united states district court for the eastern district … · dianna oleson and ann zarczynski,...

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

MILWAUKEE DIVISION

DIANNA OLESON and ANN ZARCZYNSKI, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendant.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No.: 20-cv-753 CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT Jury Trial Demanded

INTRODUCTION

1. This class action seeks redress for collection practices that violate the Fair Debt

Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq. (the “FDCPA”).

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. The court has jurisdiction to grant the relief sought by the Plaintiffs pursuant to

15 U.S.C. § 1692k and 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1337, and 1367. Venue in this District is proper in

that Defendant directed its collection efforts into the District.

PARTIES

3. Plaintiff Dianna Oleson is an individual who resides in the Eastern District of

Wisconsin (Milwaukee County).

4. Plaintiff Ann Zarczynski is an individual who resides in the Eastern District of

Wisconsin (Milwaukee County).

5. Each Plaintiff is a “consumer” as defined in the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(3), in

that Defendant sought to collect from each Plaintiff a debt incurred for personal, family, or

household purposes.

Case 2:20-cv-00753-NJ Filed 05/19/20 of 14 Document 1

2

6. Defendant Midland Credit Management, Inc. (“MCM”) is a foreign corporation

with its principal place of business located at 3111 Camino Del Rio North,

Suite 103, San Diego, CA 92108.

7. MCM is engaged in the business of a collection agency, using the mails and

telephone to collect consumer debts originally owed to others.

8. MCM is engaged in the business of collecting debts owed to others and incurred

for personal, family or household purposes.

9. MCM’s website contains an “FAQ” webpage, which states:

https://www.midlandcredit.com/faqs/ (last accessed November 27, 2019)

10. The FDCPA defines a “debt” as “any obligation or alleged obligation of a

consumer to pay money arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance, or

services which are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household

purposes, whether or not such obligation has been reduced to judgment.”

11. The FDCPA defines a “debt collector” as “any person who uses any

instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of

which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or

indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6)

(emphasis added); see, e.g., Barbato v. Greystone Alliance, LLC, 916 F.3d 260, 267-68 (3d Cir.

2019) (“As long as a business's raison d’être is obtaining payment on the debts that it acquires, it


3

is a debt collector. Who actually obtains the payment or how they do so is of no moment.”);

Tepper v. Amos Fin., LLC, 898 F.3d 364, 371 (3d Cir. 2018) (“In sum, Amos may be one tough

gazookus when it attempts to collect the defaulted debts it has purchased, but when its conduct

crosses the lines prescribed by the FDCPA, it opens itself up to the Act’s penalties.”); Kurtzman

v. Nationstar Mortg. LLC, No. 16 17236, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 19750, at *6-7 (11th Cir. Oct.

10, 2017); McMahon v. LVNV Funding, LLC, 301 F. Supp. 3d 866, 883 (N.D. Ill. 2018); Long v.

Pendrick Capital Partners II, LLC, No. 17-cv-1955, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 44459, at *39-40

(D. Md. Mar. 18, 2019); Skinner v. LVNV Funding LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2812, at *7-8

(N.D. Ill. Jan 8, 2018); Mitchell v. LVNV Funding LLC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 206440, at *7-12

(N.D. Ind. Dec. 15, 2017); Torres v. LVNV Funding LLC. 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49885, at *13-

15 (N.D. Ill Mar. 27, 2018); Hordge v. First Nat’l Collection Bureau, Inc., 2018 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 132435, at *12-13 (S.D. Tex. Aug. 7, 2018); Meola v. Asset Recovery Solutions, 2018

U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139101, at *13-18 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2018).

12. The primary purpose of MCM’s business, and MCM’s principal purpose, is the

collection of consumer debts.

13. MCM is part of one of the largest debt buyer and debt collection outfits in the

industry, with consumer debt portfolios in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The 2013 10-K

filing for MCM’s parent company, Encore Capital Group, Inc. (“Encore”), states that Encore has

“one of the industry’s largest financially distressed consumer databases.” (Form 10-K, 12/31/13,

p. 2).

14. According to Encore’s 2013 Form 10-K, Encore spent more than $525 million to

purchase consumer credit card accounts in the U.S. As Encore paid less than 10 cents on the


4

dollar, the face value of those accounts is in the tens of billions of dollars. Encore purchased

similar amounts of U.S. consumer credit card accounts in 2012 and 2011.

15. MCM’s role generally is to service defaulted consumer debts purchased and held

by MCM and its affiliates. MCM uses instrumentalities of interstate commerce, including the

mail, telephone, banking systems and wire transfers in its business of aggregating and collecting

debts, primarily charged off consumer credit card debts.

16. Neither MCM nor any of its affiliates purchase defaulted consumer debts with the

purpose of selling them at a profit. See, e.g., https://www.midlandcreditonline.com/wp-

content/uploads/2015/08/Consumer-Bill-of-Rights.pdf (last accessed: February 25, 2019) (“We

do not resell accounts to third parties in the ordinary course of our business.”).

17. Even when acting as the purchaser of defaulted consumer debts, the primary

purpose of Midland is debt collection. See, e.g., Barbato, 916 F.3d at 267; Mitchell, 2017 U.S.

Dist. LEXIS 206440 *16 (N.D. Ind. Dec. 15, 2017) (“‘[t]here is no business purpose in

purchasing charged off debts if the ultimate goal is not to collect them,’ and … ‘[d]ebt buyers

don't buy debts to use them as wallpaper, but to turn them into money’” (quoting Pl.’s Reply

Br.)).

18. MCM, along with its affiliate Midland Funding, LLC (“Midland Funding”), by

itself and through its attorneys, files thousands of collection lawsuits against consumers in state

courts annually. Wisconsin Circuit Court Access (CCAP), for example, shows MCM as a named

party in over 578 small claims lawsuits against Wisconsin consumers so far in 2020 in

Milwaukee County alone. Upon information and belief, all or almost all of these actions were

filed to collect consumer debt from Wisconsin residents.


5

19. Upon information and belief, when MCM obtains judgment in such actions,

usually by default, it frequently seeks to garnish consumers’ wages by contacting the consumers’

employers.

20. MCM is a debt collector as defined in 15 U.S.C. § 1692a.

FACTS

21. On or around May 20, 2019, MCM mailed a debt collection letter to Plaintiff

Oleson regarding an alleged debt owed to MCM, with an “Original Creditor” listed as

“SYNCHRONY BANK (USA) N.A.” A copy of this letter is attached to this complaint as

Exhibit A.

22. Upon information and belief, the alleged debt referenced in Exhibit A was

incurred by use of an “Amazon” branded credit card, which was used only for personal, family,

or household, purposes, including purchases of household goods from Amazon.com.

23. Upon information and belief, Exhibit A is a form letter, generated by a computer,

with the information specific to Plaintiff Oleson inserted by the computer.

24. Upon information and belief, Exhibit A is a form debt collection letter, used by

Defendant to attempt to collect alleged debts.

25. Exhibit A contains contradictory and confusing representations about the identity

of the creditor to whom the debt is owed.

26. The header of Exhibit A states that the “Current Owner” is “Midland Credit

Management, Inc.”:


6

27. The reverse side of Exhibit A states that MCM Credit Management, Inc. is the

“Current Creditor” and “The sole owner of this debt”:

28. The body of Exhibit A, however, includes the following representations:

29. This representation states, in relevant part:

You may request the following information by writing to us at 320 E Big Beaver Rd. Suite 300, Troy, MI 48083 and the same will be provided to you at no cost within 30 days of receipt of your written request: … 3) Documentation evidencing the transfer of ownership of the account to Midland Funding ….

30. On or around May 31, 2019, MCM mailed a debt collection letter to Plaintiff

Zarczynksi regarding an alleged debt owed to MCM, with an “Original Creditor” listed as

“CAPITAL ONE BANK (USA) N.A.” A copy of this letter is attached to this complaint as

Exhibit B.

31. Upon information and belief, the alleged debt referenced in Exhibit B was also

incurred by use of a credit card, which was used only for personal, family, or household,

purposes.

32. Upon information and belief, Exhibit B is another form letter, of substantially the

same form as Exhibit A, the letter sent to Plaintiff Oleson.


7

33. Like Exhibit A, Exhibit B contains contradictory and confusing representations

about the identity of the creditor to whom the debt is owed.

34. The header of Exhibit B states that the “Current Owner” is “Midland Credit

Management, Inc.”:

35. The reverse side of Exhibit B states that MCM Credit Management, Inc. is the

“Current Creditor” and “The sole owner of this debt”:

36. The body of Exhibit B, however, includes the following representations:

37. This representation states, in relevant part:

You may request the following information by writing to us at 320 E Big Beaver Rd. Suite 300, Troy, MI 48083 and the same will be provided to you at no cost within 30 days of receipt of your written request: … 3) Documentation evidencing the transfer of ownership of the account to Midland Funding ….


8

38. The representation that Plaintiffs may request “documentation evidencing transfer

of ownership of the account to Midland Funding” is a material representation that “Midland

Funding” may also be a creditor of the account. E.g., Taylor v. Alltran Fin., LP, No. 18-cv-306-

JMS-MJD, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159862, at *6 (S.D. Ind. Sept. 19, 2018).

39. Confusing and misleading representations about the name of the creditor are

material misrepresentations because they create the potential for fraud or double-payments.

Janetos v. Fulton Friedman & Gullace, LLP, 825 F.3d 317 324-25 (7th Cir. 2016).

40. For this reason, courts hold that a debt collector must clearly and unequivocally

identify the current creditor to whom the debt is owed and “a FDCPA plaintiff states a claim

when she alleges that the collection letter names the creditor in a manner that is unclear or

confusing.” Blarek v. Creditors Interchange, No. 05-cv-1018, 2006 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 60595, at

*3 (E.D. Wis. Aug. 25, 2006); see also, e.g., Dewees v. Legal Servicing, LLC, 506 F. Supp. 2d

128, 133 (E.D.N.Y. 2007); Walls v. United Collection Bureau, No. 11-cv-6026, 2012 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 68079, at *5 (N.D. Ill. May 16, 2012); Deschaine v. Nat’l Enter. Sys., No. 12-cv-50416,

2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31349, at *3-5 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 7, 2013); Aribal v. GMAC Mortg., No. 12-

c-9735, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 105355, at *12-13 (N.D. Ill. July 29, 2013); Braatz v. Leading

Edge Recovery Solutions, LLC, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 123118, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 21, 2011);

Pardo v. Allied Interstate, LLC, No. 14-cv-1104, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125526, at *8-9 (S.D.

Ind. Sept. 21, 2015); Long v. Fenton & McGarvey Law Firm, P.S.C., 223 F. Supp. 3d 773, 778-

79 (S.D. Ind. 2016); Brinkmeier v. Round Two Recovery, LLC, No. 15-cv-3693, 2016 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 97664, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. July 25, 2016); Datiz v. Int’l Recovery Assocs., No. 15-cv-3549,

2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127196 (E.D.N.Y. July 27, 2018), adopted by, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

163290 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 24, 2018); Smith v. Cohn, Goldberg & Deutsch, LLC, 296 F. Supp. 3d


9

754, 761 (D. Md. 2017); Taylor v. Alltran Fin., LP, No. 18-cv-306-JMS-MJD, 2018 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 159862, at *6 (S.D. Ind. Sept. 19, 2018); Africano-Domingo v. Miller & Steeno, P.C.,

No. 19-cv-401, 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7887, at *15-18 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 16, 2020).

41. Plaintiffs were confused and misled by Exhibits A & B.

42. The unsophisticated consumer would be confused and misled by Exhibits A & B.

The FDCPA

43. The FDCPA creates substantive rights for consumers; violations cause injury to

consumers, and such injuries are concrete and particularized. Derosia v. Credit Corp. Solutions,

2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50016, *12, 2018 WL 1513043 (E.D. Wis. March 27, 2018); Pogorzelski

v. Patenaude & Felix APC, No. 16-C-1330, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89678 *9 (E.D. Wis. June

12, 2017) (“A plaintiff who receives misinformation from a debt collector has suffered the type

of injury the FDCPA was intended to protect against.”); Spuhler v. State Collection Servs., No.

16-CV-1149, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 177631 (E.D. Wis. Oct. 26, 2017) (“As in Pogorzelski, the

Spuhlers’ allegations that the debt collection letters sent by State Collection contained false

representations of the character, amount, or legal status of a debt in violation of their rights under

the FDCPA sufficiently pleads a concrete injury-in-fact for purposes of standing.”); Lorang v.

Ditech Fin. LLC, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169286, at *6 (W.D. Wis. Oct. 13, 2017) (“the weight

of authority in this circuit is that a misrepresentation about a debt is a sufficient injury for

standing because a primary purpose of the FDCPA is to protect consumers from receiving false

and misleading information.”); Qualls v. T-H Prof’l & Med. Collections, Ltd., 2017 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 113037, at *8 (C.D. Ill. July 20, 2017) (“Courts in this Circuit, both before and after

Spokeo, have rejected similar challenges to standing in FDCPA cases.”) (citing “Hayes v.

Convergent Healthcare Recoveries, Inc., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 139743 (C.D. Ill. 2016)); Long


10

v. Fenton & McGarvey Law Firm P.S.C., 223 F. Supp. 3d 773, 777 (S.D. Ind. Dec. 9, 2016)

(“While courts have found that violations of other statutes … do not create concrete injuries in

fact, violations of the FDCPA are distinguishable from these other statutes and have been

repeatedly found to establish concrete injuries.”); Bock v. Pressler & Pressler, LLP, No. 11-

7593, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81058 *21 (D.N.J. May 25, 2017) (“through [s]ection 1692e of the

FDCPA, Congress established ‘an enforceable right to truthful information concerning’ debt

collection practices, a decision that ‘was undoubtedly influenced by congressional awareness that

the intentional provision of misinformation’ related to such practices, ‘contribute[s] to the

number of personal bankruptcies, to marital instability, to the loss of jobs, and to invasions of

individual privacy,”); Quinn v. Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 16 C 2021, 2016 U.S. Dist.

LEXIS 107299 *8-13 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 11, 2016) (rejecting challenge to Plaintiff’s standing based

upon alleged FDCPA statutory violation); Lane v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC, No. 15 C

10446, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 89258 *9-10 (N.D. Ill. July 11, 2016) (“When a federal statute is

violated, and especially when Congress has created a cause of action for its violation, by

definition Congress has created a legally protected interest that it deems important enough for a

lawsuit.”); see also Mogg v. Jacobs, No. 15-CV-1142-JPG-DGW, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33229,

2016 WL 1029396, at *5 (S.D. Ill. Mar. 15, 2016) (“Congress does have the power to enact

statutes creating legal rights, the invasion of which creates standing, even though no injury

would exist without the statute,” (quoting Sterk v. Redbox Automated Retail, LLC, 770 F.3d 618,

623 (7th Cir. 2014)). For this reason, and to encourage consumers to bring FDCPA actions,

Congress authorized an award of statutory damages for violations. 15 U.S.C. § 1692k(a).

44. Moreover, Congress has explicitly described the FDCPA as regulating “abusive

practices” in debt collection. 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692(a) – 1692(e). Any person who receives a debt


11

collection letter containing a violation of the FDCPA is a victim of abusive practices. See 15

U.S.C. §§ 1692(e) (“It is the purpose of this subchapter to eliminate abusive debt collection

practices by debt collectors, to insure that those debt collectors who refrain from using abusive

debt collection practices are not competitively disadvantaged, and to promote consistent State

action to protect consumers against debt collection abuses”).

45. Plaintiffs who allege that debt collectors engaged in misrepresentations in their

dunning letters, including misrepresentations of the character, amount or legal status of any debt,

have standing, as such misrepresentations risk injury to interests expressly protected by Congress

in the FDCPA. See Degroot v. Client Servs., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6677 (E.D. Wis. Jan. 15,

2020) (“[A]n informational injury can be concrete when the plaintiff is entitled to receive and

review substantive information.”); Oloko v. Receivable Recovery Servs., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS

140164 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 19, 2019); Untershine v. Encore Receivable Mgmt., Inc., 18-cv-1484

(E.D. Wis. August 9, 2019); Richardson v. Diversified Consultants, No. 17-cv-4047, 2019 U.S.

Dist. LEXIS 118786 *10-11 (N.D. Ill. July 17, 2019) (“the receipt of a communication

misrepresenting the character of the debt (here, the amount owed) is the kind of injury that

Congress sought to prevent through the FDCPA. ‘Such an injury falls squarely within the ambit

of what Congress gave consumers in the FDCPA: ‘a legally protected interest in certain

information about debts,’ with ‘deprivation of information about one’s debt (in a communication

directed to the plaintiff consumer) a cognizable injury.’” (internal citations omitted); see also

Pierre v. Midland Credit Mgmt., Inc., 2017 WL 1427070, at *4 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 21, 2017); Saenz

v. Buckeye Check Cashing of Illinois, 2016 WL 5080747, at *1-2 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 20, 2016);

Bernal v. NRA Grp., LLC, 318 F.R.D. 64, 72 (N.D. Ill. 2016) (holding that Plaintiff had standing

to challenge misleading communication sent to him because the communication violated his


12

“right to be free from such misleading communications”). Such misrepresentations may cause

consumers to make incorrect decisions about their finances or make payments to incorrect

parties.

46. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e generally prohibits “any false, deceptive, or misleading

representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt.”

47. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(2)(a) specifically prohibits “the false representation of the

character, amount, or legal status of any debt.”

48. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(3) specifically prohibits: “The false representation or

implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney.”

49. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(5) specifically prohibits: “The threat to take any action that

cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.”

50. 15 U.S.C. § 1692e(10) specifically prohibits the “use of any false representation

or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.”

51. 15 U.S.C. § 1692f generally prohibits a debt collector from using “unfair or

unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt.”

COUNT I – FDCPA

52. Plaintiffs incorporate by reference as if fully set forth herein the allegations

contained in the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.

53. Exhibits A & B state that MCM is the “current owner,” the “current creditor,” and

“the sole owner of this debt.”

54. Exhibits A & B also state that MCM will provide the consumer with

“documentation evidencing the transfer of ownership of the account to Midland Funding.”


13

55. Exhibits A & B fail to unequivocally identify the current creditor to whom

Plaintiffs’ alleged debts are owed.

56. Exhibit A contains representations that are false, deceptive, misleading,

confusing, and unfair to the unsophisticated consumer.

57. Defendant violated 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692e(2)(a), 1692e(5), and 1692e(10).

CLASS ALLEGATIONS

58. Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of a class, consisting of: (a) all natural

persons in the State of Wisconsin (b) who were sent collection letters by MCM in the form of

Exhibit A and/or Exhibit B to the complaint in this action, (c) between May 19, 2019 and

May 19, 2020, inclusive, (d) that was not returned by the postal service.

59. The class is so numerous that joinder is impracticable. On information and belief,

there are more than 50 members of the class.

60. There are questions of law and fact common to the class members, which

common questions predominate over any questions that affect only individual class members.

The predominant common question is whether Exhibits A & B violate the FDCPA.

61. Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the class members. All are based on

the same factual and legal theories.

62. Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class members.

Plaintiffs have retained counsel experienced in consumer credit and debt collection abuse cases.

63. A class action is superior to other alternative methods of adjudicating this dispute.

Individual cases are not economically feasible.

JURY DEMAND

64. Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury.


14

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that the Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiffs and

the Class and against Defendant for:

(a) actual damages;

(b) statutory damages;

(c) injunctive relief;

(d) attorneys’ fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit; and

(e) such other or further relief as the Court deems proper.

Dated: May 19, 2020

ADEMI & O’REILLY, LLP

By: /s/ Mark A. Eldridge John D. Blythin (SBN 1046105) Mark A. Eldridge (SBN 1089944) Jesse Fruchter (SBN 1097673) Ben J. Slatky (SBN 1106892) 3620 East Layton Avenue Cudahy, WI 53110 (414) 482-8000 (414) 482-8001 (fax) [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]


Case 2:20-cv-00753-NJ Filed 05/19/20 Page 1 of 3 Document 1-1

O JS 44 (Rev. 12/07) CIVIL COVER SHEETThe JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as providedby local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiatingthe civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE FO RM .)

Place an X in the appropriate Box: 9 Green Bay Division 9 Milwaukee Division

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)

NOTE: IN LAND CO NDEM NATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE

LAND INVOLVED.

(c) Attorney’s (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an “X” in O ne Box O nly) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES(Place an “X” in One Box for Plaintiff

(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)

í 1 U .S. Government í 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF

Plaintiff (U .S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State í 1 í 1 Incorporated or Principal Place í 4 í 4

of Business In This State

í 2 U .S. Government í 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State í 2 í 2 Incorporated and Principal Place í 5 í 5

Defendant(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)

of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a í 3 í 3 Foreign Nation í 6 í 6

Foreign Country

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an “X” in One Box Only)

CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES

í 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY í 610 Agriculture í 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 í 400 State R eapportionment

í 120 M arine í 310 Airplane í 362 Personal Injury - í 620 Other Food & Drug í 423 W ithdrawal í 410 Antitrust

í 130 M iller Act í 315 Airplane Product M ed. M alpractice í 625 Drug Related Seizure 28 USC 157 í 430 Banks and Banking

í 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability í 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 í 450 Commerce

í 150 Recovery of O verpayment í 320 Assault, Libel & Product Liability í 630 Liquor Laws PROPERTY RIGHTS í 460 Deportation

& Enforcement of Judgment Slander í 368 Asbestos Personal í 640 R.R. & Truck í 820 Copyrights í 470 Racketeer Influenced and

í 151 M edicare Act í 330 Federal Employers’ Injury Product í 650 Airline Regs. í 830 Patent Corrupt Organizations

í 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability Liability í 660 Occupational í 840 Trademark í 480 Consumer Credit

Student Loans í 340 M arine PERSONAL PROPERTY Safety/Health í 490 Cable/Sat TV

(Excl. Veterans) í 345 M arine Product í 370 Other Fraud í 690 Other í 810 Selective Service

í 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability í 371 Truth in Lending LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY í 850 Securities/Commodities/

of Veteran’s Benefits í 350 M otor Vehicle í 380 Other Personal í 710 Fair Labor Standards í 861 HIA (1395ff) Exchange

í 160 Stockholders’ Suits í 355 M otor Vehicle Property Damage Act í 862 Black Lung (923) í 875 Customer Challenge

í 190 Other Contract Product Liability í 385 Property Damage í 720 Labor/M gmt. Relations í 863 DIW C/DIW W (405(g)) 12 USC 3410

í 195 Contract Product Liability í 360 Other Personal Product Liability í 730 Labor/M gmt.Reporting í 864 SSID Title XVI í 890 Other Statutory Actions

í 196 Franchise Injury & Disclosure Act í 865 RSI (405(g)) í 891 Agricultural Acts

REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS í 740 Railway Labor Act FEDERAL TAX SUITS í 892 Economic Stabilization Act

í 210 Land Condemnation í 441 Voting í 510 M otions to Vacate í 790 Other Labor Litigation í 870 Taxes (U .S. Plaintiff í 893 Environmental M atters

í 220 Foreclosure í 442 Employment Sentence í 791 Empl. Ret. Inc. or Defendant) í 894 Energy Allocation Act

í 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment í 443 Housing/ Habeas Corpus: Security Act í 871 IRS— Third Party í 895 Freedom of Information

í 240 Torts to Land Accommodations í 530 General 26 USC 7609 Act

í 245 Tort Product Liability í 444 W elfare í 535 Death Penalty IM M IG RA TIO N í 900Appeal of Fee Determination

í 290 All Other Real Property í 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - í 540 M andamus & Other í 462 Naturalization Application Under Equal Access

Employment í 550 Civil Rights í 463 Habeas Corpus - to Justice

í 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - í 555 Prison Condition Alien Detainee í 950 Constitutionality of

Other í 465 Other Immigration State Statutes

í 440 Other C ivil Rights Actions

V. ORIGINTransferred fromanother district(specify)

Appeal to DistrictJudge fromMagistrateJudgment

(Place an “X” in One Box Only)

í 1 OriginalProceeding

í 2 Removed fromState Court

í 3 Remanded fromAppellate Court

í 4 Reinstated orReopened

í 5 í 6 MultidistrictLitigation

í 7

VI. CAUSE OF ACTION

Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):

Brief description of cause:

VII. REQUESTED IN

COMPLAINT:

í CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION

UNDER F.R.C.P. 23

DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:

JURY DEMAND: í Yes í No

VIII. RELATED CASE(S)

IF ANY(See instructions):

JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER

DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

RECEIPT # AM OUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE M AG. JUDGE


✔

DIANNA OLESON and ANN ZARCZYNSKIMIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC.

Milwaukee

Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP, 3620 E. Layton Ave., Cudahy, WI 53110 (414) 482-8000-Telephone (414) 482-8001-Facsimile

✔

✔

✔

15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq

Violation of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

✔

✔

May 19, 2020 /s/ Mark A. Eldridge

JS 44 Reverse (Rev. 12/07)

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS 44

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet

The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and service of pleading or other papers as requiredby law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the useof the Clerk of Court for the purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is submitted to the Clerk of Court for each civil complaintfiled. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows:

I. (a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use onlythe full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and then the official, givingboth name and title.

(b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at thetime of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land condemnationcases, the county of residence of the “defendant” is the location of the tract of land involved.)

(c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney of record. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, notingin this section “(see attachment)”.

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Rule 8(a), F.R.C.P., which requires that jurisdictions be shown in pleadings. Place an “X” in oneof the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below.

United States plaintiff. (1) Jurisdiction based on 28 U.S.C. 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here.

United States defendant. (2) When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an “X” in this box.

Federal question. (3) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment to theConstitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code takes precedence, and box1 or 2 should be marked.

Diversity of citizenship. (4) This refers to suits under 28 U.S.C. 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the citizenship ofthe different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; federal question actions take precedence over diversity cases.)

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. Mark this sectionfor each principal party.

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an “X” in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, issufficient to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerks in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than one nature ofsuit, select the most definitive.

V. Origin. Place an “X” in one of the seven boxes.

Original Proceedings. (1) Cases which originate in the United States district courts.

Removed from State Court. (2) Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 U.S.C., Section 1441. When the petitionfor removal is granted, check this box.

Remanded from Appellate Court. (3) Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date of remand as the filing date.

Reinstated or Reopened. (4) Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date.

Transferred from Another District. (5) For cases transferred under Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or multidistrictlitigation transfers.

Multidistrict Litigation. (6) Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 U.S.C. Section 1407. When thisbox is checked, do not check (5) above.

Appeal to District Judge from Magistrate Judgment. (7) Check this box for an appeal from a magistrate judge’s decision.

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional statutesunless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC 553

Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an “X” in this box if you are filing a class action under Rule 23, F.R.Cv.P.

Demand. In this space enter the dollar amount (in thousands of dollars) being demanded or indicate other demand such as a preliminary injunction.

Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded.

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS 44 is used to reference related pending cases if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket numbersand the corresponding judge names for such cases.

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.


AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT for the

Eastern District of Wisconsin

) ) ) )

Plaintiff(s) ) v. ) Civil Action No.

) ) ) )

Defendant(s) )

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you receive it) – or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(a)(2) or (3) – you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

GINA M. COLLETTI, CLERK OF COURT

Date: Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk


DIANNA OLESON and ANN ZARCZYNSKI

20-cv-753

MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC.

JEFFERSON CAPITAL SYSTEMS LLC

c/o CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY

8040 Excelsior Drive Suite 400

Madison, Wisconsin 53717

Mark A. Eldridge

Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP

3620 East Layton Avenue

Cudahy, WI 53110

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l))

This summons and the attached complaint for (name of individual and title, if any):

were received by me on (date) .

☐ I personally served the summons and the attached complaint on the individual at (place):

on (date) ; or

☐ I left the summons and the attached complaint at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

☐ I served the summons and the attached complaint on (name of individual)

who is designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

☐ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

☐ Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc.:


20-cv-753

0.00

united states district court for the eastern district … · dianna oleson and ann zarczynski,...

Documents