l
15
\Ii
17
18
m
:?J}
21
22
Zl
u
53
Yes,
Is she still employed os we speak by
21
A
a
eRA?
A Yes,
a Would she be a more knowledgeable
person about the record keeping of CRA?
A Sure, Yes,
Q Who would be the most knowledgeable
employee that you con think of today that would know
the record keeping procedures and policies of CRA
with regard to client accounts?
MR, BRADSHAW: Let me clarify if I
may, Are you asking him who would be the most
knowledgeable with respect to records os they ore
kept today or as they were kept in the ordinary
course of business in or around late fall 1994?
MR, GROVE: We will start with that.
accounts and files kept at the time of the opening of
this account in September of 1994,
A Again, that would hove been the general
manager which I would hove to check payroll records
to see who it was,
BY MR. GROVE:
Q
there?
You have flO ideo lihether he's still
2!i
GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2.08 PARK DR, SUITE B. H8G., P. 11110 71N~.H~08 0" HI00-222..,77
---
2
:I
4
5
II
7
8
9
10
II
12
1:1
H
15
1fi
17
IH
I!l
21)
21
:?2
~I
:/,t
2!i
V
54
A He's not.
a Thot much you do know?
A Uh-huh,
Q It's a he, He's not there, but his
name you do not know?
A It could have been a she, I could find
out,
Q Would you check?
A I could check,
Q And give Mr. Bradshaw that information.
A Exactly what do you wont to know? What
positions or titles and what time frame?
Q WelL September 1994, October,
November, December of '94, who would be the
individual most knowledgeable in the record keeping
policies of eRA with regard to client accounts, ond
Similarly who was in charge of the collections
deportment or the general manager, whatever Job title
it is,
A Well, there is 0 general manager and
collection manager data entry supervisor and a
variety,
Q September, October, November and
December of 1994, what individual was the collections
manoger und similarly who wos the general manager.
-. GEIGER iii LORIA REPORTING SER\lICE. 2409 PARK DR. SUITE D, HBG., PA 17110 717'!l41-1!l08 OR 1'800-222'4!l77
:J
2
:J
.t
5
Ii
7
l!
9
JO
II
12
~) 1:1
.,./
I.'
Hi
\Ii
17
III
I!l
al
21
22
:!:l
:M
~
55
Now, as Mr, Braushaw has indica ted on a couple of
occasions here today, are you, Mr. Seiders, aware of
the Judgment entered against CRA by Russell J, Hill
of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the
Southern District of Iowo?
A Yes,
Q Are yoU aware t~at that JUdgment wos
entered by Judge Hill in the amount of $20,000 in
punitive damages against CRA and $1500 in attorney's
fees? Are you aware of that?
A Yes,
Q How long has Mr, Bradshaw been CRA's
attorney in this matter? Dues your file reflect?
A In this matter?
Q Yes, the Hamm motter,
A Probably since when I first became
aware of it which was in late June of 1995 I had
mentioned it to Mr, Bradshaw,
Q So would that be the first time
Mr, Bradshaw wos retained by you or by CRA with
regard to the Hamm matter?
A Yes.
Q When you hired Mr, BradsllOw, and \'/as it
yo 1I tho t hi r e u Mr. B I' ads 11 a won be h 0 I f 0 f C R A ?
^ Yes,
GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 24011 PARK DR.. SUITE D. HBG. P. 17110 1IHS"H!108 OR l'80Q.;z:u...e17
I")
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
'--'l
-/'
1:1
I,t
15
III
17
\8
56
Q
A
Q
June of 1995?
A
You personally, Mr, Seiders?
Yes,
And what was your title with CRA in
Not to sound stupid or anything, but I
have to check the corporote minutes, I may have been
president, I am not sure of the timing,
Q But you personally hired Mr. Bradshaw
and his firm, is that correct?
MR, BRADSHAW: So that there is no
misunderstanding, I think to suggest that he
personallY hired us, I don't think you mean to
confuse the issue, but is your Question that he was
involved in hiring us on behalf of the company?
MR, GROVE: Was he the agent or
representative of CRA who hired Mr, Bradshaw and his
law firm,
A
ActuallY it goes back -- I guess the
ill answer to that in short is yes,
al BY MR, GROVE:
21
Q
So the obvious short follow-up to that
~ is you were authorized to so hire this law firm,
~I M r, Bra d s h 0 H 's low fir III , tor e pre s en t C R A?
2-1
2!i
A
a
Yes.
Now, this is \;rHlt I'm obout to ShOli you
GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2400 PARK DR. SUITE B. HUG. PA 11110 711"4\01508 OR l'OOO'22;2:'''!Hl
=:J
2
:I
4
5
II
7
II
9
III
11
12
) \:1
H
\5
U;
17
II!
I!l
al
2\
to!
:1;1
21
2.")
V
57
here is by way of follow-up or clarification as to
several questions you hove Just answered here
previously with regard to the bankruptcy court
Judgment 09ainst eRA, and what I'm holding here as
Exhibit No.8 is Attorney Easter-Wells' January 23,
1996 letter to Mark Bradshaw in which she indicates
to Mr, Bradshaw that she has enclosed a JlIdgment of
the bankruptcy court as' I have Just described to yoU
by Judge Hill and that the date of the issuance of
Judgment was January 19, 1996, The question I have
is I assume YOU and Mr. Bradshaw have discussed this
Judgment of Judge Hill doted January 19, 1996, Yes
ar no?
A Yes,
(Letter doted January 23, 1996, marked
as Plaintiff's Exhibit No, 8,)
BY MR, GROVE:
Q Did yoU discuss with Mr. Bradshaw
relative to this Judgment the certificate attached to
it by the bankruptcy court in Iowa Iclative to the
individuals who were noticed by the court of the
entry of the January 19, 1996 JUdgment?
MR. BRADSHAW: I urn 90ing to object to
this Question U5 invading the attorney-client
privilege, I think if you wont to ask him as you
GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK DR. SUITE S, HBG. PA 17110 717'5.4H!lQO OR "OOO'222'.4!117
n
2
:I
4
5
H
7
II
II
10
II
12
() 1:1
\.,
15
lti
\7
III
l!1
~)
21
22
l!;l
21
2fi
-_..J
58
-~----_._-._--_.._---_.~--_.._--,--------_.._-_._._-_.--~--- .-----.----.-. .
have already had and I have allowed you to without
objection ~Ihen we liere retoined, whether Wl! ho(J
discussions, those sorts of things are finl!, but I
think when you gl!t into specific QUl!stions did you
discuss this, did you discuss t1wt, that does invade
the privilege and I om going to instruct the witness
not to answer the qllestion,
BY MR. GROVE:
a Then I would for purposes of 0
follow-up question indicate Lo Mr, Seiders and he can
correct me if what the bankruptcy court did was
incorrect. The cour t indicates t1lD t they sent notice
of this January 19, 1996 enLry of Judgment to among
others, and I'm only denling with individuals
connected wi th CRA, Efron and Efron, Lawrence J,
Rosen, Richard Lyons, CRA Security Systems, Does
your file reflect that CRA received this January 19,
1996 Judgment in the moil from tile Uni ted States
Bankruptcy Court in Iowa?
MR, BRADSHAW: Again, I don't lIleon to
be cantankerous, As I understand the question, you
have the January 1996 JlIdgmenL,
MR. GROVE: The very latest one,
MR. BRADSHAW: MId your que!; Lion is
whether CRA record!. reflect rr!ceivin9 that judgment,
- G[IGER a LOlftA R[PORTlNG 5tAVltt. 2010U PARK DR. SUITE D. HOG, PA I1l10 111'~"H5DD OR 1'800'222',U~71
~
2
:l
,I
5
II
7
8
9
10
11
12
t') 1:1
H
15
iii
17
IH
\!I
:!II
21
:.!:.!
:!;I
21
2:1
"'-J
59
MR. GROVE: I am looking at and this is
on exhibit all attached. 0 certificate of service
from the bankruptcy court indicating among others
that they sent 0 notice of this entry of Judgment to
Richard Lyons, CRA Security Systems, My question is
does his file reflect the receipt of that notice of
Judgment and/or does he have any personal knowledge
of it, the receipt of it,
MR. BRADSHAW: I want to make sure we
are not getting into compound questions. and I wont
to make sure he understands the question that you
have asked and the question that you have asked.
Please stop me if I om wrong, I am not trying to
throw you off base, The question is whether or not
his file reflects receiving the January 1996 notice
of entry of Judgment?
MR, GROVE: Correct,
A We did receive that because the matter
was involved with Mr, Bradshaw. I would have simply
forwarded it on and it would be a part of the file,
That.s the January . 96
MR, BRADSHAW: If I can c1ari fy, if
your court documents -- we have I believe represented
to the court thut we did receive notice of the
January entry of the order. Your question is whether
__ GEIGER a LORIA "CPORTlNG SeRVICE. HOB PARK DM, SUITE S. HUG. PA 17110 111"41-1'08 OR 1-aOO-222''''77
--
2
:I
10
4
5
(I
7
8
9
III
11
12
1:1
\of
15
u;
17
IH
I!I
60
or not the receipt of the January order is reflected
in the file?
MR. GROVE: Correct, since the court
indicated that such notice Has sent to Richard Lyons.
CRA Security Systems, on January 19. 1996,
A I believe we Hould have received that,
That's '96,
BY MR, GROVE:
a You retained Mr, Bradshaw in June of
'95,
A Yes, I don't believe there is any
problem with that,
a Does your file, what you're looking at.
reflect or acknowledge receipt from the bankruptcy
court of this notice of Judgment?
MR, BRADSHAW: I can represent to you
and you can take a look through this. This is the
affidavit, the cOllrt pleadings which I think you
already have copies of.
:!II M R, G R 0 V E : Ish e Jus t - - i s t hat it?
21 That's the file, the one sheet? Is that it? I
~ Hasn't sure what he hod beneath that sheet,
2:1 A Ye s .
201 BY MR, GROVE:
~l a Tt1at's the flle?
v
__ G[IG[R" LORIA REPORTING SERVlct. 2408 PARK DR. SUITE D. HBG. PA 17110 717.a."'!I0B OR I.BOQ'222.,n17
0
2
:I
,t
5
Ii
7
H
0
10
II
12
(-) 1:1
--
11
Hi
\Ii
17
IH
I!l
:!I
21
22
Zl
~I
2f)
-..J
r,l
_.'--~-- -~"----_.._--
A Yes.
MR, BRADSHAW: Other thon his
litigatiun file unce tile matter WllS referred over to
us which is goinu to include transmittal letters.
cop i e s 0 r pie 0 (Ji n g s. tho t sOI'l 0 f t h 1 n g , I t h ink
what you hod asked us fur HUS his collections file.
and this is the collections fIle undo of course.
there is 0 seporote file which we would keep in the
course of litigation,
MR. GROVE: Hoving been retoined. but
his file. the eRA file is reflected on that single
sheet ond opporently does not reflect receipt of the
January 19, 1996 order of COUI't, bankruptcy court,
MR, BRADSHAW: By which time the lIIatter
was in litigation and was no longer in collection,
MR, GROVE: Well. the question I guess.
is there any acknowledgement of receipt by eRA of
this or ore we sayinu there WllS no file; therefore.
if it cOllie in, I don' t know lillU t happened to it?
A
At tlla t pol n L, I he fi I' S t r liD s III 0 d e
awore of the cllse was frolll Ilnother one or lilY lawyers
in the sumnwr 0 r . 95 whi ch r turned I t over to Mark,
and then in lute foil. Dnd moybe tills Iilll Iwlp, the
sheriff CfJme In (HICI! to 0111' properly nnd still WI) IHlli
no notice uf 1 L. and thol' S lihen Mod, conloc ted till!
_" G[IG[R ft LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, ;'400 pARK ON. SUITE B. HOG. PA 17110 71H14H~08 OR 1'800.;zaZ.A'!I17 -
--
2
:I
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
(:.>
12
1:1
f.t
15
U;
17
IH
I!l
21)
21
22
v
62
:!:l
sheri ff and then in January' 96, which order was
that? Was that the one from Cumberlond County?
MR, BRADSHAW: J f J can help, That was
the second Judgment,
A I am not aware there were two
Judgments, I'm sorry,
BY MR, GROVE:
a It's almost this simple, whether it was
directed to Mr, Lyons of CRA Security from the
bankruptcy court and the question is do you hove a
record of receiving this from the bankruptcy court in
January of this year?
A I thinK that's something that again my
general manager at this time would have intercepted
and hove handled, I don't know when,
a And that name you are going to provide
me with through Mr, Bradshaw?
A That's the current general manager, I
do know his nome,
a How about providing me with that name?
A That's Carl Burd, B-U-R-D, Actually
after I turned it over to Mr, Bradshaw and then Carl
Burd pretty much -- because you communicated with
Carl. I die! not really stay on top of the matter. So
J hove no -- my answer to youc question would simply
21
25
GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2406 PARK DR. SUIT[ B. HBG. PA 17110 711'!14H!10B OR 1-800-222-,"'17
d
2
:I
4
5
Ii
7
II
9
10
\I
12
C> 1:1
1,1
15
\Ii
17
IH
HI
:Ill
21
Z!
~l
2-t
2!)
J
63
be ! don't know nor would I have had any reason to
know in my capacity,
a And apparentlY from what you do know.
there is no written record of such a notice of
Judgment coming in from CRA in January 1996?
A I hones tly don't know. From these
notes here. they don't go that far,
MR, GROVE: And I am going to try this
as No, 7. Mr, Bradshaw, what I was referring to
there,
BY MR, GROVE;
a You referred to yet another attorney
involved on behalf of CRA. and I believe your
affidavit that Mr, Bradshaw submitted to the court in
December of last yeor indicates that that was your.
Mr, Seiders. your first kno~,ledge of the Hamm
bankcuptcy situation. Am I ringing any bells with
you?
A My first knowledge of the Hamm
bankruptcy according to these notes was December 15,
1994, My first knowledge that Mortha Easter had
filed 0 suit of some sort was in the summer of '95.
n I'm looking at your affidavit uf record
in this cose, and I'm reading paragraph two, In late
June of this year, 1995, I fir~t became aware of the
_ GEIGER iii LORIA RtPOHflNG S[ltVIC[. l40n PARK DR. SUITE B. HOG, PA l1110 117'UI'I!108 OR "80Q.azz...,77
...
o
u
2
:I
"
5
Ii
7
II
9
III
\I
12
1:1
H
15
Iii
17
III
III
~)
21
2:!
:1:1
211
2.1
51t
bankruptcy proceeding in the United states Bankruptcy
Court for the Southern District of Iowa involving the
plaintiff herein. Mr, Homm. You're saying in
paragraph three specifically I received through my
counsel. Stacy Allen. and it goes on to enumerate
what you received, Are you looking at that?
A Yes,
a In November of 1994. you were using in
the State of Indiana Efron and Efron in this
collection motter, According to this affidavit. you
hove another attorney in that area by the nome of
stacy Allen. Who is Stacy Allen and where was she
headquartered or where was he headquartered? I'm
assuming it's a woman,
A It is. She was headquartered in
Maryland,
a Whereabouts in Maryland? What town?
A In Baltimore,
a Does she have her own firm? Is she
with a large firm like Mr, Bradshaw is?
A She was on emnloyee for a while of eRA,
ProbablY at that time yes. she worked primarilY
for CRA,
a Well. now you have indicated earlier
today that you have un in-house uttorney and I
_ GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2010tt PARK DR. SUIT[ 8. H8G. PA 17110 117'~"'H!108 OR HIOO'222."'1!l77
~
10
I..J
1
2
:\
.1
5
II
7
8
9
10
11
12
1:\
H
15
III
17
18
I!l
~
21
22
2:1
21
2!l
65
believe you gave her nome,
A Yes.
a Are you saying that stacy Allen was
also at one point on in-house attorney for CRA?
A Yes, That would be fair to SOy,
a And con you indicate what year stacy
Allen or years was with CRA os in-house counsel?
A ProbablY from 1992 through 1995, late
'95. She hod also left for 0 small period in there
and then come bock Just for accuracy sake.
a Do you hove to your knowledge the
current whereabouts of Stacy Allen?
A Yes,
a Where is she?
A In Maryland.
Q Do you hove on address?
A Yes,
a Could you give it to us?
A She's at 1513 Norman Drive in
Luthervil1e,
Q Is that her low office to your
knowledge?
A I believe it's her home, 1513 Norman
Drive in Lutherville.
a NOlL this affidavit that we ore
__ GEIGER II LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, z,.aon PARK DR. SUITE O. HSG. PA 11110 717'!I.t"I!lOB OR 1-000-222-."17
,..
2
:J
-1
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
1"
0 1:1
1-1
15
16
17
IH
I!l
:!J)
21
22
:!:I
24
2!')
V
66
disCUssing here indicates that in June of '95 YOll
first became aware of a bankruptcy proceeding
involving Mr, Hamm, Yet I believe you testified here
earlier that in December of 1994. YDU first became
aware of Mr. Hamm's bankruptcy proceeding,
A Well. this was when I first knew about
it because routinely I Just don't know about that
stuff, I was going from the notes which 011 of my
testimony hos been from these notes, I had no
personal knowledge of, you know. the maiL and so
forth, that goes through there,
Q So the file sheet. for wont of a better
phrase, indicates that CRA first became aware of
Mr. Hamm's bankruptcy proceeding in December of 1994.
is that correct?
A Yes,
MR, BRADSHAW; Can I ask for a
clarification on bankruptcy proceeding because again.
it's as though there ore two levels of notice? There
is Hamm's bankruptcy which could be a bankrllptcy
proceeding which would be the chapter seven itself.
and then there is Homm's action against CRA which is
certainly also 0 related proceeding or bankruptcy
proceeding. and I think that may be part of the
confusion,
,
_" GEIGER II LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2406 PARK DR. SUITE B. HUG. PA 17110 711'5~H50B OR 1-800'222-4577
I
2
:I
4
5
Ii
7
R
9
III
II
12
':) \:1
H
15
Iii
17
lH
19
:Ill
21
22
:!;I
21
2!i
67
MR, GROVE: I am onlY trying to pin
down his personal knowledge as president of the
company so we all cleorlY understand, and as I
understand what he Just said is from the file sheet,
the master sheet. whatever I shollld call that.
computer printout, that sheet reflects that CRA first
became awore of Mr, Hamm's bankruptcy proceeding.
quote unquote. in December 1994, is thot correct?
A Yes, That's correct,
BY MR, GROVE:
Q But what you are saying as I understand
it. Mr, Seiders, you personallY were not oware of
Mr, Hamm's bankruptcy situation in December 1994?
A Yes, That's exactlY right,
Q You personallY did not become aware of
it until June 1995 when in communication with a
former in-house counsel by the name of Stacy Allen?
A That is absolutely correct. yes,
Q Now, maybe you can as they say in
sports tell me who's on first and who's on second,
Starting in September of '94 and coming through
December of '94, you have testified to as per the
exhibits thot CRA utilized the legal services of
Efron and Efron in Indiana, the state of Indiana, and
that you had them send correspondence to Mr, Humm,
_ GEIGER A LORIA R[PORTlNG SERVICE, 2408 PARK DR, SUITE Q. HUG, PA 17110 117,!I,,,'150B OR "800'222."~17
'"
2
:I
4
Ii
Ii
7
8
9
10
11
12
t:> 1:1
H
15
\Ii
17
II!
I!l
:Ill
21
Z!
~l
21
25
V
68
CRA did. that you then used Lawrence Rosen here in
Harrisburg to send correspondence to Mr. Hamm and
that in June you were contacted by a Stacy Allen who
apparently was your in-house counsel about this
situation. Now, my Question is does your file if not
purged reveal any correspondence or telephone call
notes from attorneys Rosen, Efron and Allen regarding
the Homm bankruptcy from September 1994 to December
1994?
A No. they do not.
a Attorney Easter-Wells wrote Stacy Allen
in the State of Indiana, How would she hove come up
with that address to your knowledge?
MR, BRADSHAW: I'm sorry. You Just
said that Attorney Easter-Wells had written to Stacy
Allen in Indiana?
MR, GROVE: Yes,
BY MR, GROVE:
a To your knowledge -- I'll try to
simplify this. Was Stacy Allen ever a resident of
the State of Indiano while doing work for CRA?
A Not to my knowledge.
a Well. to your knoliledoe. did shl! hove
connections in the State of Indiana?
A No.
GEIGER iii LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. HOll P,t,RK DR, SUITE 8_ HaG. I'A IlIlO 111'~UI!108 0" 1.80Q'iI2il.4ft11 -
~
2
:I
4
5
II
7
8
9
10
11
()
12
1:1
H
15
Hi
al
21
u
69
17
IH
19
a For purposes of clarification here. I
am looking at a letter that Martha Easter-Wells sent
to me dated November 26. 1996. about this matter and
her attempt to contact your company and the cast of
characters. attorneys. et cetera. that we have gone
over, She indicates to me on June 19. 1995. I had
called CRA Security Systems, Now this deals with
this contempt situation that Mr, Bradshaw is
concerned about and the Judgment that was originallY
entered against CRA back in May of 1995, I called
CRA Security Systems at 800-486-0955 and asked to
speak to a manager, I was told to speak to a
Mr. Breeding. B-R-E-E-D-I-N-G at 717-730-7066, Do
you recognize either of those two telephone numbers
as being numbers that one can call CRA. the 800
number and the 717 number?
A Yes. the 0955, The ather number.
again. that's something my managers or other people
set up, I have no knowledge of that,
a The 800 number sounds correct?
A Yes,
a She goes on to say I left a message for
Mr, Breeding and I would ask WllO is Mr, Breeding.
B-R-E-E-D-I-N-G, in .Il1ne 19. 1995?
A Again. aIls I know. he worked in
22
:1:1
21
2!)
GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2408 PARK DR., SUITE S. HBG, PA 17110 717.541-1508 OR "BOQ':Z2:z..un7
~
C)
v
70
I
2
collections deportment in some capacity, I hove very
little knowledge of the employees there.
Q But the nome rings 0 bell?
A Yes,
Q Is he still todaY there in the
collections deportment?
A I do not know,
Q Do not know whether he's still in
collections?
A No, Again. that's Just not something
that I
Q Mr, Breeding called me bac k, I
informed him of the judgment, This is the Judgment
Mr, Bradshaw is talking about that CRA claims they
got no notice of, Mr, Breeding told me to talk to
Stacy Allen, My first phone conversation with Stacy
Allen was on June 19. 1995, I asked her if she
represented CRA Security Systems and she said she
did. I wrote to her on June 19. 1995. My letter was
sent to Lutherville, Missollr1. ond was returnelJ us
she is in MarYland, I resent it to her in Marylond,
Now, the point being and
Ms, Eastec-Wells ''Iill testify to this L1lat your
company gave Stacy Allen's address os being
Luthervllle, Missouri, on June 1'), 199'i.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
\:I
14
15
16
17
18
I!l
al
21
Z!
2:1
:!A
25
G(IGER a L.ORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 240B PARK OR. SUIT[ B. URn, P" 11110 717.ft4HllOB 0" 1.800.222'4877
!d
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
III
11
12
:) 1:1
H
15
In
17
\8
I!)
~)
2\
:?2
~l
2A
25
---;
71
A What is the Zip Code?
MR, BRADSHAW: Are you asking him
whether that's the case or are yau telling him that's
the case?
MR, GROVE: What I 0111 trying to say is
he has in his affidavit indicated that in late June
af this year, 1995, I first became aware of a
bankruptcy proceeding, blah-blah, through my counsel,
Stacy Allen. This is the very same time period, June
19, 1995, that Martha Easter-Wells was put in contact
with Stacy Allen by CRA by virtue of a phone call ta
CRA and was told, gave her a phone number and mailing
address of Lutherville, Missouri, and she then sent
it after she discovered that it wasn't Lutherville --
and she will clarifY this -- sent it to Maryland, and
I am assuming she ended up in Maryland.
MR, BRADSHAW: Your question for
Mr. Seiders is what?
BY MR. GROVE:
Q My first question is based on his
affidavit. was Stacy Allen warking here at CRA
headquorters in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania, in June of
1995?
A She worked olll of MarYland, That's the
onswer.
GEIGER Ii- LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK DR, SUITE B. HUG, PA 11110 717'~Ul~OO OR l'BOO'222."~71
.~
l-._#."
2
:1
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
\I
12
<) 1:1
14
15
\l;
17
1M
19
:Ill
21
Z!
ZI
:1,1
2!i
72
a So when you SOY in late June of 1995, I
first become aware of a bankruptcy proceeding through
my counsel, Stacy Allen, where was Stacy Allen when
she advised you of this bankruptcy proceeding? Are
you looking at your affidavit?
A Yes, She was in Maryland if I recall,
a At the address you Just gave,
Lutherville, Maryland?
A Yes,
a Was she in June 1995 an employee of
eRA?
A At that point, yes, She was an
independent contractor. I guess the answer, the
broad answer would be yes,
a Why would Mr. Breeding hove told
Attorney Easter-Wells to call Stacy Allen and not
have told her to call or contact Mr, Rosen or
Mr, Efron and Efron?
A I haven't the slightest idea, I
probablY could conjecture,
MR. BRADSHAW: No.
BY MR, GROVE:
a !lut in any event. she was on
independent contractor, is that correct?
A Yes,
_ GEIGER 11 lORIA REPORTING SERVICe. 2..08 PARK DR. SUITE 8, HaG. PA 17110 1I7'!l4I-1!!10B OR ''800"Z2204!S77
~
o
\J
2
:J
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1\
12
1:1
14
15
Ui
17
18
III
~
2\
22
2:1
24
25
73
a In June of 1995 down in Maryland?
A Yes.
a Doing work for CRA?
A I believe our contract changed on July
1. if I recall.
a So that. therefore, would onswer
Ms. Easter-Hells next statement in this letter to me.
She resent the letter to her in Maryland. I said
Lutherville, Maryland. That.s not right. Baltimore.
It's Lutherville, Missouri. She resent it to her
Maryland address that she was given. Stacy Allen
called me on JUly 7 and told me she was not handling
this matter and told me to call Hap Seiders. Now,
you Just indicated July 1. 1995. her status changed
with CRA apparentlY, You have no idea why
Ms. Easter-Hells was not put in contact with either
Mr. Rosen or Mr. Efron?
MR. BRADSHAW: You're asking
Mr. Seiders to speculate as to whY someone else made
a decision?
MR. GROVE: He HaS president of the
company, If he has no idea. he has no idea.
MR. BRADSHAH: But I think your
question calls for him to engage in conjecture to why
somebody else made 0 decision.
--- GEIGER a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2400 PARK OR_. SUITt D. HIIG. PA 17110 717'!4H~08 OR 1'800.222'4577
--
1
2
:I
o
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1\
12
1:1
14
15
16
17
18
Ul
~
21
22
2:1
24
25
....;
74
BY MR. GROVE:
a Hell, do you have any ideo why when
Ms. Easter-Hells called CRA on June 19. 1995. she
wasn't told to contact CRA's attorney that they had
been using in this Hamm matter?
A Well, collection agencies routinely are
preyed upan by opportunistic attorneys, and we
prabably get one ar twa cases like Martha
Easter-Hells per month where someone went bankrupt or
they took goods with a bad check and then they turn
around and sue the agency. It's a very big business
for lawyers. and typically whenever that type of
attorney. if you will. calls in and lIlakes a threat
under, that usually is referred to -- probably
Mr. Breeding perceived her as one af these
opportunistic lawyers and referred her to stacy, if
that makes any sense.
a Well. I hear your answer.
A And I do recall Martha Easter-Hells had
called me at one time. She Hondered what our address
was, our mailing address,
a Well. you have seen in sOllle of these
exhibi ts she had it. right?
A Well. she callell mil six months later
and asked me for the address.
_ GEIGER It LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK DR. SUITE 8. Hila. PA 11110 7n,~,U'lftO. 0" "800-222'4517
~
1
2
:I
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
I:.'J la
14
15
\1\
17
18
Ul
211
2\
22
2:1
24
2f)
V
75
a And probablY Hith good cause. You
don't have any copies of these letters and she wanted
to verifY thot you were getting them.
MR. GROVE: All right. Na~1 IW are down
Just abaut to the final. This basically.
Mr. Bradshaw. is dealing Hith the contempt Judgment
and flows through the addresses and individuals or
cast of characters that we have gone over here today,
attorneys. et cetera.
(Notice and order for hearing marked as
Plainli ff' s Exhibit No.9.)
BY MR. GROVE:
a Mr. Seiders. real quick, I am showing
you a notice and order for hearing filed March 1.
1995, and this deals Hi th Mr. Hamm's malion as it
indicates to hold creditor in civil cantempt. In
this case. your organization. It notes at the bottom
that the parties served by the clerk's office ore the
debtor. Attorney Easter-Wells, Mr. Lyons, CRA
Security Systems, and this notice indicates that a
hearing on this contempt will be held on March 17,
1995. auestion: Did you ever see such a notice or
did CRA receive such a notice according to your file?
MR. BRADSHAW: I'm going to ask you to
clarify because again, I need 0 time frame, Is your
_ GEIG[R a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE. 2400 PAR" OR. 5UIT[ B. HUG. PA 17110 717.S4H,oe OR 1.800'222'4"7
,..
2
a
Q
4
Ii
6
7
8
9
to
11
12
la
14
15
III
17
18
\!l
31
21
t.l
~I
:M
2!)
\""J
76
question whether ar not he saw it or CRA had notice
of it in March of 1995 or whether he's ever seen this
dacument?
BY MR. GROVE:
a Hell, all right. First question would
be have yau ever seen that document?
MR. BRADSHAW: If you know.
I don't know. It may have been in the
A
file.
BY MR. GROVE:
a Did anyone in your company make you
aware that it had arrived?
MR. BRADSHAW: At what time?
MR. GROVE: It was mailed according to
the clerk's office March 1, 1995. So this would have
been March of '95.
A No.
BY MR. GROVE:
a Does your file that you hove been
referring to indicate receipt of such a notice in
March 1995 in the bankruptcy caurt regarding this
hearing on contempt?
A No,
Q In March 1995. from what you hove Just
testified to. I assume stacy Allen Has yaur in-house
They did not make me aware of it.
__ GEIGER iii LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 2408 PARK OR. 5U1U e. HIG. PA 11110 111.!i4H!i08 0" I'BOO.z;u...nl
~
t;)
I...J
I
2
:J
4
5
1\
7
8
9
to
11
12
1:1
11
15
16
17
18
\!l
211
21
22
2:1
24
21i
77
counsel?
A Yes.
a Would such a document upon arriving at
CRA be referred to in-house counsel for action?
A Yes. it Hould. This is a -- this would
supposedly fallow up 0 lawsuit that was filed against
us. is that correct?
a Correct. This is to do wi th as
Mr. Bradshow pointed out once or twice during the
deposition here today that CRA is olleging that they
never received notice of this contempt proceeding,
the contempt being based on contacts made by CRA and
its agents with Mr. Hamm in 1994 as Just ottested to
by the exhibits and your testimany.
A Yes. If something like this was
received, it definitely would have been referred ta
our corporate caunsel.
a Who at that time as I understand it was
stacy Allen?
A Yes. That h correct. sir.
Q But to your knowledge. you Ijerl~ never
made OHore of it by Slocy Allen or any other employee
of C RA?
A Not ot il1l1t time. Not untO .June of
'95 os r testified eOllief.
~ (;(I(;[H I LORIA R[PORTlNG 5[RVI(E. 2400 PAR" OR, SUITE B. HIG. PA 11110 1IH~.H!108 OR ,.800.zaZ.4!l17
"
2
:I
.1
5
Ii
7
8
9
to
11
12
I:;) 1:1
14
11;
Hi
17
18
m
21)
21
22
2:1
24
2fi
V
78
a Now. taking some liberties here. but in
order ta speed things UP. as you can imauine Attorney
Easter-Wells has provided me with a sort of
chronolagy of Hhal she attempted to do here vis-a-vis
CRA and the court. Now. I~i t11 regard to No.9. the
court set the maiter far hearing as you can see on
March 17, the contempt hearing involving CRA. The
notice was sent on March 1 to CRA, Mr. Lyons. and as
she notes here parties served by the clerk's office
of the bankruptcy cuurt including Lyons at CRA
Security Systems. Proof of this is at the bottom of
the notice and order for hearing dated March 1. At
the hearing an March 17, no one from CRA Security
Systems appeared. Now. this is an Mr. Bradshaw's
pleadings and position here regarding notice that IS
naH befare Judge Bailey. When no one appeared on
March 17. the Judge on his own ~otion decided to
reset the hearing so ihat better notice could be sent
nat only to CRA Security Systems but also to two
separate attorneys who had represented CRA in
collection efforts, namelY Rosen and Efron. Naw with
that in mind. this would be No, 10.
(Notice and Order for Heoring marked as
Plaintiff's Exhibit Nu. 10.)
BY MR. GROVE:
GEIGER a LORIA HtPORlING SrHYICr.. HOR PARK DR, BUITt U. HBa, PA 11110 111'S.H~OB OR 101100'222'.577
0
I
2
:\
4
5
1\
7
8
9
III
11
12
.:) la
I.'
Hi
\Ii
17
18
III
21)
2\
22
2:1
24
2fi
-...J
79
a Just as No.9, this No. 10 is the exact
same thing, Notice and Order for a Hearing from Judge
Hill this time setting the hearing for May 3, 1995.
on the contempt motion of Mr. Hamm, and this is dated
April 27. 1995. and attached to it is a certificate
of service indicating that the bankruptcy court sent
notice to Efron and Efron and Lowrence J. Rosen of
1101 North Front Street. Harrisburg. Pennsylvania,
and alsa indicates that CRA Security Systems/Lyons
was served with this neH hearing dote. I ShOH you
No. 10 and the same questions with regard to 9 are
were yau personally aware af this arriving scheduling
a May 3 hearing before the court?
A No,
a May 3. 1995, similarly would stacy
Allen, corporate in-house counsel for CRA. have been
given or would have taken over such a natice had it
come in on behalf of the company?
A Yes.
Q Did you ever hear fram Efron and Efron
or Mr. Rosen that such a no tice for a contempt
hearing on Moy 3 in Iowa bankruptcy court 110d been
received by their offices as your prior or ongoing
attorneys?
A No.
_ onCER iii LORIA R[IIORTlNG SERYICE, 1<40U PARK DR. SUITE 8. H8G., PA t11l0 111'UH&OB OR I'Boo.azz.nl1
~
2
a
.1
5
1\
7
8
9
10
11
12
C:;) 1:1
11
15
iii
17
18
I!l
211
21
22
2:1
24
25
V
80
a So to your knowledge either from
company files or personal knowledge, you were not
you. Mr. Seiders, were not personally advised by the
Efron low firm or the Rosen low firm of that order?
A Thot is correct.
a And you hove nothing in your file that
reflects CRA's receipt of this?
A No.
MR, BRADSHAW: If I may, Counsel. if
you turn to the second page of what you marked as
Exhibit 10. although I note that an the first page of
what you hove marked as Exhibit 10 at the bottom that
there is a list of parties that are supposedly
served, if you look at the second page where the
clerk's certificate actually appears, notwithstanding
page one's representation that there was service to
CRA Security Systems/Lyons, there is no indication
that there was any service to CRA/Lyons or otherwise
an page two of this same document. In fact, what it
says is totol notices, four. and those notices are
directed to Martha Easter-Wells, Jeremy Jomes Hamm,
Burton H. Fagan. 11110ever he is, presumobly trus tee's
office, ond the United states trustee.
MR, GROVE: That will be clarifled ot
the hearing. I can tell you that the clerk's office
- GEIGER ft LonlA REPORTING SERVICE, 2400 PARK OR. SUITE 8. HBG. PA 11110 111-!5"HSOB OR 1'800.22Z'4!517
~
2
:t
.1
5
(,:)
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
1:1
H
15
16
17
18
19
211
21
22
2:1
~I
25
..;;
81
when they certified to that April 27 have advised me
that notices were sent as indicated there to all
people. I'm talking about CRA/Mr. Lyons and ta the
two attorneys.
MR. BRADSHAW: That's fine. I'm
merely clarifying.
BY MR. GROVE:
a Mr. Seiders. if I told you that in
January of this year. I personally telephoned
Mr. Rosen and asked him whether CRA was aware of
these cantempt proceedings. and if I told yau that
his answer was that he personallY advised you of that
notice and sent it to you by mail as well as any and
all other paperwork he had received on the Hamm
matter, what would you say to that?
A That if he sent these notices onto --
a You.
A To me personally?
a Correct.
A I Hould simply say that I did not
receive them.
a And he therefore, if he testified to
this in a court of laH. you Hould indicate that he
was mistaken?
A
I would Simply indicate that I did not
__ GEIGER Ii lORIA REPORTING SERVICE, 240ft PARk DR. SUITE I. HIG. f'A 11110 717.e.H5oD OR "800,222'.577
~
o
1
v
1
2
3
4
II
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
111
16
17
18
19
lJ)
21
:12
Zl
24
25
82
receive ttlem.
a Would you ulso indicate that you did
not receive a telephone call from Mr. Rosen
specifically about this contempt proceeding and the
hearing that is May 3, 1995?
A I would have to say so because we take
these suits quite seriouslY. As I said we probablY
get two or so a month, so I would have definitelY
responded.
That's Hhat he says.
I would have definitely responded had
a
A
he called.
a The point beiny you had notice
occording to Mr. Rosen. yaur attorney of record wi th
the court.
MR. BRADSHAW: I am going to obJ ect to
that. I dan't know hOH he became ottorney of recard
with the caurt. Are you suggesting that there is an
entry of appearance anYHhere in the bankruptcy file
on CRA's behalf?
MR. GROVE: Hhen I sOY att 0 r ney 0 f
record vis-a-vis collection letters sent received by
Mortho ElI~;ter-Wells from Mr. HUlIlm Hho she then
odvlsed the bankruptcy court of these ongoing notices
und whu \'105 send! n\) them tJllin\) Efron oncl Efron or
GIIGIR a LORIA RI,-ORTING SERVICE, 2..08 PARK DR, SUIU B. HaG.. PA l1110 711'UH&OB OR '-800-222..1l77
83
iIIpiI
rt!l
7
8
Mr, Rosen that tile caurt then in turn noticed
Mr. Rosen Clnd Mr. Efron of this contempt proceeding
as ottorneys fur CRA to their kno\~ledge. Mr. Rosen's
position is when he received such a thing. he
immediatelY advised Mr. Seiders.
MR. BRADSHAW: I am merely carrecting
your reference to attorneys af record with the court.
I f you have a question for Mr. Seiders, please ask
I
2
3
4
5
8
9
10
it.
MR. GROVE: I am talking about the
" contempt petition indicated to Russell J. Hill that
U prior attorneys for CRA were as follows: Efran and
Efran ond LaHrence J. Rosen, The clerk, therefore,
o
13
w sent notices of this sort of thing based on that
m position and attached exhibits thereto by
18 Ms. Easter-Hells of correspondence of Rosen. Efron.
~ et cetera, to her contempt petition to establish
m dates and times. Clnd the court then noticed these
19 attorneys In both March and Apr 11 0 f 1995. I don't
~ believe I have any other questions.
21
MR. BRADSHAH: I have none.
112 (The deposi I.lon was concluded at 1: 10
Z) P. M. )
:IA
25
v
GllGIR . LO'UA "IPORTING SIRVICE, a"08 PARK DR" SUITE B. HIQ., PA 17110 711.e"HIS08 OR l.aOO.222.'S77
M
1
2
3
..
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
0 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
00
21
22
ZJ
24
25
\,J
84
COUNTY OF LEBANON
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
ss.
I, Anthony J. BalshY, Reporter-Notory
Public. authorized to administer oaths within and for
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvonia ond take depositions
in the trial of causes. do hereby certify that the
foregoing is the testimony of Hop Seiders.
I further certify that before the
taking of said deposition. the witness was duly
sworn; that the questions and answers were taken down
stenographiccllY by the said Anthony J. BalshY, a
Reporter-Notary Public, approved and agreed to, and
afterwards reduced to typewriting under the direction
of the said Reporter.
I further certify that the praceedings
and evidence are contained fullY and accuratelY in
the notes taken by me on the within deposition, and
that this COpy is a correct transcript of the same.
In have hereunto
subscribed my hand 1996.
Reporter
Gllot" a LORIA REPORTING SERVICE, a"08 PARK DR., SUITE B. HIG.. PA 17110 717.enlftOe Oft t'800'222..n7
ORA
S~CURITY
SYSTEMS
loi
32HA..lleISlrMl . 1'.0. 80x 6~b . LomOI,.e, P^ 17~ . To1npMn", (117)730.7063 118(0) ~86.oo55
JE_IM~ 1"''''4
ftO~ MJLL~jn[ OOlvE
IHTTellhoeF. fA S?Pl
5 r. n \. "lh:J ,-' f :.': f t..., '. It
r: t: : ) " ~ ,. t" r \, I , ;. ~
nCCJUI1t .: 'JI"(~I~.OlN
nriJlllal Lhl:;(" '\"",,\11,'.: 'Jb.Ot.
P I! ~ \J r II .~ 0 t. I, I. ~" ~'~'.
\ 1 ~ ,I)U
IUTIIL A'I')';'" ,.U::
',I,Oi
Onr JFRl'I"V 1.1"''1'':
Thl, Is lo ~:lVI~~ you Lt.., He r"v~ ~,." ,. ,.,n_" Dr
Sp"nl:.~ r.l h. 'or on. ourpn~. "I C'll I:~ .irq tn'
c"46~ ,0U o~~ thl!~,
'Jtllli- be idvheo Lh..'. '.11111" 1,0 COv," .r, "1:" C1p:ch oroce
"otlfl.cI, olr knowlnyly "tlUl1g a chc,. Irv.' 1 cIO>'" .ccoutll In
lien."., 'nr 901l~' ot ."vlc~s iF 'y~ln,\ '.11" 1.01, dnc: .lIso may
I dl/I ri" Iv ." I c: l V IIU I c: I r II I L .
W. IIt'll you l" t",ulvI! '.nl. maltd ~r ,m""..I.l< ~aym~nl 01 tne
. u'" 11 t" t r a . b 0 v f \of Il h I n t,". II t xl t "" c: a r ~, " 0 J V ,n." l I > no L r e c: e I v. d,
1/, ili.1t .ivlle out cll"nl thal lne ;ccvU/lt rr".ln~ unp.la, alld will
'urth,r 'chlse t"c'" 01 L"clr OIH Ion> lI' 0..'.'" lht d.I., lurlnlr.
,....., be r...lr"J"O th~t .houl'l our .Iient ~.CIO= lO unaerlalll
IIUhtloh 0' anv ~ort, VOU "'.y h. ad~I.I"n.IIV r='~onslble for
piilllll.. ""of/lit all"r"~Y's hI!' .IS .II~".~ 01 to" nllvanl I"w$ In
voU~ Jutl.~lctlon,
W. bbl...v. ltl:'l'l you will 'yr..~ \"~L you' I~\"r"sl' woulo be oelt
lI.r\l~d by",." Iny full ~nO I ""ot:< I n, pav,n'''l, paVIU I. LO CtllI, In tn.
'0"_ of . C:lrllf 1001 cn.ck or ",on~y or~.r, hilt l~ \n~ ;:DOYf ladrelSl.
lI.tutth;,r t'\IH ltolt yIlU Will r.vlow U,' ~.:t'r .,no yovtltn yourself
"COl'dln,,1 V,
Unl..., YOU no'IIv L'll' "'I,c" .it"'" Iv JI/' IIllr rdctlvln\l
thli ""tic" th;\l y"U :llsnut. lOe vlllt:llv ~r l"" .,.nt vr any porllon
tnet-of. thl.. of'i~u ..1'1 ~,."'UN,. thl~ ,ier, I. I'j ,,~Il~. If 'Iou not.lfy
l hi. 0 f , I c. 1 n .. r .. t n ~ .. It.,. n ~ U <.I, H · PI," r '" . ,." ", L'" I S n" tic e, l n I $
"lflce willi ootaln v'rlfle"ll"" nl tll, ,J'ut 0' uo.a,n a COpy 01 a
Judg"'enl ;''10 ,"all Vl'U a rooy 01 ...,t. '''J~;,..'': o. _H I !lc3tlon, II you
r'llu-.t ..11" ofll... In .H,l,nq wit"'" .\, r.lr' 1ll.r Itc<lv1ng tnls
"ottc.. tht, of' Ie'" w il t ()ru\lIt1~ )f~u ...It" '."_ ".,1,,,..' "IIU -'d(Jr." of t.n.
n r I, In JI let e d Ita', I' I' i , , .. f ~ n t, f I 0 III l:'.: c. 'J t r . ,t I:' c rJ , t '" r .
.'{i2~i~~~
FJlIIID IT "f:"
~,cn:,' 0 l YOIlS
C.,II"',on .,eparl_enl
^n",' lr,fnrrn:~lIl'" nhh"lnnll will ho Ilc::Arf I", thAt nwT"W,~A
'.
to PllcltC. In lowI & 1I11/lOIS
Marthe Eaeter.WolIs
AlIornllY al l.aw
Suite 504 Kahl BulldlnQ
326 W. 3rd 51.
Davenporl, IA 52801
319-322-04e,f)
319-322-2300 FAX
[I~';' ~:
oct.ober 15, 1994
)'...
~
~At.
1-[e/r~
Set/!
?dO/
eRA security Syate~s
12J. Market Street
~-.t.. .,K -
Leaoyne, fA 11043
Re I Jereay Hellllll
Bankrupt.cy 110. 94-1003
chapter 1
Dear creditor:
H)' c.Uent "erallV 1lUYl'__ reee i ved B bi 11 fro~ you. ..p&ffi.~.QU did-,
no\!....k...w ibat: t..fY\. 'S y.uA>. ~f lrvul k::>c9'1'lit-- ,.....
t-+- I..... wd\':'u l!&+"d on tt>91. teeeJlt bal\lt""[It-cy; ~
(it ) .. bt for w l'-..You are collecti~iGtCd ~
t recen bankibptey. _________
Ilnd1b.ed ill the Hot ice of Creditors Iwlrrntr-yml-snoulanave
~. P1eftse dlrqct any further correspondence to me.
slncerelY~ ~ -tfu. ':;'~~
'Mo.JAc... f u..iL. . wA . 1A &11\ ~
1"'.1 n /7".-d .-.J.....
~.RQ...e~t:'L"'_: \
.~-~~ ~'
l... l !/..
~_ U/cQA-."
Hartha Be.ter-Wells
HEW/jllh
Bncloaures
-
F.lllIlRlT "II"
},~,
1'5:%
I ~1..11. ., .. .'01'
.111"'111,. i.' l.."
IlnoiI AIIO InOIl
',or..ilonai Corporallon
Attorni~d Counlelor.
HI.I.' '11 AVttIIIE
HAMMoND. I" ..J20
PlIOIIEI Ul'ltJ~-31U
Hnv...h", l~. I"""
~i\'n\J FIl;'"Wlll 1'0 I
C. p..\
vn BOX 61'>
~~HOlllr, I'A 1700-0&'~
01922';. 01 020
tIAMM, J.tM~
801 RIL~ilD. DftlVE
IETTrNbOftr lA 52722
,'t:(.'~'lJlIt. 0192~"jl. lit
Total du..: S~l.tn
lO..t.. "!TIICR UPPEIl PQnl'lC'tl AtI\lIIF.TJllll wlTtI P"Yl1f.t11' ......,
"fl Spenc.r c1rtl
. AccoUn~ .. -019219,'-0IN
0119. ch.ck ~.ount. 536.0'
hbc,..in, "e. 51~.IHI
Totll A.ouni OUe. $~I.01
P1ell~''''. Idvllld thel thlr. "ttl~. r"rr."""I< ~P^ s~r."I'IIY Syr.l.",~ (eIlAI.
CRA hl~ ~eGentlv lnror~.d u~ Ih~1 vnu ~'ol. a ~hP.rk .hre~ w~, nol hnnnt.~
bV vollr Ilr.dH In.thut1on 10 tho abovo ,"."II'.",~,l ""Heh.lnt.
I ..IUM rOil know that "rltlll'j IIn n""oi,) ch,,'~ i. . '.110'" ",attor whl~h
could lnvolv. clvll e. ..eLl al crl",."al nanellons. rt II c""rl rrnco.dlnv
II ul.., '011 could be lIahl. to. .,,""11<""01 ,...... ,,,r.h.. .'.\'lI"'V tUG
end coUit cOlii,
If vou l..e4l.te1y peV tho full om"u,,1 .how" ,b?vo, you will "ot Incur
anv o~ the.. iddltlonll co.t.. H.kp you, full paymenl to 'CP^" and 50"d
It to ih. .ddc... ebov", III o<ldlll,,", Ir Y'Ju uould IL~e VOllr o.lqllllll r.he:k
returnid. C~ req~lre. a 1.lf odd.... .ta"'pP.~ .nv~lop..
Verr tiUlr fourl.
Horton t.. arron
"
"'11 lnqlllre. .hou1d b. '"''''I to' (711)"1 JQ 101,1.
Unle.. vou noHrv thL. oHI". wlthll' 11) ddY' .1'... 1.,,,.I'n"9 th.. n.lll~u
thet VOII dhpute the votldllV oe Ihl, ,l.hl 0' ony r'"tl''''' Iho..,,!' 'hl.
oUlce 11111 .lIeu... thll d,,"1 I. voll". II v'", n"HI' Ih.. ocrl". '" wrltln"l
within io d.f' hOIl recllvln~ Ihl. lint lei', Ihl< "Ulee will obuill
vadelcaHon of the debt nr n"I.,ln d '.lJI'1' III thr l'Jd~"'''". ""I .,.11 y'JU a
copV ot .Uch ~ud9...nt or v.rllle.llon. Ir you rlqulst Ihl. "rrle. In wrlLlng
)0 cliVI If tel' '"oelvln9 lhl. lint lei, thl, ollror ulll p,.wlde y"" ul'h lh.
"allle 'nd eddr... of thl nrl'lllI.1 r.r.tillor, II dlttorenl (r,,'II Ihe CUUtlH
",.edltol,
Thl. I. an .He..pt t" coll."t. rI.lll. "nl' Inl'H,"." In" 'Jb'..,IIIPd ~Ill h.
u.ed for that purro",
,a'~..
h\l'lr
:.1
..
,._",,v',:
"',"'.'
ImE'V8ltY & ROSEN
^"'OllN!:l'S ^T v.w
1101 NORnl flIOIIT SHIF.!'T
IIAIUUSBlmO. l'ENNml.\'o\NlA 17102
n:1.F.1'''ONEI71'11234.1~11 F^,<I?111234 :16~O
'.~,_.'.
i> "L ""tl' r
t, 1 .,fll.
JE-EI1Y H'''''''
'Oft WJLLSJ~E U~lVE
llETT~NnDPF. IA ~l.nt
11-'J"?
kfl ~JI.'IIC,f GI'I..S
;. c ( n 1.4"" ..:
Ut I; ''',1 I llll.ount:
~"lll"'~~ Ctl~~~ ~r~f
'OlqtZ'J?~-OIN
')o.oZ
U:'.OO
1'1 r.\ '" L'"'~V~4T IllJf:
,S 1.02
!lhr JF.RFII' "''''I'll
'I~I~' b- ~avls.~ Lh.t,
SV*t.'!'II', toc to tall_cl
ell.llt r"''''~nc.o1 aonv.,
..tt.r ...,c.bly "oJv~ ').~n
"dV,: 0.-:" tl"..'lt"~ Dy lq:A 5ocurtl,
~ rlent Ow.O ,II Il 011 CHlla I' 01 the
,~ p r t v t" U" ;\ l t .:.,. j.J t... \11 , ~ 5 ~ I v ~ t nt,
.".'ute. 'sr tut.
AHhftUllh n(l rfeclsj(ln hiS o,tn "'dr!e In 1".I<l.tt lOIS "atur, you
ill6uld Ii. reM'nd_1! th.1 ..,Itloq ~n ...,COIl.Cllol. CObC_ I~ a serloui
\/1$UtI&h 01 Doth r.lvll 1'1'1 e,l,oln1' laws, .,nll ",oy ~15o ,,'vlrslly
ttt.et Vllllr r.roult. 5houlel lhj, mdtt"1 tlt ;)UnUd~ tnrollgh the courts
civil')'; or throllllh c',"oIn~1 prOHr.utlon, yuu m,IY bl adultlonllly
Ihbl. 'Dr cl'Iurt cosh ..nLl .ottnrn,y'! leos, d.penolng UpOIl lh. IIWI
'POIlCIDIt Ih your s'.t<.
YoU IIlIV ,UII avnl<1 tl'. "ar~h r.ons~'luenc.s ul IloHID'. litigatIon
1111' .."k In" 'ui I p'Y"unL to l.wr,nc. kO~.II, SvOl to tne 100VI aOelrl.l.
Fall.;r'!' "0 ..~kf oay.,-nl IS $t.too, "Ith,n '.11' newt II'te,n day. lIlay
r.sult In. ~nt ICt.lOII~ rlusCI""ed .UO.... I t,u~1 10H you will rlYleW
th~ ~Itt-r .n~ goy.ro youl'~(1 I atcorrlln.lv.
V.'Y trUly VOl/IS,
~tL.~ 7 1'2,..--
l:l w' I nc,' .I, :( lJ .... II
Unl_.. vou oot,.y lhl~ ''''cc, wltll'" to d..n aILeI' 'ece'vl09
tnl. noUe~ tha'. you "'s"ul. 1/,. val"~llv 01 lOIS denl, or any
portion ~n.'~ol, !nl. u"I~,' will :1\~"Il'" lllh u.ut I~ valid. 11
you notify thl, nfllc. 'n ..1'''''09 wlllll" 10 ""yo I'om l'ocelv'n9
t n I S no tI c .. , "" 5 cd' Ie. w. I I I U lJ l a '" ., eI " I r. .11 0" 0 I I II' diD tor
obta'n. C?PY ,,' a Ju.;n"'.n' ;11'" m"l, Y"v ., ~o"y 01 slIeh jud..moOlor
vlrlflcetl?lI. l' YlJU I"'IU." '111. ,,'flro III W!IIIIly "Ith,n JO elaYI
· It. r ,. e. I v In q 'II I. noLI c . , I " Is., , I I .. W I II p, lJ V , d. you wit h t II.
"''''' Inll 1.loreli 0' U,. 01'",1".1 CI'-lIll01, "olflere"t flo," the
curt~"t er,.lltor. rills I, .'n "It-,,'ot III c'JII.ct a debl. Any
In' 0 r ." l' 0 n 0 b t ~ In. u .. I 'I b ~ u <. ,. , 0 It". l I' u I' Il u.. .
~:XIIIIlIT "G"
- -.----.
"
, .
1 31'~ .::~ .:.~ :1(11)
1\11(11'1 E""~ Iii Lillo'
F'H,.tl ;l~
,I,ll
UNITED STA'I'F.S BANKRu.rrCV COllRT
S,'ulbflu Ullllicl of 10llia
P. O. 801 9l~
Ues \lolnrs. Illwa ~OJO^.9264
n' ..... .-..--..-- ............--.-----..---
..I.
tl\'lt!l !eltlily Jlmes Hamm
Jllr,.
em Nil 9,1 . \lIOO) l.l11
Chnpler .,
~'.J, J.... E ..P
03/01/95
[)eblllr(s)
I'Irii':'F's 'A~I\Ir.-ii';(nu;,
._.!J.t.\_~.ni"n. ~~.!. _ . .
I. .
........---...- ..-...-_.- --.- ---- .---.
! t~f t
NOTICE AND ORDER FOR HEARING
'.J,"
YOU AlE IIEl'F.BY NOTIFIED Ihll I hwiol "'1\1 be h,'\d ol1lhr
tallowlll_III(I):
.11.' MotION TO nOLO CREDnOR IN ('IVII. C'OMTf.MPl AND l.IA1ll.F. FOil [lAMAr;ES
I pol VIoLATION OF TIlE DISCIIAROI! INJUNCTION (I7.U\lR)
~~h.. \ ~ .,
. ~..1Ii ............ .unll J. lUll. Chl.r \I ~ R:IJlkruplCY Judge. In 2mll"""1 ('"ul1"'OIll. F.derlllllulldlnl. 4th
iillt ~ft)lIl*". Davlnport, IA '1801. 0" MI,'\'h 11. 199~. 1110:.5 1m.
,,~. . PI.... eonlUIt llIe toe II BlU1kmplc)' Rnlr' c!meelnlnl tlllldlll:l. and rrocednr., rel,lled '" eml~iI,. mnlhlulnrrs.
W'l6IMnl, tic,
. .',
I' lha court hu pleviousll' orderrd Ihal hrieh and OIIgllm.nlS tIe filed on Ih. .h,,' t' mlnerll), !hole datume"I'
tIllll '" III" 0"' ..nk prior 10 Ihe hemnr. dale.
'1"
,I. loLl' ,
I ~ I,' r III I mauer lssluled prior IU the he;ulnJ. a tlln,.nl ord~1 di'p"sinr. of Ihe mailer mu" be filed Il.ith Ibe coun
pnII' 10 lh. Khedultd time of Ihe hel,inl I. indl Dumen. Collllruom (lepu')', mO!1 h. I~ ad,'hed.
1.
The ~Ul\' or 'Ime alloued fUllhls miner h 30 MINUTES,
. rr IS ORDERED IIIlt It.emalllngofacoryoflhIsOI.drllo!lllm..lrdparti-.31IU.I..dll.plior 10 Ihe date
11...1 fOI hearl"l thall be deemed lufficient nnllc. hmnl
,..,.,
i
Diled: M.eh I, 1995
"'Iry M. W"bel
C1rrk. ll.~ Illll\krurlt\' ('Ollrt
I .
.,
Dy; i.lnd~S: ~lfi' ........-
CoullnK"n "<PUI\'
--..-......-.
Noli' Any commuftlntl(tn rralrdlng !lchrdUIl"R mllltr" mu,1 h(' dlrt!nrd tl" 1"lla nun'f"IL CnurHnnm llf'rul~'. ('1')
2~.6479.
Pirrilei aerved: I>tbtor. Weill. LlOOII('RA SetUI il) 5).len". 'nUII.e, U.S :,'-.
.",
III 'll2';".~ ~I)')
1\ TT(f'lll' 'O~' .. T l.1I"!
PI\O"of.:
~,
.'
----.-- -.-" -".--'
UNITED STATES BANKRlIPTC\' COlIR1'
SOlllhern 1IIIIIIel 0110..0
p 0 BOl 9260&
Des Mlllne.. Iou ,o~n69264
.------
_._~_.' --".--. ~ --. _..~--
In reI Jeremy James lIamlll
em No 94, olOm DII
Ch"11I~r 7
FILEJ>
04/27/95
nehIUI(S)
rl.,li:li ~ i1""UPlCl ('i.un
U~_I t.~11IMS. Inlilrl
--~..-,-_._---_. -...- .......... ...-.-.....,-- .-,.... .....-
NOTICE AND ORDER FOR HEARING
yoU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED Ih.1 I heallov will be heh! Oil Ihe
ioi1oWlDl Nlter'I):
CONTINUED HEARING ON MOTION TO HOLU C'REIlITOR IN CIVil CON r1iMI'f
ANb LIABLE FOR DAMAOES FOR VIOL,"TION OF THE [)\SCIl.\RGF.
INJUNCTION (I7.DBR)
"'(1
tJr~lt lilt it-nlIJI RuuIII J. HIli. ehlell' Ii 9;mknllllry lud~e. in ~\I'J Fluor r:"ullrOloIO. I'eelelll B1I1ldillg. ,1111
IIId \'tRY 51.1, Olvenpor1. IA 52801, nn M.~ J, 199~. .1 Ol:Jn pm,
Uh'l , .
Pleill cnnlull IIIr LocoU n."kn'llIcy Rule' e"oeerDlng ronduel. ,,"d pr,'.'edurrl rel..ed 10 e.lllhhs. t:oollnu\nru.
ietlltmenl. etC.
If the coun hu pre,h,u,ly nrdrr,d lh~1 hlleh alld "'r.Ulllelll~ be filed 0" Ih. ,Ix'l'e mlllel('). Ihme documeol.
"'1 be IIled one week pllor 10 Ihe heulnl dllr,
,Ill'
Ir Ihl. mlnrr j. len1ed prior rl' the he3110g. ~ runornl order disp("m~ of Ih. lIIall.r mUll he filed wilh Ihe court
IIHer 10 I1Ie achlduled lime 01 Ihe htarlns. Linda Burnell. ("('UIUlIOm I)epul\'. fO"" be '0 alMaell
T1IIInKKUlll'f 11m. 1II10lled fl'llh'l lII.n.r 'I I~ MINUTES
IT Is ORDERED 11131Ih. mAlling ul 3 e"I'I' 1'1 Ihl. Order III Illlere'lrlIl'lltlle' .1 le311 ~ lIavs I'"or rn Iht dlle
11II111 for h.u1nlshlil he deemed .umeienlno"re herenf.
. tlll.d: April %'7, 1995
Mlrl M W"hel
('Irlk. \' S n;\l\krl1l"e~ ('nun
~-
nv'
Lindl~, "ml'll
,uunru;lln (levulI
-..-- ----...-.--.--.--
I
tlOI" An)' tommUnltllln" ICJ;vdh'J Ichedullll.~ ,nallCI1 nlllll ... ,fllcet.drlll.mdn RII."e". ('IIllItrll.,mllrrOI), (51~1
%M.M'79.
PanllllClYcd: Uebtor. e...ler W.1I1 CRA Srrnl1!l' ~r't'''l'ILl'''''', \' S,lr . h . IIn..n, Ehull
'-..
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
PlAINTIFF/PETITIONER
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
V,
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS,
DEFENDAN~RESPONDENT
95-7095 CIVIL TERM
IN "E: OPINIQN ~p ORDER OF COUAI
"
BAYLEY, J., January 14,1117:-
On December 12, 1995, a $21,500 foreign Judgment was entered by plaintiff,
Jeremy James Hamm, against defendant, CRA Security Systems. Plaintiff then filed a
writ of execution. The judgment had been entered on May 17, 1995, In the United
State Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Iowa, Eastern Division, at 94-
10030.
On Decernber 29, 1995, defendant filed a petition to strike the foreign judgment
alleging two defectS: (1) that the attorney who entered the Judgment was not
licensed to practice law In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and (2) that CRA
Systems "was never given appropriate notice of the proceedings In the bankruptcy
court In Iowa, and therefore was deprived of Its opportunity to defend or to be heard
In that forum." A Rule to Show Cause was entered on December 29, 1995 and was
made retumable fifteen days following service, The Rule was served and no
response was filed. On February 13, 1996, defendant flied a motion to make the Rule
absolute. The Rule was made absolute and the judgment was stricken on February
13. Plaintiff did not file a motion for reconsideration or any direct appeal from the
order striking the judgment.
"..
~7085 CIVIL TERM
Over elght months later on October 28, 1996, plaintiff filed a petition requelting
an evidentiary hearing averring:
The Respondent's 'Notice' Issue, aforestated, was remedied by
the United State Bankruptcy Court, Russell J, Hili, Bankruptcy Judge, by
the Court's reentering Its Order (JUDGMENn of May 17, 1995; Judge
Hili r-uered this Order (~UDG~ENn on Januarv 19. 1~, with
appropriate Notices of Its entry belng mailed by the Iowa Bankruptcy
Court Clerk's office to Lawrence J, Rosen, Esquire of Harrisburg,
pennsylvania and Richard Lyons of CRA Security Systems, Lemoyne
Pennsylvania. (Emphasis added.)
Mr. Rosen was the Respondent's attomey during tiltS time period
Involved hereln and Mr, Lyons was a member of the Respondent's
Collection Department during this period.
Plaintiff further avers that:
Finally, Petitioner's undersigned counsel, by Investigation
subsequent to the Court Order of February 13, 1996, has determined
that the Respondent's stated objections to the Iowa Bankruptcy Court's
Judgment(s) of May 17, 1995 and January 19, 1996, are not, In fact
legally valid , . . .
Plaintiff seeks an order to:
[h]old an Evidentiary Hearing on the Issue of lack of Notice as alleged
by Respondent for the purpose of determining whether a Bankruptcy
Court Judgment entered January 19, 1996 against the Relpondent In
the State of Iowa Is now valid and enforceable In the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania,
A Rule was entered on October 30, 1996, directed to CRA Security Systems "[t]o
show cause why the petitioner Is not entitled to the relief requested." CRA filed an
answer, A deposition was taken, and the Issues have been briefed and argued,
On December 29, 1995, when defendant's petition to strike the foreign
judgment was filed and tne Rule to Show Cause was entered, the applicable
.2.
Il,,'
85-7085 CIVIL TERM
procedure was set forth In Pennsylvania Rules of Civil procedure 206 through 209.'
Since defendant did not file an answer to the Rule, there was no dispute as to the
tactual allegations set forth In the petition, The lack of a dispute warranted the entry
of the order on February 13, 1996, making the Rule absolute and striking the
judgment. That order became final when plaintiff did not file an appeal within 30
days. 8M O'Neill v. Gioffre, 384 Pa. Super, 579 (1989). Accordingly, there Is no
longer a judgm81 i~ entered In this court upon which there Is eny basis to hold an
evidentiary hearing as requested by plalntlff.a
For the foregoing reasons, the following order Is entered.
ORDER OF eOUAl
AND NOW, this '''' day of January, 1997, the petition of plaintiff filed on
October 28, 1996, IS DISMISSED.
By ~e Court,/i /
(4. /
Ed9WB."'~
)
1, Rescinded effective January 1, 1996, and replaced with Rules 206.1 through
206,7.
2. Plaintiff has averred In his current petition that on January 19, 1996, the
Bankruptcy Court In Iowa reentered the judgment In his favor that had been entered
against CRA Security Systems on May 17, 1995. The January 19, 1996 Judgment has
not been entered as a foreign judgment In this court. If It Is, what effect If any our
striking of the foreign judgment entered on December 12, 1995 will have on such a
new judgment, Is not an Issue presently before us.
-3-
Bruce A. Grove, Jr., Eequlre
For PIaIntlft/p.mtoner
Mark 0, Bradlhaw, Eequlre
For o.rtndant/R..pondent
85-708lS CIVIL TERM
......'........
.
\
...
"'
. :~. "..,,_,>-_,...,~,",!, ':~"'. _.... '" ~<;<,.", ... .., ..- '.'''"'_ -,,,,,_.,,,,-,,,,,.,,-,,"",:i\lO,,,,i#--,.,.,.,,,-,,,,,,,,,,~_< .'-~_' "-.' "->."'_ ..,"~"'t ",,-..,~,t.....-'t<; "'H'........''''~ C"",,,,-, ,.,,,,..~_. ....._.
JEREMY JAMES HAMM ._...n.
............ .......... ..-.. ."." ................. .--.. _.....-
In lhe COU" of Conunon PItas of
Cuml>erJand CounlY. P.nnsyh'~ni:a
........................---....-..-..-................-..-..---....--..--..
VI.
- 7-/\ ,.,-
~., .1J.::.. .C./I-:1.__..m.
CIvIl.
I~).~?n
__. ~}!~..!? ~.cm!UTX. ;;.Y ~I.UM.S_ _., n -- -" - --.
.n_._..___n_.....n___n___P.R6IIJ:J:P~ oIUnGM2NT.....
.......... ........
.....--...........--...----....--.........-....-..................
. ..- .............-........-...............
In accordance with the attached tril[lJlCOllpJc.. ~.i\H1QlI\JUl1:..lIncLnn.
...-.........-.....-..--....---........--...............-............-..........-......... - -
., . .~ ~ !.!~.I!yg .J!!.!.'!~}!..!.'!t~r.!'!.'!~.I!CLl!L~~}l.t pJ..t. -^,__QP.t.tlr, . jl.\dW\lllJl t. .1lL.fA.'loJ:....
o~" .~!'.~~~Ll:!~!l!I!'..,!g.!lj R~ ". .9!V~_~.!!f:J!rH.I .13.l!P.t.Vl1l.li. .lO..tbA .iU\lOJWt...oL. U 1".50.0.00
as of January 19, 1996. .
.-...........-.......---.........--......... -.....-..-....-----..-..-..-........-..-..-......---......-..................-..-..---.............--....---
.-....-..-........-......-........--....--....-...........--...........-.......................................................-................--............--
.....-...................---......-..-..-...... ...-
..-.......-----..--...............-.......-..................................-..-...--......-......-
...-....-..-..............-........-..---...............-..-..-..--..--...........-.....---. .......-.........-..-....
To
Laurence E. Welker
..--..........---......-.---..-......--........-....--..-....-..-
Prnlhonol~ry
_______ _.!1~F_C:J:I_______"__m_~L__. ._.000. 19..97..
, \' ~)
_____.L~I.~_~~~:<:e..-...--..--..---
Bruce Grove Allllf1ley for P!,intiff.
i~
.
.
.
.'
~
. .'
UNJ1'1lD STAT1lS 1WOOlUI'I'CY COURT
FOR 11fB SOunmRN D1S'J1Ucr Of IOWA
~
."~ ..~., ,....
, ~ I
'JAN '1'8 IS9S lli.
""
CIwll.,,~.L IlcnllU CIurI' :
IN TIiE MAmR OF:
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
CASE NO. 94-1003-DH
CHAPTER 7
Debtor
JUDGMllNT
The luue. of this proceeding having been duly considered by the Honorable RUSSELL J. HILL, United States
Bankruptcy Judge, and a decision having be"ll r"adled without trial or hearing,
rr IS ORDBRJlD AND ADJUDGED:
Per Order of May 17, 1995, that Judgment be and is hereby entered in favor for the Debtor, Jeremy James Hamm,
and apinat CRA Security Systema for Punitive damage. in the amount of $20,000.00 and attorneys fea in the
amount of $1,500.00 are ordered and Judgment is granted therefore.
May M. Weibel
Clerk of Banlauptcy Court
Date of issuance: January 19, 1996
By:
~ ~L_.
JUDGMENT
10/1/92
..
.'
./
--
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT re m
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA If MAY' T 1995 U
EASTERN DIVISION
DEBTOR.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
BANKRUPTCY NO. 94-1003D
CHAPTER 7
IN THE MATTER OF
JEREMY JAMES HAMK
ORDER ON MOTION TO HOLD CREDITOR IN CONTEMPT
AND LIABLE FOR DAMAGES FOR VIOLATION OF THE
DISCHARGE INJUNCTION
This case coming on for hearing on the Debtor's Motion to Hold
CRA Security systems in contempt of Court for Violation of the
Discharge Injunction of 11 U.S.C. S 524,
IT IS FOUND that on April 7, 1995 the Debtor filed the
Petition in this case. Notice of commencement of the Chapter 7
case was sent to the creditors on April 20, 1995. The Court finds
that Spencer Gifts, North Park Mall, Davenport, Iowa and
Continental Collections, P.O. Box 40441, Rochester, NY 14604 were
listed on the mailing Matrix, and Notice was given to them on April
20, 1995. On July 26, 1994, Discharge was entered in this case and
Notice was given to Spencer Gifts and continental Collections.
On January 3, 1995 the Debtor filed a Motion to Reopen and the
Court approved it on January 26, 1995. The evidence now before the
Court shows that the Debtor received multiple letters from
,....,...,... 11I......__ ~ 1_'" II......
:..:~u:.~~""'-"~
1WlY1l.~~U.&IAIIIIUPTClCO\lllI J 1
ft, !jj7~r7 ~ u..iJIJ'''-4<-"
..,CIIia
r ,
CRA security Systems and from attorneys hired by CRA security
Systems. The amount of the original debt was less than $50.00.
upon receipt of the letters, counsel for Mr. Hamm, Martha Easter-
Wells contacted CRS security systems and advised them that the debt
had been discharged in bankruptcy. There were also telephone calls
to CRA security systems in which CRA security Systems was advised
of the bankruptcy discharge and in which they responded that they
were not bound by oral notice of tha Disch~rge.
Even after notice orally and in writing, CRA Security systems
proceeded to contact counsel to collect the debt. Martha Easter-
Wells contacted counsel and advised them of the bankruptcy
discharge. Counsel stopped contact immediately. They were well
advised to so.
The Court finds that under 11 U.S.C. 5524(2) that the
discharge operates as an injunction against the commencement or
continuation of an action or employment of process or act to
collect any discharged debt as a personal liability of the debtor.
The Court finds in this case that the facts indicate that CRA
Security systems clearly and intentionally violated
11 U. s.C. 5524 (2). They have continued process to collect the debt
even after being informed of the bankruptcy discharge. The record
will reflect that CRA Security systems received notice of this
hearing and notice of the pending contempt proceeding and have not
responded. The first notice was for the hearing on March 17, 1995.
CRA Security systems and counsel for CRA Security systems
2
t: .
did not appear. The second hearing Notice was for May 3, 1995 at
2:30 p.m. and they failed to appear and counsel failed to appear.
The Court rule. that sanctions should be imposed. Insofar as
Efron , Efron and Xrevsky , Rosen, the Debtor has not asked for
sanctions becaus. they terminated contact immediately upon being
advised of the bankruptcy discharge.
Insofar as sanctions, the record will reflect that the debtor
is asking for f..s of $1,500.00. The Court finds attorneys fees in
the amount of $1,500.00 are reasonable.
Insofar as punitive
damag.s, local counsel will have to employ counsel in the U.S.
District Court in which LeMoyne is located unless counsel for the
d.btor is willing to go there herself. To interest counsel in that
district, the amount of the judgement will be determinative. In
addition, some of the.e businesses look at punitive damages as a
business expense. This Judge wants to put CRA Security System and
other businesses on notice that if there is a phone call indicating
that there is a bankruptcy, they need to stop and check it out.
Punitive damages in the amount of $20,000.00 and attorneys
fees in the amount of $1,500.00 are ordered and Judgment is granted
therefore.
Date: /Vl1l.'1 17,/195
ill
Judge, U.S. ankruptcy Court
Southern District of Iowa
3
~
rL
~
I ' , ,'C' ":', '
'.- :' ;
, .
---'.." .' "., ,....-".......-..
_.._~,-. --
;:s'
~ at ....
cr: ~ \.l' r--..
~f1 .. ") ~
"1 <l; I'
7' :r.: ~~)~ ~
~~': 0.. >. 1S
'.!~ ~ 0l-
e, ,... ""(J)
t: "\::-:
I "';?- I ~
-~l Cl:: ,"~ 'C'f
a:, CL ,,) <S
r=: ... . ~. ~
u" r- 'j r
0 ." () ."..".
.... ......
'. ,
.
l]
c-t
r-..... 0
~ ..J)
+; II:..
~ ~
C I
Ii
IN TilE COUR'l' 0[0' COWON PU'AS OF l'UMBEIUAND COUl'fl"{ , PF,NNSYINMHA
CIVIL DIVISION
PM!:X:IPE FOR WRIT OF EXlXUTION
Caption:
Confessed Judgment
Other
vs.
FLle No.
Atroun t Due
Interest
Q1' 7()qr ~-
,
$ 21,500.00
1,500.00
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
Atty' 5 Comn
Costs
$
IBO.OO
TO nlE plC1llOrOl'ARY OF niE SAlD COURT:
'l1le W1dersigmll:l hereby certifies that the below does not arise out of a retail
installment sale, contract, or account based on a confession of jud!Jl1lnt, but if it does,
it is based on the appropriate orj.ginal proceedJ..ng filed pursuant to Act 7 of 1966 as
1lIl'I!llded: and for real property pursuant to Act 6 of 1974 as arrended.
Issue writ of execution in the above n-atter to the Sheriff of Cumberland
County, for debt, interest and costs upon the following described property of the
def~t(sl all personal property inclUdinq office equipment, vehicles,
- ~- ~~.
~aBh a~~Il'IAtll at 324 Market Street, LeMovne. Pennsvlvania.
PRAEX:!PE fOR ATI'AOt1ENl' E:XEX:tmCff
Issue writ of attacl1rent to the Sheriff of Cumberland County, for debt,
interest and costs, as above, directing attaclYrent agalnst the above-named gamishee(s) for
the following property (if real estate, supply six copies of the description: supply four
copies of lengthy personalty list) ~!l ~l! o:.u tI ~I r;.l!!!!!'" ~n
equlpmen~, venic~eB~L~gh aR~ g~R~:'~ 3~4:Halk~~ s~re~~:
( r<,;.4, lJJ ,,,. tti uv. Q.nli't..-
and all other property of the defendant! s I 1n the possession,
~aid garnishee(s),
(Indicate) Index this writ against the garn1shee(s) as a lis pendens against
real estate of the defendant(sl described in the attached exhibit.
Slgndture:~~._" -~~
Druce Grove
DATE:
March '51, 1997
?nn t NiJlrr~:
..lddress:
1513 Cedar Cliff Drive
_Ca!!!E-llill, PA 17011-7721
.~: t.O[:lI'Y for'
Jeremy James Hamm
Telephone: (717) 763-4167
supreme ct. 10 No. 15502
~ 0\ t
M 0'
f .. )$
- )~.
f, ~c . .l::t
.ff a.. ,?j
-'>-
C r- .(J)
_~l I .16;
fl.- :1~
F 0- .:;!
.u .c
u. r- a
0 0'1
1_' \ -' '-6 : ~ ~
....~ <. - a ~ -
~I
'-....9~...j
'-.9 V
\.l
~
~
~
'H.IJiI 4HM ad'!":>a...1d a....1l1Clas aTH . H.IJiI xapu,!" OJ.
'.S,T ~o sa,!"do:> .1nO~ hTddns '.S'!"T h.Tl/UOS3ad h4.6uaT ~I
'(6ZT( 'ON 'd'J'ij"dl d'!"4S39UMO ~O ~'!"^"P'!"~~" ~O hdo:> pUll Tl/U16,.1o
UlI pUll s.uaua^o:rcl1rr 6\llpnT:>ul uopdp:>sap JO sa,!"do:> lqs hTddns 'hPaclo.ld Tl/a.l H I sil.ON
. ,.rI:1r\''"
nJ.\lU,'"I':, .,. ,'-
or 'I'" : ,", - :"\'./
q1 r.n'. ?\i r:.\ '1: 7.\3
CU..".i>"'- ,,',. ,.-,\1
\,,'.f \>.1""'\ \!/" ),\11\
"",,\,.\,.,; \..,' ,.1
~
.
.. .
.
5. The matter came back before this Court on October 28, 1996, (more than
daht month. after Plalntifr. judament was dismissed), when Plaintiff filed a "PetItion for
III Evidentiary Hearlna".
5. After briefinallld araument, the Court entered an Order on January 14, 1997
dilll\iulna Plalntifrs Petition for an evidentiary hearing, A true and comel copy of this
Order i. atlIChed hereto as Exhibit "0".
7. No appeal was taken from this Order, and it is now finai. S= docket.
8. In dismissina Plaintlfrs Petition for an Evidentiary Hearing the Court reasoned
that:
Since [Plaintiff] did not file an answer to Ihe [December 29,
1995] ~ \lID no diwu~ as to the factual alte,ations in the
petition. The lack of dispute wamnted the entry of the order on
February 13, 1996, maidna the Rule absolute and strildna the
judament. Thai order became finai when Plaintiff did not file an
appeal within 30 clays. S= O'Neill v. Gioffre, 384 Pa. Super,
579 (1989). Accordingly, there is no longer a judgment entered
in this court upon which there is any basis to hold an evidentiary
hearing as requested by plaintiff.
SSia Exhibit "0" al 3, Bayley, J. (emphasis added).
9. The court indicated in footnote Iwo (2) of its Opinion Ihal, aithough Plaintiff
had referred to a "reentered" judgment from Iowa, said judgment was nol before the court,
and that consequently, "what effect if any our slriking of the foreign judgment entered on
December 12, 1995 will have on such a new judgmenl, is nol an issue presenlly before us."
10. Apparently laldng this languaae as encouraaement to "re-domestlcate" the
"reentered" judgment, Plaintiff has now done so, thereby brlnglnglhe matter back before
the court for a third time (after waiting some three (3) additional months following the
Court's January 14, 1997 Order to do so). Sa: praecipe for entry of judgment attached
hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "C".
II. CRA's position al this juncture Is simple: Plaintiff is altemptlng to relltlgate an
luue which was resolved lIIa1nst Plaintiff more than a year 11I0, as a result of this Court's
entry of the February 13, 1996 Order. (Exhibit" A")
12. In order that the "reentered" judgment be entitled to full faith and credit,
Plaintiff would be required to establish that CRA had been given adequate notice and an
opportunity to be heard in certain bankruptcy proceedings in Iowa during the spring of 1995,
Thae Issues were squarely ralKd by CRA Security System's Petition for a Rule to Show
CaulC ("CRA's First petition to Strike") filed December 28, 1995, which Petition required
Plaintiff to demonstrate why the earlier-filed judgmenl should not be slricken. Sa: CRA's
First PetItion to Strike and accompanying Order, altached hereto as Exhibit "D".
13. As this Court recognized in its Opinion of January 14, 1997, given Plaintiffs
total failure to respond to CRA's First Petition to Strike, as required by this Court's Order of
December 29, 1995, the earlier-entered "Judgment" was subsequently stricken by Order of
February 13, 1996.
14. Tbe Court Order made Exhibit" A" hereto fully and finally that CRA did nal
have notice and/or an opportunity \0 be heard during Ihe proceedings leading \0 the entry of
judgment apInsl CRA In the Bankruptcy Cou. In Iowa,
15. Plaintiff now (as he did in October 1996) wishes \0 challenge the proprlely of
this Court's Order of February 13, 1996, and wishes to relltigate issues of notice, etc.
16. However, Plalntifrs altemptlo relltigate issues such as "notice" al this late
date are precluded by operation of law, as a result of the entry of this Court's February 13,
1996 Order, an Order which is now lw1& since final.
17. As indicated, Plalntiff has conceded, as a matter of law, that CRA was nol
given notice of the hearlng3 prior 10 Ihe Order resulting in Ihe Instant judgment againsl CRA
In Iowa.
18. Plaintifrs belief that lack of notice to CRA regarding Ihe hearings leading \0
the entry of judgmenl was somehow "cured" because CRA had notice that the judgmenl had
been "reentered" evidences a fundamental misunderstanding as to the "notice" required
under, IllIer alia, the United States Constitution. CRA was entitled 10 an opportunily \0
participate in the proceedings grim: 10 the enlry of judgment, not merely to posl hoc notice
that a judament had been rendered. The "re-entry" of the Bankruptcy Court's Order (even
arguendo adequate or timely notice 10 CRA of this single Order) did not remedy CRA's
lnablllty \0 participate in the wiler proceedings leading up to the Court's Order upon which
,
.
--,.,.....'
'.
WHEIUlfORB, Defendant CRA Security SylCems respectfully requcsll that a Rule be
enleled upon Plaintiff to show cause why the reentered Judament should not be stricken, and
dlenaftcr requall that ill Motion to Strike be aranted, and that PlaIntifrs judament be
diamiued with prejudice.
BCURT SBAMANS CHBIUN A MBU.O'IT, u.c
By:
~~,,- .
Mark D. Bradshaw, Esquire
J.D. No. 61975
213 Market Street
P.O. Box 1248
Harriabul'J PA 17108
(717) 237-6000
DATB: ~\ 17 I /'/17
Attorneys for Defendant
CRA Security Systems
"~\:t;;'~i~il~iA~;~::;Y .'
.,
'~-'
.,..f
" ~.
i;,'"
.'" .~~\<{ -' ."
\
.. j-';:.~ 'j Co"
'i-,','.
"","-
,'..'\;=.,""",-....?',.
--~,,,,,,,,:-..-~ ~-
:..}'-
..
-.1:''':"",0::-,"
-;'-f'\~,:;
;!",.sc: ',.1
'.:---.;':~,:_:_-h'A'.
'>'(0'
-,,'--,:';
~;~\-:~~ !
t,"";;,
.'{'
-,.:."."'::,'
\
. ~ '1_ ...........
3. 'lbl. Court'. Order iuulna the Rule to Show Cause made the Rule returnable IS
day. followina service. According to the Prothonotary, service was effectuated on December
29, 1995. Ss docket. Additionally, the undenigned provided courtesy copies of the
documents to Plalntifrk Iowa counsel, and subsequently to local counsel.
4. The undenlaned hu received, and has granted, three separate requests for
ealClll10n of time to respond to the Petition. The most recent extension was through and
includina Wednesday, February 6, 1996. No response has been filed on behalf of Plaintiff to
date.
WHBRBFORE, Defendant respectfully requests that this Court enter a Rule absolute
in the fonn attached, thereby striking the Judgment,
Respectfully submitted,
By:
ECKERT SEAMANS CHERIN & MELLaIT
t\~?~\\J
Mark D. Bradshaw, Esquire
I.D. No. 6197S
Chrislopher M, Cicconi, Esquire
I.D. No, 19331
One South Market Square Building
213 Market St.
P.O. Box 1248
Harrisburg PA 17108
(717) 237-6000
Allorneys for Defendant
CRA Security Systems
2
CIi'..R.TIF1CATE OF SERVICE
I, Mark D. Bradshaw, Esquire, hereby certify thai I am this day serving a
copy of the forqolnl document upon the penon(s) and In the manner Indicated below, which
service satisfiel the requlremenll of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing
a copy of the same In the United States Mall, HarrIsburg, Pennsylvania, with fint-class
postqe prepaid, as follows:
Bruce A. Grove, Jr., Esquire
1513 Cedar CliffDrlve
Camp Hill PA 17011
EC
By:
Mark D. rldshaw, Esquire
1.0, No. 61975
Christopher M. Cicconi, Esquire
1.0. No. 19331
One South Market Square Building
213 Market St,
P.O, Box 1248
Harrisburg P A 171 08
(717) 237-6000
Attorneys for Defendant
CRA Security Systems
February 9, 1996
9$250,1
5
. .JUn'
.,"
." " ")' '-
l" :1;':<~,1 ,,',:,
",",{",:. ~~.
.
, . 1'! , .
, .. 'r, :,/
, '.
1111 W .-
:~t .
.-'!~, ..
."..... "1-'-
'I
i:) on:U:Mll 11_ ....... '.11011""~''''
,_~';'4:' ...."
-;' ","T')':'~'-':""':;'~' '.'" .-"
)j~~~l\t\~~~~~~'tli~~.
-i;~-~~'
".,'"
"."'._.,__--....... "'_' '''r',__
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v.
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS,
DEFENDANTfflESPONDENT
95-7095 CIVIL TERM
IN RE: OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
BAYLEY, J., January 14, 1997:-
On December 12, 1995, a $21,600 foreign judgment was entered by plaintiff,
Jeremy James Hamm, against defendant, CRA Security Systems. Plaintiff then filed a
writ of execution. The judgment had been entered on May 17, 1995, in the United
State Bankruptcy Court for the Southem District of Iowa, Eastem Division, at 94-
10030.
On December 29, 1995. defendant filed a petition to strike the foreign judgment
alleging two defects: (1) that the attomey who entered the judgment was not
licensed to practice law In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and (2) that CRA
Systems "was never given appropriate notice of the proceedings In the bankruptcy
court In Iowa, and therefore was deprived of Its opportunity to defend or to be heard
in that forum." A Rule to Show Cause was entered on December 29, 1995 and was
made retumable fifteen days following service, The Rule was served and no
response was filed. On February 13. 1996, defendant filed a motion to make the Rule
absolute. The Rule was made absolute and the judgment was stricken on February
13, Plaintiff did not file a motion for reconsideration or any direct appeal from the
order striking the judgment.
95-7095 CIVIL TERM
OVer eight months later on October 28, 1996, plaintiff filed a petition requesting
an evidentiary hearing averring:
The Respondent's 'Notice' Issue, aforestated, was remedied by
the United State Bankruptcy Court, Russell J, Hili, Bankruptcy Judge, by
the Court's reentering Its Order (JUDGMEN1) of May 17, 1995; Judge
I:jlll reentered this Order tJUDGMEN1) on Januarv 19. 1996, with
appropriate Notices of Its entry being mailed by the Iowa Bankruptcy
Court Clerk's office to Lawrence J, Rosen, Esquire of Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania and Richard Lyons of CRA Security Systems, Lemoyne
Pennsylvania. (Emphasis added.)
Mr. Rosen was the Respondent'S attomey during the time period
Involved herein and Mr. Lyons was a member of the Respondent's
Collection Department during this period.
Plaintiff further avers that:
Finally, Petitioner's undersigned counsel, by Investigation
subsequent to the Court Order of February 13, 1996, has determined
that the Respondent's stated objections to the Iowa Bankruptcy Court's
Judgment(s) of May 17, 1995 and January 19, 1996, are not, In fact
legally valid , , . .
Plaintiff seeks an order to:
[h) old an Evidentiary Hearing on the Issue of lack of Notice as alleged
by Respondent for the purpose of determining whether a Bankruptcy
Court Judgment entered January 19, 1996 against the Respondent In
the State of Iowa Is now valid and enforceable in the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.
A Rule was entered on October 3D, 1996, directed to CRA Security Systems '[t]o
show cause why the petitioner Is not entitled to the relief requested.' CRA filed an
answer. A deposition was taken, and Ihe Issues have been briefed and argued.
On December 29, 1995, when defendant's petition to strike the foreign
Judgment was flied and the Rule to Show Cause was entered, the applicable
-2-
95-7095 CIVIL TERM
procedure was set forth In Pennsylvania Rules of Civil procedure 206 through 209.1
Since defendant did not file an answer to the Rule, there was no dispute as to the
factual allegations set forth In the petition, The lack of a dispute warranted the entry
of the order on February 13, 1996, making the Rule absolute and striking the
Judgment. That order became final when plaintiff did not file an appeal within 30
days. See O'Neill v. Gioffre, 384 Pa. Super, 579 (1989). Accordingly, there Is no
longer a Judgment entered In this court upon which there Is any basis to hold an
evidentiary hearing as requested by plalntlff,2
For the foregoing reasons, the following order Is entered.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this '''' day of January, 1997, the petition of plaintiff filed on
October 28, 1996, IS DISMISSED.
By th~-C6Urt;'
, ,
,
I '
Edgar B. Bayley, .
)
1. Rescinded effective January 1, 1996, and replaced with Rules 206,1 through
206.7,
2. Plaintiff has averred In his current petition that on January 19, 1996, the
Bankruptcy Court In Iowa reentered the Judgment In his favor that had been entered
against CRA Security Systems on May 17, 1995. The January 19, 1996 judgment has
not been entered as a foreign Judgment In this court. If It Is, what effect If any our
striking of the foreign Judgment entered on December 12, 1995 will have on such a
new Judgment, Is not an Issue presently before us.
-3-
"
-4-
I)L~\t~\ -'. .
..110
, . . . . -
;;:-:\." i ,~_,
!~J!'~
:~~l:/:)
; :p
;:";.;.
_.-c.',,;'"
!}Y~L;;-~. .
[;~,;~";
.- "'-.-",
rc'
,~',. .
-;"'.'l'_
,-..
1'--
..~
(~tv-::,;~; .
f,'i."_.r,l
}'..
,:.-,,-
";.-,~',:-. "
'(',,'F'
~~L~ 'if.;_~
M.>',."
E'.'"l>:"
tk;('''-'
ft,):: .;i ,~.
}:-';'" '.
,"
,:"
'-,. .
";Y"r ",,' ': "~,"
_, "~-_'c
Apr.1"."7 10 I BOA Cap" tal .Recovery
717 730 7070
P.02
, JIIINY JAMES HAMK .
..,....................................--..... ..-...... ..
rn 11\8 Court 01 Co_ Pleas 01
ClUlIbcrland COllnIY. pennayh'lnia
......................---..--------.......--...---
Vf.
- ,\ -
.1J.:'...-7-r./l-tL...---. c.~l\.
'~.~L.
~.1
....----.....-.....-...----.........---...--.................
._. ~,,~. .1I1!~\lRn_'Ulu.:nM.G... ..... ...---.
._._.u...-...-..n-..n--....I'.RAIiClP~ ..U~.....
...... .--
... .... .. .....--. .......................--
In .cCO!.c~~.'!.!:!!..!'.i.t:}l. .!:.h!_.~ ~M~}l_l!".. tUl'Jl'Wdpj;, . Q,(.j,lu1gl\JUlk.lncI..n..
......-...--.........--..
affidavit herein referenced.. ElStI.l\)J..t.A._,n.l&.r..JQcjgJDlUlt.J.n..Ca.'(ox...
............-...........----...---.....--------..--...
. o~" ,q!l.~!!lX--'!!!It~u~iA!~JI! L(:K~_~ef:J!r.U:.I JiU_l&'M.J..U..tbA-JJQOJlQk.Ot..Ul..~O.O. 00
a. of January 19, 1996. .
..........----........--.... ..........--.......-.-------...---------.-------------------...------.
...._...__._.....__._---_..__......~_._....._--_._----.----------.--------..---..--.-.....-.--...
.-----.-.-.....------.--....
..- ---------------.--...-----.----.-..-.----.-..-.---........-.--...
.---. ----.- . -. ..-.. .----_.. .. .-- --...-.... --.... -..-... -......- ---- - ....... -....... -- .....--
-.....-..---...---..
Laurence E. Welker
1ro .___._ .---..--.~----.--.---.----..---...._--
March ~l
-.--.- -------------- ..----...--. --. -- - -. - -.. -...
P'DthonOlal'1'
1~..!l7..
.,' C". r,
...__.L~.~:<:e...-. ...n_....._.
Bruce Grove Atlamcy for P~~inliif,
,
("'\ lO
~:. -J f)
11
.., :.:-
r~ I .,f
.,., .f ,I
. ,
-v. ,..
~....'. , i.~t1J
p' ...j
.I~I .,~
''"oj r
..:. ' -'I
.. , -.r
Coo\, ,,' . '1--
..' . - ;"r.~
\ '..It
.. '"
'.'1 . '.
..' '(;:) ~4
-.
--.,'-...<~~~'
- H",~j~lk~," ~ r
Irr-D
"
1;-
~~,,-'" -!. -, ...-
~~~;1\\~':}-}!:j_:,
I~~i .. ..
~1~i;.)t~~,~;i:rr
;j:;~~l(':"
'-,-. ':'':,.'!'L
- \. ~ ..,
~:O:'<,~;'i i.~
"
!'I-;!.:~\:
';:'c, '.-.~. '~J',
~,'\::!.; ; ~ ,: ,-"
:i,:{: ;'_1
\\,
..",.,!.';!
,':',,' '-'-
~. ., ;:' L
;~-.:".
If'
,;:-.
".""
':'
(i A~" IllliU M...._ ltIN\..a."'''''
I ,..
DEL; 1.3 WgSbIJ
JEREMY lAMES HAMM
Plaintiff
) IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) ctJMBB,lU.AND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 95-7095
V.
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
Defendant
ec~~rt r;':',1!JMfm$
Cr",. ....\., . '. ;^l'r~',,"
~ t.., i . . ~ '.. ' ..... ."1., ~
JAr~ 0;;: 19~
ORDER
Herrlokn:i'g, ~.~
.
I,. .,
AND NOW, this -),J, day of ~, 199Gpon consideration of
Def'enclant CRA Security Systems' Petition to Strike ludgment, a Rule is hereby issued upon
Plaintiff to show cause, if any he W, why the relief requested in such Petition should. not be
iraitted. The Sheriff of Cumberland County is directed to take no further action with reaard
to any enforcement or execution proceedings pcndbg a resolution of this -Petition.
Rule retumable IS days following service.
BY THE CO
(('
1.
<.
91110,1
.... ..... "'~")' r:r''"'M r.I:CCl"D
~ . .J.~ \... Ji ,.."....., "'... ..~;\
!:t T.' :';":'"',' \' :1 r:of, I h.-rc unto s~1 my hcnd
j..;d 1:13 :..~I or sa;J Court at Cilrli!le, Pa.
Thls.;1.,,'J.~~~ dilY 01...00u.."...., 19..:t.S-
..........,......--JI.;A'~~~i~~~'"
'. .
,.
3. Upoa InfOrmation IIId beIleI, aIIiDnIey Buter-WelII II DOt Ilcea"'" to pnctIce law
iD die r-......MIIIh of PeIlIIIylvanla, IIId hid nO ItInlIlq to file IepI documentlllld
inatructdle Sberiff of Cumbedand County to like any actIoIl OIl behalf of her client nUl,
tbeN are ",.....--taI defectI which IppcII' of IIlCOId with nprd to die Jud.ment (I.e. the
IIJIIO baviDa beal purportedly filed by an unIiceItJed attorney).
4. Fwldamcnlll defectl, IIICh u that let forth above, are, ItInlIlq alone, adequate
poundIto aupport the atrIIdna of a judamcnt.
5. However, u let forth in areater detail below, there are far more lCrioulluues
wltlch support the ItriIdn& of the Judgment.
6. AtlIl:hed hereto II the Affidavit of Mr. Hap Selden, President of Capital
Recovery .tAI'CIIIft. Inc. tJdlb/l CRA Security SYlteml.
7. AlICt forth in greater detail in Mr. Selden' Affidavit and the Bxhiblts attached
thereto, the Bankruptcy Court recordl relating to thil Judgment demonltrate that CRA
Security Sylfeml was never given appropriate notice of the proceedinll in the Bankruptcy
Court in Iowa, and therefore was deprived of its opportunity to defend or be heard in that
forum.
8. All result, the Judgmenl which was rendered in Iowa and lubsequently
tranlferred to this Court is unenforceable and void, and cannot support valid execution
procedures.
2
JBRBMY JAMBS HAMM
Plaintiff
) IN THB COURT OF COMMON PLBAS
) CUMBBRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
)
) No. 95-7095
)
)
)
)
)
V.
CRA SECURITY SYSTBMS
Defendant
AFFIDAVIT
HAP A. SBIDBRS, havlna been duly sworn, hereby states on the buls of his
knowledle u follows:
1. My name is Hap A. Selders. I am the President of Capital Recovery Associates,
Inc., tJdlb/a CRA Security Systems. a Pennsylvania corporation having its principal place of
bullncu at 324 Market SInlCt, Lcmoyne, Cumberland County. Pennsylvania 17043. I am
over the lie of eJahtecn (18) and am competent to testify in the above-referenced matter.
2. In late June of this year (1995), I first became aware of a bankruptcy proceeding
in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Iowa involving Plaintiff
hczcln. Mr. Hamm.
3. Specifically, I received, through my counsel, Stacey Allen. correspondence from
an Iowa attorney named Martha Easter-Wells (hereinafter "Easter-Wells.) dated lune 19.
1995 which advised that a judgment (the "ludgment") had been entered against CRA Security
Systems in the Bankruptcy Court. A true and correct copy of the lune 19, 1995
correspondence is attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit "A. (hereinafter the
.Correspondence").
. "
4. 'I1le Corrapondence from Euter-WelIs wu convenlenUy directed to Ms. Allen
euct1y 31 days Col1owina the entry of the Judlmentln the BsnIauptcy Court.
5. 'I1le Conespondencc from Euter-WelIs to Ms. Allen wu the first notice I had
rqard1na the entry of any Jud&ment qalnst CRA Security Systems by the Bankruptcy Court
In Iowa, and In fact, represented the fint notice I rec:e1ved CllIICCltIIinI this proceeding at all.
6. Pollowlna my receipt of the Correspondence, I requested Hurisbura counsel at
Bcbrt Seamans Cherln " Mellott to contact the Iowa BsnIauptcy Court in an effort to
ucertain the procedural background of this matter, and to obtain copies of relevant court
documenllin an effort to understand how the Judgment couid have been entered aaalnst CRA
Security Systems.
7. Through Eckert Seamans' efforts, I was able to obtain copies of the Bankruptcy
Court documents, (including the Order and Notice for the hearing which resulted in the
Order) dlrect1y from the Bankruptey Court. These documents are attached hereto and made
a part hereof u Exhibit "0".
8. 'I1Ie Certificate of Service which is a1tached to the Order indicates that the Court's
Order was served on a number of parties, not Includlnll CRA Security Systems. Included u
having received notice per the Certificate of Service are four lypewrilten namos, attorney
Euter-WelIs, Plaintiff Hamm, Burton Fagen (identity unknown), and the United States
Trustee. Additionally, handwritten below these typewritten names were the names of two
attorneys who had directed correspondence on behalf of CRA Security Systems 10 Mr.
Hamm: Bffron &. Bffron, and Lawrence J. Rosen, (each of which Is mentioned In the
Bankruptcy Court's Order of May i7, 1995, however, neither of which represented eRA in
any capacity In this maller, and neither of which were sanctioned), ~ Exhibit B).
,
...--....-
9. Furthermore, the Certificate of Service attached to the Notice and Order for
Hearina lCIteduUna the hcuin& in thll matter indlC"18 an identical aervice nit, once ..Iin,
DDllnciud1n& CRA Security SYlteml. Here apin, the typewritten material indicalcl that four
Noticea were sent to the aame four partiea above-referenced, and there are handwritten
entr1cs reIatina to BeCton " BeCton and Lawrence J. Rosen.
10. 'lbe documenll received from the United SIIICI Bankruptcy Court in Iowa
explained, to me, why I wu lurprised to receive Attorney Baster-Welll' June 19, 1995
Correspondence, inalmuch as CRA Security SYltems had never received fonnal notice from
the Bankruptcy Court of the entty of the Order, or notice of the scheduling of the hearing
which led to the entty of the Order.
11. Alain, the timinl of the Jline 19, 1995 Correspondence (exactly 31 daYI
foUowlna the Bankruptcy Court'1 Order) leads me to question the manner In which this
Judlment wu obtained In the Bankruptcy Court in Iowa.
i2. In any event, CRA Security Systems never made any deliberate decision not to
defend the Bankruptcy matter in Iowa, rather, it never had the opportunity to make any
decision regarding this matter, not having received either Notice of the hearing, or timeiy
notice of the entty of the Court'l Order such that any appeal would have been possible.
13. In addition, CRA Security Systems was never a party to the underlying
Bankruptcy proceeding, and wu never formally served, whether in person, by certified mail,
or in any other formal manner with service of the Debtor's Motion 10 find CRA Security
SyslCms in conlCmpt. Consequently, I believe the Bankruptcy Court never had personal
jurisdiction over CRA Security Systems in Ihe firsl instance,
...
. , .
..., ...
o
Q
'.
UNITED STATES BANXRUPTCY COURT f2
POR THB SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP IOWA If
EASTERN DIVISION
00
IN THE HA'l"1'ER OP
JBRBMY JAMBS IWIM
BANKRUPTCY NO. 94-~Q3D
C ~ rl~.' .....
'I. "I 1.-
",'.~J'l, \..,!~,..,,,,,,,
I'J, " . i~l...
. .0;.' ,..,...
. t~J.. ", . , !J
JUL 3 . .:i.fl'j';','
11. J ;995
l1t'lsb, .
:J,"il, I~~n
~ERLIo~it:OTi~RN Dtu.~BLSD ~E~~i:'Nc~~ "l
DISCHARGE XNJUNCTION
DEBTOR.
)
)
)
)
)
).
)
CHAPTER 7
-
t,
This case coming on for hearing on the Debtor's Motion to Hold
CRA security Systems in Contempt of Court for Violation of the
Discharge Injunction of 11 U.S.C. S 524,
IT IS FOUND that on April 7, 1995 the Debtor filed the
Petition in this case. Notice of commencement of t~e Chapter 7
case was sent to the creditors on April 20, 1995. The Court finds
that Spencer Gifts, North Park Mall, Davenport, Iowa and
Continental COllections, P.O. Box 40441, Rochester, NY 14604 were
listed on the mailing Matrix, and Notice was given to them on April
20, 1995. On July 26, 1994, Discharge was .entered in this case and
Notice was given to Spencer Gifts and Continental Collections.
On January 3, 1995 the Debtor filed a Motion to Reopen and the
Court approved it on January 26',1995, The evidence now before the
Court shows that the Debtor received multiple letters from
1
'J-5j?f{
Exhibit "B
, " I
\.
.'
(I~.,
~
r)
'-
",
-r_
CRA Security systems and from attorneys hired by CRA Security
systems. ' The amount of the original debt was less than $50.00.
Upon receipt of the letters, counsel for Hr. Hamm, Martha Easter-
Wells contacted CRS Security systems and advised them that the debt
had been discharged in bankruptcy. There were also telephone calls
to CRA Security systems in which CRA Security systems was advised
of the bankruptcy discharge and in which they responded that they
were not bound by oral notice of the Discharge.
Even after notice orally and in writing, CRA Security Systems
proceeded to contact counsel to collect the debt. Martha Easter-
Wells contacted ccunsel and advised them of the bankruptcy
discharge. Counsel stopped contact immediately. They were well
advised to so.
The Court finds that under 11 U.S.C. 5524(2) that the
discharge operates as an injunction against the commencement or
continuation of an action or employment of process or act to
collect any discharged debt as a personal liability of the debtor.
The Court finds in this case that the facts indicate that eRA
security systems clearly and intentionally violated
11 U.S.C. 5524 (2). They have continued process to collect the debt
even after being informed of the bankruptcy discharge. The record
will reflect that CRA Security Systems received notice of this
hearing and notice of the pending contempt proceeding and have not
responded. The first notice was for the hearing on March 17, 1995.
CRA Security systems and counsel for CRA Security Systems
2
\. ..
"0
. " .
(l)
..
. ,
did not appear. The second hearing Notice was for May 3, 1995 at
2130 p... and they failed to appear and counsel failed to appear.
The Court rules that sanctions should be imposed. Insofar as
Efron , Bfron and Krevsky , Rosen, the Debtor has not asked for
sanctions because they terminated contact ilDlDediately upon being
advised of the bankruptcy discharge.
Insofar as sanctions, the r.ecord will reflect that the debtor
is asking for fees of $1,500.00. The Court finds attorneys fees in
the amount of $1,500.00 are reasonable.
Insofar as punitive
damages, local counsel will have to employ counsel in the U.S.
District Court in which LeMoyne is located unless counsel for the
debtor is, )lilling to go there herself. To iilterest counsel in that
district, the amount of the judgement will be determinative. In
addition, some of these businesses look at punitive damages as a
business expense. This Judge wants to put eRA Security system and
other businesses on notice that if there is a phone call indicating
that there is a bankruptcy, they need to stop and check it out.
punitive damages in the amount of $20,000.00 and attorneys
fees in the amount of $1,500.00 are ordered and Judgment is granted
therefore.
Date: Mtl'i /7,! 195
~."~
Russ 11 J. HiU
JUdge, u'S'/~ankruPtcy court
Southern District of Iowa
3
.
(~. . . .I:""J
lJNfI'ED-i;i~TES BANKRUPrCY COuR-..".
Southern District of 10WI
P. O. Box 9264
Dca Molaea, lowI50306-9264
. ,
. .
.
. .
In re: Jeremy James Hamm
Case No. 94 .01003 DH
Chapter 7
F I L .E D
I 04/27/95 I
aat. u s. IIaDIauI1ccY Coun
Del Mol.... 10...
Debtor(s)
NOTICE AND ORDER FOR HEARING
YOU ARB HBRI!BY NOTIFIED Ihal I bearing wUI be beld on the
foUowiDa IIlIIler(I):
CONTINUED HEARING ON MOTION TO HOLD I~REDITOR IN CIVIL CONTEMPT
AND UABLB FOR DAMAGES FOR VIOLATION OF THE DISCHARGE
INJUNCTION (l7-DBR)
befol'lllhc HoDorab1e Russell J. BIll, ChIef V,S. BlllbuplcY Judge, In 2nd Floor Counroom, Federal BuUdlng, 4th
IIId Peny Sueell, Dlvenpon, IA S2801 , on May 3, 1995, at 01:30 pm.
Plcuc: COOlUIt the Local BanknJplcy RutCl concerning conduct, and procedures related to ellh\bilS, conllnuances,
ICttlemenl, elC.
If Ihe coun bu previously ordered thai briefs and arguments be filed on the above matter(s), those documents
aball be flied ODe week prior 10 the bearing dale.
If Ihls IIlIIter is setlled prior to the bearing, a coOlent order disposing of the matter mUJI be filed with tbe coun
prior 10 the scheduled time of the hearing. Unda Burnett, Counroom Depul)l. musl be so advised.
'Ibe amount of lime alloned for this matter Is IS MINUTES.
rr IS ORDERED thai the maIllng of a copy of this Order 10 Interested panics at leut S days prior 10 the date
fixed for hearing sblll be deemed sufficlenl Dotlce bereof.
Daled: April 27, 1995
Mary M. Weibel
Clerk, U.S. Bankruplcy Coun
By: ~.L A &.A ;;zif
Linda S. umett
Counroom Depul)I
NOle: Any communication regarding schedullng matters musl be directed 10 Linda Bumen, Counroom Depul)l, (S15)
284-6479.
Panics served: Debtor, Easter-Wells, CRA Secunly Systems/Lyons, U.S.Tr., Tr., Rosen, Efron
23/23/
.
,......_10:
. .
. , .. .
.........Wclli. 6011ItIdy. Suite 300. Daveapon.1& 52103
....,.-..... 101 HIII.1da Drive. lleUcadorf. IA 51721
.... H........ 206 Commen:. BlcUnal BIde., 2535 ~ DrIve. JIou"t'dorf. IA 527U
U.s. -n-. Room 517, PedtnJ BuUdll1l, 210 Walnut Sueer, Des Mnlllel, IA 50309
I.tA
'L."
()
>>>>>>> TocaIIlOIIca: 4 <<<<<<<
f.. F ~otJ t Uf.. ON
5 ~ 1- f1 rt "h~ IWIl.
flo.ml"...J I r:.{I1 I{ to 3 2-0
L -...J(tNCA- If. /....<;;p,J
,'01 N. FraN I- ,5+.
b PL'J /7 I 0 1-
l+CV'rl~ .......j I rq
. . ~\"I"""""""IftIMeI' ,
...........,........r..rl"...u..."'*"""C4...t.....h....,....~"
..... - '...!I:"tunlllt.'.....:':"1I'.....;.." .,
. . t' ".'hI!':'''M'''' ,. . I
, ,', ,:\" t... r
~. -_....""'."~ (""
......~u," ..-:tll.
. . ..
I . .. .
.
. . I .
.
CERTIIl'ICATE OF SERVICE
I, Mark D. Bradshaw, Esquire, hereby certify that on thll 28th day of December,
1995, I aervcd a tnJe and comet copy of the foreaolna via United Slalel ftnt-clul mall,
po'laie prcpald, upon the following:
Martha Euter-Welll, Esquire
601 Brady Suite 300
Davcuport IA 52803
By:
::d SEAMANS CHBRIN " MIlLl.OTf
~~
Mark D. Bradshaw, Blqulre
I.D. No. 61975
Christopher M. Clcconl, Esquire
I,D. No. 19331
One South Markel Square Bulldlna
213 Market Street
P.O. Box 1248
Harrisburg PA 17108
(717) 237.6000
Allomeys for Defendant
eRA Sccurily Sys1ems
91161.1
I .. . .
. ... .
CERTlFlCA.TE OF SERVICE
I, Mark D. Bradshaw, esquire, hereby certify Ihatl am this day serving a
copy of the foreaolna document upon the person(s) and In the manner Indicated below, which
service satisfies the requirements of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, by depositing
a copy of the ume In the United States Mall, Harrisbulll. Pennsylvania. with fint-clus
poItIIe prepaid, u follows:
BnIce A. Grove, Jr., esquire
1513 Cedar Cliff Drive
Camp H\l1 Pa 17011
~+~
Mark D. BradshaW
DATED: Arrl /7, NO[ 7
IICIUS
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
Plaintiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA
V.
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS
Defendant
95.7095 Civil Term
R...J;PONDENT'S BRIE'" IN SUPPORT OF ITS RENEWJ'n MOTION TO STRIKE
I. ~ural RlI"klround
The entire procedural background of thll mailer II rather complex, However, II a
result of the entry of this Court's February 13, 1996 Order (made Exhibit" A" \0 Plalntlfrl
accompanying Renewed Motion \0 Strike), Ihe procedural backaround necelsary to dispose of
the Inltant Motion \0 Strike Is aclually very straillh1forward.
On or about December 12, 1995, Plaintlfrs Iowa counsel nled a "judllment" with the
Prothonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, and directed the Sheriff
\0 bqln execution proceedlngl throullh levy. On December 28, 1995, the underslllned, on
behaif of CRA, filed a Petition \0 Strike and Rule to Show Cause ("CRA'I Firsl Petition \0
Strike") relating \0 the referenced judgmenl, allellln1l1wo fundamental defectl which
appeared of record with regard 10 Ihe judgment. Firs1, the allomey purportinlllO file the
same In this Court was unlicensed as a Pennsylvania allomey, Second, Respondent CRA
Security Systems had never been given approprlale notice of 1he procccdings in the
Bankruptcy Court In Iowa. and, therefore, was deprived of Its opportunity to defend or be
heard In that forum, ~ CRA's First Petition to Slrlke (A1lached to the accompanying
Renewed Motion to Strike al Exhibl1 "D"),
CRA '. Flnt Petition to Strike was appropriately supported with an ACfidavll from the
President of CRA, together with a Brief on the law supporting the striking of a judgment
under circumstances such as those described In Ihe Petition and the Affidavit. This Court
aubsequenUy luucd an Order to Show Cause on December 30, 1995, requiring Plaintiff to
show cause, If any he had, why the judgmenl should not be slrlcken. This Court's Order
made the Rule returnable on January 17, 1996.
For reuons known only to Plaintiff and/or his Iowa or local counsel, no response was
ever flied to CRA '. Petition to Strike. As a resull, once it became clear Ihat Plaintiff did not
Intend to respond, the undersigned requested thallhe Rule be made absolute. Thereafter,
this Court entered Its February 13, 1996 Order striking the judgment. No Motion for
~s1deraUon was ever filed, nor did Plaintiff file an appeal. Instead, CRA considered the
matter final until receiving a "Petition for Evidentiary Hearing", some eight month.
following this Court'. February 13, 1996 Order. Following briefing and argumenl, this
Court luucd an opinion and order, In which Judge Bayley noted that the facts set forth In
CRA's Flnt Petition to Strike had never been challenged, and thai the Court'. order of
February 13, 1996 had been properly issued (striking the judgment) IhIUIl Plaintifrs failure
to respond.
Now, some three month's following this Court's January 14, 1997 Order, Plaintiff
has "reentered" a judgment from Ihe Bankruptcy Court In Iowa. S= CRA's Renewed
Motion to Strike at Exhibit "C".
2
U. Anumf!ftt
A. Any and all issues relating to "notice" regarding the Iowa bankruptcy
proceedings were foreclosal tilfough Plaintifrs failure to respond to the earlier
Order to Show Cause, and this Court's resulting February 13, 1996 Order.
In order thai Plaintiff's judgment from Iowa be entitied to full faith and credit,
Plaintiff must establish that CRA was afforded its constilutional rights to notice and an
O9jIOrtUnity to be heard. SfIG Tron-run COI:poration v. Ml:r.erock, 820 F.Supp, 225 (W.D.
PI. 1993) l:iIID&, inter alia, Morris I ~pldus Associates v. Alroort ELS. Inc., 240 Pa, Super.
80, 361 A.2d 660 (1976).
In order to prevail on these issues, Plaintiff would have 10 demonstrate that CRA had
adequate notice of certain bankruptcy proceedings in Iowa, Plaintiff, however, Is entitied to
no such opportunity, inasmuch as all such "notice" Issues were resolved against Plaintiff as a
result of this Court's Order of February 13, 1996, a copy of which is altached to CRA's
Renewed Motion to Strike as Exhibit "A".
11Ie "notice" issues were squarely presented 10 the Court as a result of CRA's Fint
Petition to Strike, as well as the supporting Affidavit and Brief. Plaintiff chose not to
respond to these factual avennents. As a result, by operation of law, all factual avennents
contained in CRA's Petition of December 28, 1995 have been deemed admitted.'
Under Petition and Rule practice, if Plainliff had wanted to challenge CRA's
assertions regarding the inadequacy of notice in the Bankruptcy Court in Iowa (or any other
mallCr set forth in the Petition filed by CRA lasl December), it was incumbent upon Plaintiff
.---......
As a malter of substantive law, it matters not whether the former Rule 209 (still
effective in December of 1995) is deemed applicable 10 the resolulion of Ihis matter or
whether currenl Rule 206.7 (effective January I, 1996) is deemed control1ing.
3
10 do 10 withIn the time constraints established by the Court's "-'"mber 29. 199~ Order. It
has been the law for at least fifty years thai:
[l]n the abllellce of any answer 10 a petition for a rule \0 show cause, on the
dale the rule Is relumable, the factual avermenls in the Petition are taken as
true.
3 standard Pennsylvania Practice, OI~:27 al454, ~ Commw. v. One nodie Motor
IW, 123 Pa. Super 311, 187 A.461 (1936) affd. 326 Pa. 120, 191 A.590. This Court
recoanlzed in its January 14, 1997 Opinion and Order thai its February 13, 1996 Order had
been properly entered In the absence of a response by Plaintiff. Allhis juncture, therefore,
Plaintiff has waived, (or, at a minimum is collaterally eslopped from attempting 10 litigate)
luues such as notice, having elected not 10 raise such issues nearly a year ago, and having
neither RlQucsted reconsideration nor taken an appeal from Ihis Court's February 13, 1996
Order.
By "reentering" a judgment from the Iowa Bankruptcy Court with this Court, Plaintiff
II nece....Uy uraing once again thai the "notice" issue was somehow "remedied" by the
Bankruptcy Court's formal entry of judgment, at some time after Iowa counsel first sought 10
domesticate the earlier-filed "judgment" with this Court. This, al any rate, was the argument
put forth by Plaintiff in his unsuccessful "Petition for an Evidentiary Hearing" lasl fall.'
To reiterate, however, formal entry of judgmenl occurred approximately one month
following the transfer of the supposed "judgment" by Iowa counsel to this Court in
December, 1995. Had Plaintiff truly believed that Ihis last step "remedied" the earlier notice
, This allegalion was an Implicit admission that the "judgment" transferred by Iowa
counsel to this Court was not, in fact, fit1iI atlhe time il was purportedly transferred.
4
5. The matter came back before this Court on October 28, 1996, (more than
daht month. after Plalntifrs judamenl was dismissed), when Plaintiff flied a "Petition for
an Evidentiary Hearlna" .
5. After brlefina and qument, the Court entered an Order on lanuary 14, 1997
diamiuina PlaIntirr. PetItion for an evidentiary hearlna. A true and correct copy of thl.
Order I. attIchod hereto as Exhibit "8".
7. No appeIIl was taken from this Order, and Ills now final. ~ docket.
8. In dlsmissina Pla1ntifrs Petition for an Evidentiary Hearlna the Court reaaoned
that:
Since [plaintiff] did not file an answer \0 the (December 29,
1995J there was no dl~ute as 10 the fllClual allqltlonl In the
vtItion. The lack of dispute warranted the entry of the order on
February 13, 1996, maldna the Rule absolute and strlldna the
judament. That order became final when Plaintiff did not file an
appeal within 30 clays. ~ O'Neill v. Gioffre, 384 Pa. Super.
579 (1989). Accordlna1y, there Is no 10naer a judament entered
In this court upon which there Is any basis \0 hold an evidentiary
hearlna as requested by plaintiff.
SIla Exhibit "8" at 3, Bayley, 1. (emphasis added).
9. The court Indicated In footnote two (2) of Its Opinion thaI, althouah Plaintiff
hid referred \0 a "reentered" judamenl from Iowa, said judament was not before the court,
and that consequently, "what effect If any our striking of the foreign judgment entered on
December 12, 199.5 wll1 have on such a new judgment, Is not an Issue presently before us."
10. Apparently laldnl thlslanluqe II encoul'llementlo "nHIomesticate" the
.reentered" jud,ment, Plaintiff hu now done so, thereby brinlinl the matler back before
the coun for a third time (after walt1nlsome three (3) additional months fOllowin, the
Court'. January 14, 1997 Order 10 do so). ~ praecipe for entry of judlmentattached
hereto and IlIIde a put hereof.. Exhibit "C".
II. CRA's position at this juncture is simple: Plaintiff I. a\templinllo relitilate an
IUlIe which wu resolved lllainsl Plaintiff more than a year 11I0, .. a result of thl. Coun'.
entry of the February 13, 1996 Order. (Exhibit" A")
12. In order that the "reentered" judgment be entitled 10 full faith and credit,
Plaintiff would be required to establish that CRA had been given adequate notice and an
"I'I"'rtunlty 10 be heard In certain bankruptcy Proc:cedinls In Iowa during the aprinl of 1995.
TheIe llIUeI were squarely n1sed by CRA Security System's Petition for a Rule 10 Show
CauIe ("CRA's Fint petition to Strike") filed December 28, 1995, which Petition required
Plaintiff 10 demonstrate why Ihe earlier.fiIed judgmenl should not be stricken. ~ CRA's
Fint PetItion to Strike and accompanying Order, attached herelo as ElIhibit "D".
13. As this Coun recognized In ill Opinion of January 14, 1997, liven Plaintirrs
IoIal failure to respond 10 CRA's First Petition 10 Strike, as required by this coun's Order of
December 29, 1995, Ihe earlier-entered "Judgment" was subsequently stricken by Order of
February 13, 1996.
14. The Court Order made Exhibit" A" hereto fully and finally Ihat CRA did lUll
have notice and/or an opportunity to be heard during the proceedings leading to the entry of
judlment qalnlt CRA in the Bankruptcy CoUll in Iowa.
15. Plaintiffnow (as he did in October 1996) wishes to challenge the propriety of
thil Court'. Order of February 13, 1996, and wishes to relitigate issues of notice, etc.
16. However, Plaintifrs attempt 10 relitigate issues such as "notice" at this late
date are precluded by operation of law, as a resull of the entry of this Court's February 13,
1996 Order, an Order which is now lm1& since final.
17. As indicated, Plaintiff has conceded, as a matter of law, thai CRA was not
liven notice of the hearings prior 10 the Order resulting in the instanl judgment qainst CRA
in Iowa.
18. Plaintifrs belief that lack of notice to CRA regarding the hearings leading to
the entry of judgmenl was somehow "cured" because CRA had notice Ihat the judgment had
been "reentered" evidences a fundamental misunderstanding as 10 Ih... "notice" required
under, Itller alia, the United States Constilution, CRA was entitled to an opportunity to
participate in the proceedings IlIiln to the entry of judgmenl, not merely 10 posl hoc notice
that a jud,ment had been rendered, The "re-en1ry" of Ihe Bankruptcy Court's Order (even
arguendo adequate or timely notice 10 CRA of Ihis single Order) did nol remedy CRA's
inability to participate in the earlier proceedings leading up 10 the Court's Order upon which
Juctament wu ultimately entered, (for example, the hearing It which the Iward apInst CRA
wu made).
19. By the time Plaintiff orchestrated the "re-entry" of the Order In Iowa, (over I
yar 110 _ in January 1996), he was already under an obllgltion to respond speclfic:al1y to
CRA's factua1lvermenll relatlnl to lack of notice in the earlier Proc:eedinls in Iowa, by
virtue of this Court'. Order of December 29, 1995. As indicated, Plaintiff chole not to
rapond to this Petition, and conaequenUy these issues were resolved aaainst him.
20. The re-entered judgment continues to surfer from the same constitutional
infirmities which Plaintiff had conceded II the time this Court entered its February 13, 1996
Order Itrildnl the earller.filed "judgment". Nothing Plaintiff can do or say It thll juncture
can alter the legal effect of Plalntifrs judicial admission that the Iowa Proc:etdinll
t\vo.m~lves, (and not merely the earller-entered "Judgment" resulting therefrom), were fatally
flawed.
_ a~ II" .___ ...~~
--'-/W~'%;~;I.~'i'~i~;r,~i~~~~;';{.i~~tt;lf~\!;;;!~t.:\'7,';;i:':Ji~',;;,
~
:~,; ,
,,;
,'."
,.'.'
..;-
_ III~ u_ ..._.~...
1'" "!;;,T ~., . ~....
......../..'--...._.....;,_.
.--....,._p-.....f
\.:
.
,-
,
"
v.
: IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
: CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVAN~.~
: ' ,,*~)'-
; q,~ ,,~ ~
v.-ff e~~ ~ ~ .
v~ ~... \ ~Y'
';)~- -.)"t:b.
!o."\~
y,'1'
,
,
: 95-7095 CIVIL TERM
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
PLAINTlFF/PETlTlONER
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS,
DEFENDANTfflESPONDENT
QBDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this '''' day of January, 1997, the petition of plaintiff filed on
October 28, 1996, IS DISMISSED.
Bruce A. Grove, Jr" Esquire
For PlalntlfflPetltloner
Mark D. Bradshaw, Esquire
For Defendantfflespondent
:saa
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
v,
CRA SECURITY SYSTEMS,
DEFENDAN~RESPONDENT
95-7095 CIVIL TERM
I~ RE: OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT
BAYLEY, J., January 14, 1997:-
On December 12,1995, a $21,500 foreign Judgment was entered by plaintiff,
Jeremy James Hamm, against defendant, CRA Security Systems. Plaintiff then filed a
writ of execution. The judgment had been entered on May 17, 1995, In the United
State Bankruptcy Court for the Southem District of Iowa, Eastem Division, at 94-
10030.
On December 29, 1995, defendant filed a petition to strike the foreign judgment
alleging two defects: (1) that the attomey who entered the judgment was not
licensed to practice law In the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and (2) that CRA
Systems 'was never given appropriate notice of the proceedings In the bankruptcy
court In Iowa, and therefore was deprived of Its opportunity to defend or to be heard
In that forum.' A Rule to Show Cause was entered on December 29, 1995 and was
made retumable fifteen days following service, The Rule was served and no
response was filed. On February 13, 1996, defendant filed a motion to make the Rule
absolute, The Rule was made absolute and the judgment was stricken on February
13. Plaintiff did not file a motion for reconsideration or any direct appeal from the
order striking the judgment.
95-7095 CIVlL TERM
OVer eight months later on October 28, 1996, plaintiff filed a petition requesting
an evidentiary hearing averring:
The Respondent's 'Notice' Issue, aforestated, was remedied by
the-United State Bankruptcy Court, Russell J. Hili, Bankruptcy Judge, by
the Court's reentering Its Order (JUDGMENT) of May 17, 1995; Judce
I:iIIJ reentered this Order (JUDGMENT) on Januarv 19, 1996, with
appropriate Notices of Its entry being mailed by the Iowa Bankruptcy
Court Clerk's office to Lawrence J, Rosen, Esquire of Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania and Richard Lyons of CRA Security Systems, Lemoyne
Pennsylvania. (Emphasis added.)
Mr, Rosen was the Respondent's attorney during the time period
Involved herein and Mr. Lyons was a member of the Respondent's
Collection Department during this period.
Plaintiff further avers that:
Finally, Petitioner's undersigned counsel, by Investigation
subsequent to the Court Order of February 13, 1996, has determined
that the Respondent's stated objections to the Iowa Bankruptcy Court's
Judgment(s) of May 17, 1995 and January 19, 1996, are not, In fact
legally valid , . , .
Plaintiff seeks an order to:
[h]old an Evidentiary Hearing on the Issue of lack of Notice as alleged
by Respondent for the purpose of determining whether a Bankruptcy
Court Judgment entered January 19, 1996 against the Respondent In
the State of Iowa Is now valid and enforceable In the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania.
A Rule was entered on October 30, 1996, directed to CRA Security Systems "[t]o
show cause why the petitioner Is not entitled to the relief requested." CRA filed an
answer, A deposition was taken, and the Issues have been briefed and argued,
On December 29, 1995, when defendant's petition to strike the foreign
judgment was filed and the Rule to Show Cause was entered, the applicable
.2-
95-7095 CIVIL TERM
procedure was set forth In Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure 206 through 209.\
Since defendant did not file an answer to the Rule, there was no dispute as to the
factual allegations set forth In the petition. The lack of a dispute warranted the entry
of the order on February 13, 1996, making the Rule absolute and striking the
judgment, That order became final when plaintiff did not file an appeal within 30
days, See O'Neill v, Gioffre, 384 Pa, Super, 579 (1989), Accordingly, there Is no
longer a Judgment entered In this court upon which there Is any basis to hold an
evidentiary hearing as requested by plalntlff.2
For the foregoing reasons, the following order Is entered.
ORDER OF COURT
AND NOW, this '''' day of January, 1997, the petition of plaintiff filed on
October 28, 1996. IS DISMISSED,
By thjl-COUrt;'
- .
I'
)
1. Rescinded effective January 1, 1996, and replaced with Rules 206,1 through
206.7.
2. Plaintiff has averred In his current petition that on January 19, 1996, the
Bankruptcy Court In Iowa reentered the judgment In his favor that had been entered
against CRA Security Systems on May 17, 1995, The January 19, 1996 judgment has
not been entered as a foreign judgment In this court. If It Is, what effect If any our
striking of the foreign judgment entered on December 12, 1995 wlll have on such a
new judgment, Is not an Issue presently before us,
.3-
-4-
.-"
-;" .:,,1 "..~'. .";
~ ,~" ;, :\
"
'i~,' ( .
",.",~.,..,..,~
.,~, ....L, .. ._.... , . ':_,,' .'. "'- .
',.".',-/
:~1~ ;'~:\ . .,'
",,~ j .
.nnc
.,
~ I
* W1J:l'-3" UIdJ ...__ ..........l...'1'f
.~W~';;.
~~~~:.> -~~.;~.'t~:'
Apr-14-97 10:fiOA Capita' Recovery
717 730 7070
P.02
. JIREMY JAMES HAMM ...
~'....._... ....-_. ..-. .-. ..... -..---.- .-- ...,.. --....
In Ih. COUI'f 01 Common Plc:u of
Cumberland Counl~. Pcnnsylnni:l
............-.......--....--...............-...---..---..--..
',".
a -- ,\ -
~" ../J.__.-7-v.f-!L..---. C.v.l.
'~.~L.
CR. ....ClJD..."'V C1:VQ",...a ...................-. ....- ............... ......... ............... ...........
._.., .~....... ._J'. k.,-_..........n"--- ...---------
oaap,.lpb .Ju"""".........r.. ...... .. ...... ......-. ............--.......--..
_._.-.._--.-.-.--------------.-.---....o~ ,. ~.. .
.... _u .u _~!.' ..~~_~~!_~~_~g!!.. ".i.~}l..~h!_ _~t-M,,}l.t!"-. trJltlA9dp.!i. . ~_J.\It1gllllU11<.. .Incl_ ---..
._ . ~ ~!.~ ~_I!. !~_~_ J!!F..! !.rl_F..I!f.1l ~!,.I}~.!!.~_.~!,._~~}1.t tlJ..t_ ,^,_tI\.l&or. . J~lSWDont- .In..f ..\(0):;. ..
. o~.. .q~_~!'~~-J!!~I!!.J!.g~j~-I!L~~JUI.!!!:l~r!1:x JiU.I&'M_J..U..t\lft.MOllOt..-Of. .U1J.~O.O, 00
a. of January 19, 1996. .
......-.. ...- -- ----........ ..... ...--... -..-... .-.- ----.. ..-- ...... ..--..- ...- ..........-.- ...........................--...--.... ---........- --...... --....-
.....-....--.......------...-...................-.........................-.....-...........-.......-........--......................................
....----..............--..-..-................ .....
..-.....-...--.....-..-......--..-.................................-...-....-........--......
...--. ....-......-....--..--.--.....................---.....-..-..-..---.-............-.... .~_......._.... .....-
.........-...........
To .___~~.~~.!r:~_II!. .~:__l!!' !1S!'.~---.---_...--
Karch ~l
.---------------.-..---.....-..----.. -...- ....--..-...... -...
p.olhonOI:lry
19_.97__
o' - C". (,
______L.~-~~~-..-.-----.-.-.
Bruce Grove Allamey for P!3inliif.
r> lO
, -.I 0
.';! II
",. ,.'"
", ',..
:';.. .1 .....
_~.l. ,.-
i!:..... r .!!1J
-:.;.' -.>J ,,,
1,.1 .l~
.,.
',' :'1 'IJ
'~.: I '_4"'r
r.. r ... t...
"r.~
-'~' . - ."
.. :':,
... ~'1
..' I;;) ~4
-.
aJnnD
,\. ~~U"lLl~ f1JS~Ui If
","
'\'
,.'v"'....,..-.,."~'~_
.: ,:" ~:': .~:'y.>:..r';,'~ .~~;;~)..:HoY-2J~L{:~ .
~_.'l' i f' 1 ",',;il, ,'>..;X? ., ~
.;;~:~~<
~."'JliOL~l 'LL r;"
\:ip
m 01'0&:)" I'. .......,.,.,.....,...".
) IN TBB COURT OF COMMON PLBAS
) C1JMBBRLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
. .
. ,
. .
JBIlBMY IAMBS HAMM
Plaintiff
No. 95-7~5
v.
g
~I
~
.,.~
!fi~
DRnNDANT'S .JI;I".".10N TO RTIlDCE JIJDGMENT.,.'..
CRA SECURITY SYSTBMS
Defendant
\Q
U1
=
p;J
N
CD
-0
:I:
ca
co)
..
AND NOW camca Defendant, Capilli Recovery Alloclates, Inc., tJdlb/. CRA
Security SYltcma (hereinafter "CRA"), by and tIuouah Ita counae1, Eckert Seaman. Cherin "
MclIott and makes the followin& PetItion to Strike ludament In the above-referenced matter,
IlItIna In IUpport thereof u followl:
1, On or about Dcccmbcr 12, 1995, . certain judament (hereinafter the "ludlmeot")
which had been obtained In the United SII/Ca Banlauptcy Court for the Southern Diltrict of
Iowa wu transferred to thil Court by an Iowa-based attorney, Martha Euter-Wens
(hereInaflcr "Euter-Welll").
2. Toaether with purporting to transfer the ludgment and have the lIIIlle filed In thll
Pmnlylvanla Court of Common Pleas, Iowa attorney Euter-Wells instructed the Sheriff of
Cumberland County to Immediately begin execution proceedings, including a levy and
Inventory at CRA's place of busIness in Lemoyne, Pennsylvania.
I
..
,-
" .
3, UpoolnfOnnalian and belief, attorney Buter-WeIII b not IicenIed to pncdce law
In tbe CoIlllllOQMa1th of Pennaylvanla, and hid no IIUIctInI to file Iep1 documents and
inltructthe Sheriff of Cumberland County to tUe any IClion on behalf of her client, ThuI,
there 11'0 I\Jndamentll cIefec:tI wbIch IppIII' of record with repnt to the Judament (I.., the
III1lO havin& been JlUIII01'fedIy ftIed by an unllcealeCl attorney),
4. PuDdamcntal cIefec:tI, IIICh u that let forth above, 11'0, ItInd1na lIone, ldequate
aroundI to IIIppOrt the ItriIdna ofa Judament,
5. However, u let forth In areater deIaI.I below, there are far more IICriOUI luuea
which IUpport the Itrildng of the Judgment,
6, AtlIChed hereto b the Affidavit of Mr. Hap Selden, President of Capital
Recovery AuocIata, Inc. tJdlb/a eRA Security SYlteml,
7. AI let forth In greater deta1l1n Mr. Selden' Affidavit and the Bxhlblts attached
thereto, the Bankruptcy Court recordl relatlnl to thil Judgment demonltrate that eRA
Security Systema wu never given appropriate notice of the proceedingl In the Bankruptcy
Court In Iowa, and therefore wu deprived of its opportunity to defend or be heard in that
forum.
8. AI a result, the Judgment which wu rendered in Iowa and lubsequently
lranaferrcd to thil Court is unenforceable and void, and cannotlUpport valid execution
procedures.
2
V.
) IN THB COURT OP COMMON PLEAS
) CUMBBlU.AND COUNTY, PBNNSYLVANIA
)
) No. 95-7095
)
)
)
)
)
JBRBMY JAMBS HAMM
P1aIndff
CRA SBCURrI'Y SYSTEMS
Defendant
AFF1DA VIT
HAP A. SBlDBRS, havin& been duly lWorn, hereby llIlca on the bull of hil
knowled&e u followl:
1, My name il Hap A. Seiden, I am the Prcaldent of Capital Recovery Alsociates,
Inc., tJdlb/a eRA Securily SYllcml, a Pennly1vania corporadon havinl ita principal place of
bUlineu at 324 Market Street, Lemoyne, Cumberland County, Pennly1vania 17043. I am
over tho lie of elahteen (18) and am competent to teadfy in tho above-referenced matter.
2. In late Juno of thil year (1995), I fint became aware of a bankruptcy procecdinl
in tho United StateI Bankruptcy Court for the Southern Dlatrict of Iowa involving P1aindff
herein, Mr. Hamm.
3, Specifically, I received, through my counacl, Stacey Allen, correspondence from
an Iowa attorney named Mutha Easter-WeDI (hereinafter "Easter-WeDs") dated lune 19,
1995 which advised that a judgment (the "ludlment") had been entered against CRA Security
SYltemlin the Bankruptcy Court. A true and correct copy of the lune 19, 1995
correspondence ilattached hereto and made a part hereof u Exhibit "A" (hereinafter the
"Correspondence"),
,
04, The Conapondcnce from EalIler-Wells wu conveniently directed to Ms. Allen
euctly 31 days foUowina the entry of the Judgment in the Bankruptcy Court.
5. The Correapondenc:c from Euler-Wells to Ms, Allen wu the first nollce I had
reprdlna the entry of any Judgment qlinst CRA Security Systems by the Bankruptcy Court
in Iowa, and in fact, repRl~ted the first notice I RlCCived c:oncemlna this proceeding at all,
6. PolIowlng my receipt of the Correapondence. I requested Hurlabllfl counsel at
Bcbn Seamans Cherin " Mellott to contact the Iowa Bankruptcy Court in an effort to
UCOl'.Jh !he procedural blck&round of this matter, and to obtain copies of relevant court
documenll in an effort to underatand how the Judgment could have been entered against CRA
Security Systems.
7, Through Eckert Seamans' effom, I wu able to obtain copies of the Bankruptcy
Court cIocumenll, (including the Order and Notice for the hearing which resulted in the
Order) directly from the Bankruptcy Court. These documents arc attached hereto and made
a part hereof u Exhibit "B".
8. The Certificate of Service which Is attached to the Order indicates that the Court's
Order wu served on a number of parties, notlncludlni CRA Security Systems, Included as
having received notice per the Certificate of Service arc four typewritten names, attorney
Easter-Wells, Plaintiff Hamm, Burton Fagen (Identity unknown), and the United Slates
,
TIustee. Additionally, handwritten below these typewritten names were the names of two
attorneys who had directed correspondence on behalf of CRA Security Systems to Mr.
Hamm: Bffron &. Bffron, and Lawrence J. Rosen, (each of which Is mentioned In the
Bankruptcy Court's Order of May 17, 1995, however, neither of which represented CRA In
any capacity in this matter, and neither of which were sanctioned), ~ Exhibit B),
9. PurtbcnnoRl, the Certificate of Service attached to the Notice and Order for
Hearina lCMduUna the bearina in this matter indicates an identical service Uat, once ..ain,
nm includin& CRA Security SyllCms. Here qain, the typewritten materialindicatcs that four
Noticea ~ ICIIt to the IIDlO four partica above-referenced, and there arc handwritten
entrica relaIina to Effron " Effron and Lawrence J. Rosen.
10. 'I1Ic documents recclved from the United States Bankruptcy Court in Iowa
explained. to me, why I wu aurprised to receive Attorney Easter-Wells' June 19, 1995
Corrcspondcncc, inumuch u CRA Security Systems had never received formal notice from
the Bankruptcy Court of the entry of the Order, or notice of the scheduling of the hearing
which ied to the entry of the Order.
11, Apln, the timln. of the Jline 19, 1995 correspondence (exactly 31 days
following the Bankruptcy Court'. Order) leads me to question the manner in which this
Judgment was obtained in the Bankruptcy Court in Iowa,
12. In any event, CRA Security Systems never made any deliberate decision not to
defend the Bankruptcy matter in Iowa, rather, it never had the opportunity to make any
decision regarding this matter, not having received either Notice of the hearing, or timely
notice of the entry of the Court's Order such that any appeal would have been possible.
13. In addition, CRA Security Systems was never a party to the underlying
Bankruptcy proceeding, and was never fonnally served, whether in person, by certified mail,
or in any other formal manner with service of the Debtor's Motion to find CRA Security
Systems in contempt. Consequently, I belleve the Bankruptcy Court never had personal
jurisdiction over CRA Security Systems in the first instance,
"
14. All rault allll of Ibe IbcM, CIA Security SyDIII DMI' bid lilY fonDal
IIDlice or IA'/ _..1"11\1I Cl(IlllIdIIIIll to ap.1Ild dIfead die SW--WI".'lII-;'I"1 to die
eQtry of die Judamr' wIdcb II lOW IOUIht to be aaforoed. .
I'unMr .,. dlo ~.. not.
"
r/lJbt
A. SBlDP.RS
Sworn to ancllUbllCrlbod bofora me
e,.
tIIII~~,adly ~~..1119~
~P;uc~ ~
NOTAI\IAL SEAL
DWlElENlG,NoIQ~1c
lJmoynellolough ~Co,
My CommIsSIon ExpIres IltC. 21,1997
,,~u
DEC-21-19SS 15:59
717 237Ge19
P.1J9
....
. . . C)
..... ... (J
..
'.
.
,
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT ~ 00
POR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP IOWA MAY I 7 1995
EASTERN DIVISION
JEREMY JAMES HAMM
BANKRUPTCY NO. 941!t-9f.f_,-._
....,......ER 7 ....~.1(',1.: ;.' .:. "l
....11ft.5"". "~. i;', ..... .~.,'
. . .:;'4' f;~ .' .':'
. 'tJ.. ,':1
JUL. . ..'j!~,:.'-
3 l ;9"5'
Hl1ttIS/).. "
:.J '"i1. I~~il
ORDER ON MOTION TO HOLD CREDITQR IN CONTEMPT ~
AND LIABLE FOR DAMAGES FOR VIOLATION OF THE
DISCHARGE INJUNCTION
DEBTOR.
)
)
)
)
)
) .
)
IN THE MA'l'1'ER OF
t.
This case coming on for hearing on the Debtor's Motion to Hold
CRA Security Systems in contempt of Court for Violation of the
Discharge Injunction of 11 U.S,C. S 524,
IT IS FOUND that on April 7, 1995 the Debtor filed the
Petition in this case. Notice of commencement of the Chapter 7
case was sent to the creditors on April 20, 1995, The Court finds
that Spencer Gifts, North Park Mall, Davenport, Iowa and
continental COllections, P.O. Box 40441, Rochester, NY 14604 were
listed on the mailing Matrix, and Notice was given to them on April
20, 1995, On July 26, 1994, Discharge was 'entered in this case and
Notice was given to Spencer Gifts and Continental Collections,
On January 3, 1995 the Debtor filed a Motion to Reopen and the
Court approved it on January 26,.1995, The evidence now before the
Court shows that the Debtor received multiple letters from
1
'J-5/rM
Exhibit lOB
. .,
\.
'.
(~
\UI
r)
'-
".
CRA security systems and from attorneys hired by CRA security
SystUB. . The Dount of the original debt was les. than $!SO. 00.
upon receipt of the letters, counsel for Mr. Hau, Hartha Easter-
Wells contaoted CRS security systems and adviaed them that the debt
had been disoharged in bankrUptoy. There were also telephone oalls
to CRA Security Systems in which CRA security systems was advi.ed
or
of the bankruptoy discharge and in whioh they responded that they
were not bound by oral notice of the Discharge.
"
Even after notice orally and in writing, CRA seourity syste.s
proceeded to contact counsel to collect the debt. Hartha Easter-
Wells contacted counsel and advised them of the bankruptcy
discharge. Counsel stopped contact immediately, They were well
advised to so,
The Court finds that under 11 U,S,C, 5524(2) that the
discharge operates as an injunction against the commencement or
continuation of an action or employJllent of process or act to
collect any discharged debt as a personal liability of the debtor,
The Court finds in this case that the facts indicate that eRA
security Systems clearly and intentionally violated
11 U.S,C, 5524(2), They have continued process to collect the debt
even after being informed of the bankruptcy discharge, The record
will reflect that CRA Security systems received notice of this
hearing and notice of the pending contempt proceeding and have not
responded. The first notice was for the hearing on March 17, 1995,
CRA Security systems and counsel for CRA Security systems
2
... '.
1.7)
o
..
did not appear. The second hearing Notice wa. for May 3, 1995 at
3130 p.m. and they failed to appear and counsel failed to appear.
The Court: rules that aanctions should be imposed. Inaofar as
Bfron , Bfron and Krevsky , Rosen, the Debtor has not asked for
sanctions because they terminated contact immediately upon being
advised of the bankrUptcy discharge.
Insofar a. sanctions, the record will reflect that the debtor
is aSking for fees of $1,500.00. The Court: finds attorneys fees in
the amount of $1,500.00 are reasonable.
Insofar a. punitive
damages, local counsel will have to employ counsel in the U, S.
District Court: in which LeMoyne is located unless counsel for the
debtor is.)lilllng to go there herself. To iitterest counsel in that
district, the amount of the judgement will be determinative. In
addition, some of these businesses look at punitive damages as a
business expense. This Judge wants to put CRA Security system and
other businesses on notice that if there is a phone call indicating
that there is a bankruptcy, they need to stop and check it out,
punitive damages in the amount of $20,000.00 and attorneys
fees in the amount of $1,500.00 are ordered and Judgment is granted
therefore.
Date: /Vl1l.'1 /7, /995
~"~
Russ 11 J. .;Hill'
Judge, U, S ,/Bankruptcy Court
Southern District of Iowa
3
.~
'UHXTID i1TATliS IWmtUPi'J..cOtJRT rOR TO SOUTDRH Dt/.aICT
. . .
01' IOWA
.
IN THE MATTER OF I JIlRmCY J. RAMM
Ch, 2 Bankr. No. 94-1003-DH Adv. Pro. No.
Hearing Onl CONTIHlJm) -lllUNO ON MOTZOH TO HOLD CREDZTOR :EN CZV:EL CONTEMPT
MID L:EABLIi .OR DAMAOliS I'OR V:ELAT:EOH 01' '1'RB D:ESCHAROB :EHJUHCTZON (17 - DBR)
Appearances I Trustee US Tr's Atty.
. Debtor's Atty. .J.ww)., L (J.,,"-~JPlaintiffls Atty.
Creditor's Atty. ")1.. ~~... Defendant's Atty.
9 Disposition Settled
Court Rptr. . H ~_. Under Advisement
Now
Tape No. (Tel Hg.) Briefs 1_/_/_)
Not Recorded Continued / Other
Special Instructions to Clerk: ~~ j/~,~....../?J.. If . /t7...~ _ .~
. /.L /~ ~~. .J,...e."'~_ -10 dtJtJ ~I- -,~ /~ ol'/StJd.OD
~ -,- - , ~,
t~dIo"1J 7
/
ORDER
Based on today's hearing, it is hereby ORDERED that:
Date: MAY 3, 1995
HILL
BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
r~
.....,... '-:'~: (~
. ,J
. MInIl& .....WeIIi, dOl lindy, SuI,. 300, DIYIllPOIl,.. '2103
....., J-. ~ 101 HUIIldo Drift, IIeafllIIolf, fA 51121
.... H......., 206 t l If Ii ~. BIlla.. 2535 ~ DriYl, IIcaendolf. fA 52722
U.I. n-. __ 517,..... Bulldllll. 210 Weln.' SlReC, Del Moina, fA 30309
(1
..,
>>>>>>> TocaIDOla.: 4 <<<<<<<
f.. F ~O(II t /,/" OrJ
So{"~ H"~~ /We.
f.l<<i>\/II".J I :r;rJ I{ to 3 2.0
t... ""..,,,~ \f. ","Sv"';
,,0/ N.FrorJ/-,9I-.
b P,., 17 I 01-
~".m':l 1A.7J I rq
. . ..u, '""""., 1tlMeI' . "
.~""""r.frt""u"'''''''''''"c~"tt..... h.....~.
.... ~ .,...tlhu~'...A'''C.:':'1....:.. t' '1
. . t' . ,,')rtl":C{M"'. , . . .
, ,', ):\'.... r
.. ~_ll~"""'~ ,,,,,1
..,..~\"" ..:t~.
,. -
JEREMY JAMES HAMM,
Plalntiff
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNA
v.
CRASBCURrTYSYSTBMS
Defendant
95-7095 Civil Term
RWSPONDENT'S RRIF..F IN SUPPORT OF ITS RENEWF.D MOTION TO STRIKE
I. ~ural AIlr.qround
The entire procedural background of this matter is rather complex, However, as a
result of the entry of this Court's February 13, 1996 Order (made Exhibit" A" to Plalntifrs
ICCOmpanying Renewed Motion to Strike), the procedural background n~ssary to dispose of
the Instant Motion to Strike Is actually very straightforward,
On or about December 12, 1995, Plalntifrs Iowa counsel filed a "judgment" with the
ProIhonotary of the Court of Common Pleas of Cumberland County, and directed the Sherlff
to beain execution proceedings through levy. On December 28, 1995, the undenlaned, on
behalf of CRA, tiled a Petition to Strike and Rule to Show Cause ("CRA's First Petition to
Strike") relating to the referenced judgment, alleging two fundamental defects which
appeared of record with regard to the judgment, First, the attorney purporting to file the
same In this Court was unlicensed as a Pennsylvania attomey, Second, Respondent CRA
Security Systems had never been given appropriate notice of the proceedings In the
Bankruptcy Court In Iowa. and, therefore, was deprived "f Its opportunity to defend or be
htard In that forom. ~ CRA's First Petition to Strike (Attached to the accompanying
Renewed Motion to Strike as Exhibit "0"),
CRA', First Petition to Strike was appropriately supported with an Affidavit from the
Prelidcnt of CRA, together with a Brief on the law supporting the strildng of a judgment
under circumstances such as those described In the Petition and the Affidavit. This Court
subllequently Issued an Order to Show Cause on December 30, 1995, requiring Plaintiff to
show cause, If any he had, why the judgmeilt should not be stricken, This Court's Order
made the Rule returnable on January 17, 1996.
For rcaIOIl' known only to Plaintiff and/or his Iowa or local counsel, no response wu
ever filed to CRA', PetItion to Strike, As a result, once It became clear that Plaintiff did not
Intend to respond, the undersigned requested that the Rule be made absolute, Thereafter,
thi, Court entered Its February 13, 1996 Order strildng the judgment. No Motion for
Reconsideration was ever filed, nor did Plaintiff file an appeal. Instead, CRA considered the
matter final until receiving a "Petition for Evidentiary Hearing", some eight months
followlna this Court's February 13, 1996 Order, Following briefing and argument, this
Court Issued an opinion and order, in which Judge Bayley noted that the facts set forth in
CRA's First PetItion to Strike had never been challenged, and that the Court's order of
February 13, 1996 had been properly Issued (strildng the judgment) ~ Plalntifrs failure
to respond.
Now, some three month's following this Court's January 14, 1997 Order, Plaintiff
has "reentered" a judgment from the Bankruptcy Court in Iowa, s= CRA's Renewed
Motion to Strike at Exhibit "C".
2
U. AqulIWlt
A. Any and all Issues relatinalo "notice" reaardlna the Iowa bankruptcy
proceedlna. were foreclosed throuah Plaintifr. failure 10 respond 10 the earlier
Order 10 Show Cause, and this Court's resultina February 13, 1996 Order.
In order that PlaintiWsjudament from Iowa be entiUed 10 full faith and credit,
Plaintiff must establish that CRA wu afforded its constitutional riahlS 10 notice and an
CIp90Itunity 10 be heard. S. Tmn~un COlPOl'Iltion v. MI7l!mek, 820 F.Supp. 225 (W.D.
PI. 1993) 1OidD&. inter alia, Morris l'lpldus Associates v. AllPOrt "I_C!. Inc., 240 Pa, Super.
80, 361 A.2d 660 (1976).
In order 10 prevail on these Issues. Plaintiff would have 10 demonstrate that CRA had
ldequate notice of certain bankruptcy proceedings In Iowa, Plaintiff, however, is entitled 10
no auch opportunity, Inasmuch u ail such "notice" issues were resolved against Plaintiffu a
result of this Court's Order of February 13, 1996, a copy of which is attached 10 CRA's
Renewed Motion 10 Strike u Exhibit "A".
'I1Ie "notice" Issues were squarely presented 10 the Court u a result of CRA's First
Petition 10 Strike, u well u the supporting Affidavit and Brief, Plaintiff chose not 10
respond 10 these factual averments, As a result, by operation of law, all factual averments
contained in CRA's Petition of December 28, 1995 have been deemed admitted.'
Under Petition and Rule practice, if Plaintiff had wanted 10 challenge CRA's
assertions reprdlng the inadequacy of notice in the Bankruptcy Court in Iowa (or any other
matter set forth in the Petition filed by CRA last December), it was incumbent upon Plaintiff
As a matter of substantive law, it mailers not whether the former Rule 209 (still
effective In December of 1995) is deemed applicable to the resolution of this matter or
whether current Rule 206.7 (effective January 1, 1996) is deemed controlling,
3
~ en G
,..: c .,-:
r !S! '.,z"
.)~.
::- ~.- ")..;
C ii: " ~.l;
~; .;:.':;
e- N :'~li5
d. ',.+;;
... i':;;:
l~ >- 'j~
F c:: In
:a:: .,'
~.
15 ,... =>
en u
.)
R, Thomas Kline, Sheriff. who being duly sworn accordJng
to law, states this writ Js returned STAVED per instructions from
Attorney Grove,
Sheriff's Costs:
Docketing
Law Library
Prothonotary
Surcharge
Poundage
$18,00
,50
1.00
2.00
,43
$21,93
Advance Costs: $150.00
Sheriff's Costs: 21,93
$128.07
So Answ~s: /.#
:r""{Jt~'f~
R. Thomas Kline. Sheriff
Sworn and subscribed to before me
This
...
/'1 -
day of "ht..~
Ckx' C. ''yL.Jb,~ .O-r;;
P thonotary 'I
Bv~,Si'\,tLi&
Dep ty Sheriff
2000,
A.D.
,
~)
cv;1!
c:u:a
c::::a
\~
~
';'I
~
v,
VI tlV /,'1.\ " ~.! ~13d
-1.1'-' '1 I.' I,
:: '. j
LG, "V EO 9 G HdV
~ I "i,lj
i~iU3Ii~ _Ill JU J:ll~~O
1'1~"l
~\ tJ. J ,,~~
\, ... I)',}'
~.