Advanced Pleadings Search
Form 48: Complaint Seeking Turnover of Property
Bragg v. Pinnacle Hamilton Complaint (2010)
Lipscomb v. Raddatz Law Firm (2014)
Wang v. 7 Rivington St. Complaint (2014)
Carranza v. Green Cohen Complaint (2015)
Chaffee v. Farber Complaint (2015)
Crawford v. Senex Law Complaint (2016)
Sanchez v. Ehrlich Complaint (2016)
Baker v. Ross Complaint (2017)
Markosyan v. Hunter Warfield Inc Complaint (2017)
Martin v. Levylaw Complaint (2017)
Torres v. Gutman Mintz Complaint (2017)
CFPB v. Fair Collection and Outsourcing Complaint (2019)
Lamar v. IQ Data International Complaint (2020)
Lord v. Senex Law Complaint (2020)
Montijo v. Hrdlicka Complaint (2020)
Sanchez v. Law Office of Lance E Armo Complaint (2020)
Temporary Restraining Order re Boat Sale Pursuant to Statutory Lien
New Jersey State Class Action Complaint Concerning Land Contracts (Vision Property Management)
This is a 2019 first amended complaint in a class action involving land contracts, filed against Vision Property Management in New Jersey state court. It argues that the contract is an illegal combination of a lease and a rent-to-own sale of real estate, in which the lease is illegal and the rent-to-own transaction is illegal, deceptive, fraudulent, predatory, and unconscionable. The single document into which they are combined is confusing and internally inconsistent.
Michigan Federal Court Complaint Concerning Predatory Home Sale (Detroit Property Exchange)
This is the first amended complaint in a federal action in Michigan alleging misrepresentation of the terms of residential home sales and financing agreements, failure to disclose hidden credit charges, and conducting business in an unfair and deceptive manner. The complaint alleges deceptive promises of homeownership that lured unsuspecting home buyers into predatory and abusive loans that were designed to fail.
Motion to Deem Consumer’s Admission Requests Admitted (Fannie Mae)
This is a consumer’s motion directed to a mortgage servicer asking the court to deem the consumer’s requests for admission admitted. A separate Pleading and Discovery file is a reply to the servicer’s objection, and a proposed order. These documents address frivolous objections commonly raised by corporate defendants including: the document speaks for itself, the facts are public record and may be easily verified by the requestor, and the request seeks admission of a legal theory rather than a fact. Although filed in state court (Maine) it applies the Fed. R. Civ. P.
Reply to Servicer’s Objection and Order as to Consumer’s Request to Deem Consumer's Admission Requests Admitted (Fannie Mae)
This is a reply to the servicer’s objection to the consumer’s request to deem the consumer’s admission requests admitted, and also a proposed order. Another Pleading and Discovery file is the consumer’s motion directed to a mortgage servicer asking the court to deem the consumer’s requests for admission admitted.
Complaint in Fox v. A&A Auto LLC (AAA Arbitration) (Colo.)
This is one of three complaints illustrating the use of photographs and images inserted directly into a complaint to visually emphasize facts in a used car case. The complaints were submitted by Matthew Osborne, a consumer attorney in Northglenn, Colorado. This complaint is before an arbitrator in an action administered by the American Arbitration Association and involves breach of warranty, undisclosed defects, and misrepresentations concerning repairs performed, and replacement parts inserted into, a used car prior to its sale.
Amended Complaint Carrillo v. Jimmy’s Auto Sales (Colo.)
This is one of three complaints illustrating the use of photographs and images inserted directly into a complaint to visually emphasize facts in a used car case. The complaints were submitted by Matthew Osborne, a consumer attorney in Northglenn, Colorado. This complaint involves undisclosed wreck damage and undisclosed major vehicle repair problems.
Brief Re Criminal Justice Debt (Champagne v. v. Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, L.L.P., 4:20-cv-00275-SMR-SBJ (S.D. Iowa Mar. 18, 2022))
This is the consumers' reply to the defendant's objection to the consumers' request for attorney fees. The settled case involved a law firm's use of allegedly unfair debt collection practices when it sought to recover its appointed counsel fees from the indigent defendants it was representing in criminal cases. Among other reasons why the consumers argued for the court to award them significant attorney fees was the novelty of the case. The consumers raised claims under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and civil rights statutes, and the reply goes i
Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, People, et al. v. FDIC, et al., Case No. 20-5860 (N.D. Cal. filed Aug. 20, 2020)
This is a case about federal overreach. States have long used interest-rate caps to protect consumers, business owners, and scrupulous creditors from the harms of predatory lending. The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”) exempts federally insured, state-chartered banks and insured branches of foreign banks (“FDIC Banks”) from these caps.
Complaint for Violations of the Consumer Protection Procedures Act, District of Columbia v. Elevate Credit, Inc., No. [unavailable] (D.C. Sup. Ct. filed June 5, 2020)
- Elevate is on online lender that operates through several websites, including www.risecredit.com, www.elastic.com, and www.elevate.com, to provide predatory, high-interest, short-term loans to consumers that it describes as individuals “with little to no savings, urgent credit needs and limited options.”
Picket v. City of Cleveland (N.D. Ohio Dec. 18, 2019 ) (class action complaint)
This is a class action against the City of Cleveland for various discriminatory and abusive practices concerning water pricing, termination of service, and turning water delinquencies into tax liens and tax takings, including claims under the FHA, due process, and state law.
Briggs v. Strategic Fin. Sols., No. 1:22-cv-03705 (N.D. Ill. July 18, 2022)
This is a class action complaint against a debt settlement organization that used the attorney model. It alleges common law fraud, violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, unjust enrichment, violation of the Illinois Rules of Professional Conduct (for attorneys), and the Illinois Debt Settlement Consumer Protection Act. The facts of the complaint provide an extensive description of how debt settlement operators attempt to evade laws regulating debt relief services by attempting to use attorneys as a front for their operations.
Sweet v. Cardona, No. 3:19-cv-03674-WHA (N.D. Cal. July 25, 2022)
Defendants’ Consolidated Opposition to Motions for Intervention
This class action lawsuit presents a dispute between student loan borrowers and the U.S. Department of Education (“Department”) regarding the Department’s process for reviewing and adjudicating borrowers’ applications for the Department to relieve them of their loan repayment obligations based on the alleged misconduct of the schools they attended.