0 penilaian0% menganggap dokumen ini bermanfaat (0 suara)
22 tayangan79 halaman
NO. GD-I0-021437 in the court of COMMON PLEAS of ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Defendants. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice.
NO. GD-I0-021437 in the court of COMMON PLEAS of ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Defendants. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice.
Hak Cipta:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Format Tersedia
Unduh sebagai PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd
NO. GD-I0-021437 in the court of COMMON PLEAS of ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA Defendants. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice.
Hak Cipta:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Format Tersedia
Unduh sebagai PDF, TXT atau baca online dari Scribd
GD-I0-021437 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
PATRICKJ. LOUGHREN,
Plaintiff,
v.
KATHLEEN M. LION, MARTIN BAIR, BARBARANNE GROARK, LAURA BRYANS, AMALTAKSAOUI, KELLY KULPA, ELIJAH LEWIS, CAROL CONNELL, JESSICA CARTAGENA, JACLYN JAMIESON, NASTASSJA FALTERBAUER, EILEEN O'BRIEN, LISA SODA, NANCY SCHMEHL, DANIELLE DOUGHERTY, SCOTT LION, MARTIN HYNES, TINAMARIE BOSCHETTI, BRIDGET MARIE SPECK, MICHELLE CLARKSON, SHERRIPETERSON, LORETTA CRESPO, NICHOLAS BARONE, LOURDES GERENA, NATALIE ROW AN, KYLE MAHONEY, DIANA MONTANEZ, CHERYL DILCHUS, MICKIE KELLY, NANCY KELLEHER, TABITHA WILSON, JOYCE GARCIA, ERIC KEENAN, BARBARA L. HAND, ANTOINETTE BLACK, md GOLDBECK, McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER, P.C.,
Defendants.
JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
CNIL ACTION - EQUITY
NO. GD-I0-021437
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT IN EQUITY
Filed by Plaintiff, pro se
PabickJ.Loughren,Esqurre PA ID #80449
Loughren, Loughren & Loughren, P.C. 310 Grant Street
Suite 2800 Grant Building Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 Telephone: 412-232-3530 Facsimile: 412-232-3535
NO. GD-I0-021437 IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
PATRICK J. LOUGHREN,
CIVIL ACTION - EQUITY
Plaintiff,
NO. GD-IO-021437
v.
KATHLEEN M. LION, et al.
Defendants.
NOTICE TO DEFEND
You have been sued in court. If you wish to defend against the claims set forth in the following pages, you must take action within twenty (20) days after this complaint and notice are served, by entering a written appearance personally or by attorney and filing in writing with the court your defenses and objections to the claims set forth against you. You are warned that if you fail to do so the case may proceed without you and a judgment may be entered against you by the court without further notice for any money claimed in the complaint or for any other claim or relief requested by the Plaintiff. You may lose money or property of other rights important to you.
YOU SHOULD TAKE THIS PAPER TO YOUR LAWYER AT ONCE. IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A LAWYER GO TO OR TELEPHONE THE OFFICE SET FORTH BELOW. THIS OFFICE CAN PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT HIRING A LAWYER. IF YOU CANNOT AFFORD TO HIRE A LAWYER, TIDS OFFICE MAY BE ABLE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION ABOUT AGENCIES THAT MAY OFFER LEGAL SERVICES TO ELIGffiLE PERSONS AT A REDUCED FEE OR NO FEE.
Lawyer Referral Service Allegheny County Bar Association 11 th Floor Koppers Building 436 Seventh Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Telephone: (412) 261-5555
2
NO. GD-IO-021437 IN THE COURT OF COl\1MON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYL VANIA
PATRICK J. LOUGHREN,
CNIL ACTION - EQUITY
Plaintiff,
NO. GD-IO-021437
vs.
KATHLEEN M. LION, et al.
Defendants.
FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT IN EQUITY
AND NOW, comes the Plaintiff, Patrick J. Loughren, pro se, and files the following First
Amended Complaint in Equity averring as follows:
I. INTRODUCTION
This is an action to enjoin non-lawyers from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law,
which conduct, in Pennsylvania, is a crime. The Defendants in this action, with the exception of
Goldbeck, McCafferty & McKeever, P.C., are all non-lawyers. These non-lawyers prepare
foreclosure complaints, sign lawyers' names to those complaints, and file those complaints in
county courts across this Commonwealth without an attorney ever having read the document.
The instant such lawsuits are filed, the unauthorized practice of law has been committed. Thus,
upon the filing of the document, a crime has been committed. After they file the foreclosure
complaints in the manner described above, the non-lawyers prosecute the actions, and in doing so
they prepare, sign and file affidavits purporting to be signed by lawyers, but which are in fact
signed by non-lawyers. These documents serve the ultimate purpose of the non-lawyers, which is
to maximize recovery of "attorney fees" through foreclosure and sale of the property. In the
lawsuits they file, these non-lawyers claim "attorney's fees". As a result of the lawsuits, the non-
lawyers recover "attorney fees" from Mortgagors directly, in the event the loan is reinstated, or
3
from the proceeds of the sale of the mortgaged property in the event that the foreclosure results in sale of the property. The non-lawyers are assisted by Notary Publics, also defendants herein, who notarize documents at the request of the non-lawyers, some of which documents falsely purport to bear the signatures of lawyers, but which in fact are merely non-lawyers forging lawyers' signatures. Thus, the Notary Defendants aid and abet the non-lawyers in committing the unauthorized practice of law by providing them with false documents necessary to achieve foreclosure. Plaintiff seeks to enjoin this unauthorized practice of law, protect his profession and the integrity of the judicial process, disgorge the defendants of all illegal fees recovered and restore the monies to the Mortgagors from whom the monies were taken.
II. PARTIES
A. Plaintiff
1. Plaintiff, Patrick J. Loughren, is an adult individual and a member of the bar of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Plaintiff is a trial lawyer who maintains a principal place of business at 310 Grant Street, Suite 2800, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219. Pursuant to Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1701, et seq. Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself, individually, and on behalf of the public, and all attorneys licensed by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to engage in the practice oflaw.
B. Non-Lawyer Defendants
2. Kathleen M. Lion is on information and belief the Director of Human Resources
and Office Administration at Goldbeck, McCafferty & McKeever, P.C. (hereinafter "GMM") , Suite 5000, Mellon Independence Center, 701 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106.
4
NO. GD-10-021437
3. Defendant, Martin Bair is on information and belief the Manager of Administrative
Support at GMM.
4. Defendant, Barbaranne Grcark, is on information and belief the Director of Office
Administrations at GMM.
5. Defendant, Laura Bryans, is on information and belief the Manager of Quality
Control & Training at GMM
6. Defendant, Amal Taksaoui, is on information and belief the Administrative
Services Manager of the HR Department at GMM
7. Defendant, Kelly Kulpa, is on information and belief the Team Leader of the
Referrals/Complaint department at GMM
8. While named in the caption, Plaintiff is not pursuing a claim against Elijah Lewis,
as he, on information and belief, is no longer employed at GMM
9. Defendant, Carol Connel1, is on information and belief a supervisor in the
Referrals/Complaint department at GMM
10. Defendant, Jessica Cartagena, is on information and belief a member of the
Referrals/Complaint department at GMM
11. Defendant, Jaclyn Jamieson, IS on information and belief a member of the
Referra1s/Complaint department at GMM
12. While named in the caption, Plaintiff is not pursuing a claim against Nastassja
Falterbauer as she, on information and belief, is no longer employed at GMM.
13. Defendant, Eileen O'Brien, is on information and belief a member of the
Referrals/Complaint department at GMM
5
NO. GD-IO-021437
14. Defendant, Lisa Soda, is on information and belief a Supervisor of the
Referrals/Complaint department at GMM
15. Defendant, Nancy Schmehl, is on information and belief a member of the
Referrals/Complaint department at GMM
16. Defendant, Danielle Dougherty, is on information and belief a member of the
Referrals/Complaint department at GMM
17. Defendant, Scott Lion, is on information and belief a Supervisor of the Judgment
department at GMM
18. Defendant, Martin Hynes, is on information and belief a member of the Judgment
department at GMM
19. Defendant, Tinamarie Boschetti, is on information and belief a member of the
Judgment department at GMM
20. Defendant, Bridget Marie Speck, is on information and belief a member of the
Judgment department at GMM
21. Defendant, Michelle Clarkson, is on information and belief a member of the
Judgment department at GMM
22. While named in the caption, Plaintiff is not pursuing a claim against Sherri
Peterson, as she, on information and belief, in no longer employed at GMM.
23. Defendant, Loretta Crespo, is on information and belief the Supervisor of the
Service department at GMM
24. Defendant, Nicholas Barone, IS on information and belief the member of the
Service department at GMM
6
NO. GD-I0-021437
25. Defendant, Lourdes Gerena, is on information and belief the member ofthe Service
department at GMM
26. Defendant, Natalie Rowan, is on information and belief the member of the Service
department at GMM
27. Defendant, Kyle Mahoney, is on information and belief the member of the Service
department at GMM
28. Defendant, Diana Montanez, is on information and belief a member of the
Complaint, Judgment, Log In Department at GMM
29. Defendant, Cheryl Dilchus, is on information and be1ief the Supervisor of the
Litigation Department at GMM
30. Defendant, Mickie Kelly, is on information and belief the Manager of the
Litigation/Rlio/Title Curative Department at GMM
31. Defendant, Nancy Kelleher, is on information and belief, a member of the
Litigation Department at GMM
32. Defendant, Tabitha Wilson, is on information and belief, a member of the
Litigation Department at GMM
33. Defendant, Joyce Garcia, is on information and belief, a member of the Litigation
Department at GMM.
34. Defendant, Eric Keenan, is on information and belief, a legal secretary at GMM.
c. The Notary Public Defendants
35. Defendant, Barbara L. Hand, is an adult individual who, on information and belief,
is a member of the "Judgment" department at GMM. On information and belief, Defendant Hand
7
NO. GD-1O-021437 is and was at all times material hereto commissioned by the Secretary of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania as a Notary Public pursuant to The Notary Public Law, 57 P.S. § § 147-168.3.
36. Defendant, Antoinette Black, is on information and belief, the Manager of the Sales
Department at GMM. Defendant Black is and was at all times material hereto commissioned by
the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania as a Notary Public pursuant to The Notary
45. As one court has stated, "It must be borne in mind that it has always been held that
a professional man has standing to prevent the improper invasion of his profession...... [T]he
right to practice a profession is for many equitable purposes a property right; that such injunctive
action is in the nature of a suit to restrain improper and unlawful competition; that each
professional man bears a responsibility to the public for the proper practice of his profession and
that suit to enjoin improper professional practice is a proper effort to enjoin a public nuisance."
Felix v. Wax, 1958 Pa. Dist. & Cty. Dec. LEXIS 357; 13 Pa. D. & C.2d 600, 604 (Phila. Cty.
1958)
v. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A. The Unauthorized Practice of Law by Non-Lawyers Working at Goldbeck, McCafferty & McKeever, P.C.
46. The Supreme Court in this Commonwealth is empowered by Article V, Section
10(c) of the Pennsylvania Constitution to govern the conduct of attorneys practicing law within
the Commonwealth.
47. Pursuant to its constitutional authority, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court adopted
the Rules of Professional Conduct and the Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement, which govern the
conduct and discipline of attorneys. Commonwealth v. Stern, 549 Pa. 505, 701 A.2d 568,571
(Pa.1997).
48. The Non-Lawyer defendants herein are non-lawyers. They are not subject to the
Rules of Professional Conduct or the Rules of Disciplinary Enforcement.
49. The Non-Lawyers are not ..... bound by a reviewable code of professional ethics
designed to deter [them] from the temptations of self-interest which can frequently arise in the
10
NO. GD-I0-021437 course oflegal representation." Dauphin County Bar Asso. v. Mazzacaro, 465 Pa. 545 , 555, FN6
351 A.2d 229, 234, FN6 (Pa. 1976)
50. On information and belief, the Non-Lawyer Defendants have filed hundreds, if not
thousands of foreclosure lawsuits in the Courts of Common Pleas of the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania that have been written, signed and filed by these Defendants without any attorney
having reviewed the document.
51. The Defendants make it appear as if a lawyer has read, reviewed, and signed the
document by either typing lawyers' names on the documents, signing lawyers' names to the
documents, or both, but the fact of the matter is that no lawyers have read, reviewed, or signed the
documents.
52. The deposition ofGMM was taken on September 21,2010 in the case of Kimberly
A. Robinson v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., et al. No. 08-cv-01563 currently pending in the
United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.
53. As the Court is aware, a witness designated to testify pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 30(b)(6) speaks on behalf of the corporate entity and the testimony of the designee
is binding on that entity.
54. The witness designated by GMM to testify on its behalf on September 21, 2010
was Gary McCafferty, Esquire. Mr. McCafferty is both a named partner and shareholder of
GMM.
55. Mr. McCafferty admitted that the Non-Lawyer Defendants file prepare, sign and
file foreclosure lawsuits that have ~ been reviewed by any attorney:
Q. Was it the practice in 2006 that Complaints could be filed without an attorney reviewing the Complaint?
A. It could be, yes.
11
NO. GD-I0-021437
Q. Did the firm authorize its administrative staff, which I'll just describe as non-lawyers, so inclusive of secretaries, paralegals, legal assistants, to sign attorneys' names to Complaints and file them, knowing that the attorney had not read the document?
A. Yes.
56. Joseph Goldbeck, Esquire is "of counsel" to GMM and is a former shareholder and
former actively practicing attorney at GMM. Mr. Goldbeck was also deposed on September 21,
2010 in the matter of Robinson v. Countrywide, supra. During his deposition, Mr. Goldbeck
testified that non-lawyers were authorized to not only write up foreclosure lawsuits, but to sign his
name to the lawsuits and file those lawsuits without him ever even seeing the document:
Q. Back in 2006, you were an active practicing lawyer at the firm?
A. Yes.
Q. And did you authorize individuals who were employed at the firm who were not lawyers to write up Complaints and sign your name to them and file them without you reviewing them?
A. Yes, I did.
57. The third-named partner in GMM, Michael T. McKeever, Esquire, has testified that
the non-lawyers at GMM are engaged in the widespread unauthorized practice of law. While
testifying at a hearing on December 8, 2009 in the matter of DeAngelis v. Countrywide Home
Loans, Inc. (In Re: Hill), 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 3313 (Bankr. WD Pa. 2010), Mr. McKeever
admitted that it was "standard practice" in 2007 for non-lawyers to write up foreclosure lawsuits,
sign lawyer's names to said lawsuits, and file said lawsuits prior to any lawyer reviewing the
lawsuit:
Q. There's a signature page on the foreclosure complaint, and it's actually signed by -- or there's a signature there of Mr. Joseph A. Goldbeck, Jr., correct?
A. Yes.
Q. But Mr. Goldbeck did not sign this; is that correct?
A. No, he authorized someone to.
Q. But Mr. Goldbeck did not review this document, did he?
A. No, he did not.
12
NO. GD-10-021437
Q. Okay. He authorized someone to what, stamp his name on this?
A. I think that's a -- I don't believe that's a stamp, but it may be.
Q. Okay. I'm sorry, I -- is it that someone signed his name for him, is that what
you're saying?
A. Yes.
Q. Okay. Do you know who did?
A. I don't, no.
Q. And this was standard practice at your finn in 2007, correct?
A. Yes, i! was.
58. Mr. McKeever further admitted that the practice continued at GMM through the
date of his testimony, to wit, December 8,2009:
Q. In 2007, if this foreclosure checklist did not indicate a reason to request supervision, am I to understand that the foreclosure complaint was filed without attorney review?
A. In 2007, yes.
Q. Does that still happen today?
A. Yes, unless there's issues that arise that indicate an attorney should review the file.
B. The Non-Lawyers Perform No Investigation
59. Before they file the lawsuits that they both prepare and sign attorneys' names to,
the Non-Lawyer Defendants perform no investigation into the facts and/or circwnstances giving
rise to the claim.
60. On information and belief, some of the foreclosure lawsuits that the Non-Lawyer
Defendants file are filed against Mortgagors who have FHA-Insured loans pursuant to the Federal
Housing Administration (FHA) established under Subchapter II of the National Housing Act, 12
U.S.C. § 1701 et seq.
61. The Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development has
promulgated regulations establishing certain conditions precedent to a Mortgagee's right to
foreclose upon an FHA-Insured loan. See 24 C.F.R. §§ 203.500 et seq.
13
NO. GD-10-021437
62. A violation of FHA regulations can, at a minimum, serve as an affirmative defense
to the foreclosure action. See Fleet Real Estate Funding Corp. v. Smith, 366 Pa. Super. 116; 530
A.2d 919 (pa. Super. 1987)(''Today we follow the lead of these decisions and hold that a
mortgagor of an FHA-insured mortgage may raise as an equitable defense to foreclosure, the
mortgagee's deviation from compliance with the forbearance provisions of the HUD Handbook
and regulations.")
63. In fact, FHA-Insured loans typically contain provision within them that specifically
limit the Mortgagees' right to accelerate the debt andlor foreclosure prior to compliance with FHA
Regulations. A typical provision states:
9. Grounds for Acceleration of Debt
(d) Regulations ofHUD Secretary. In many circumstances regulations issued by the Secretary will limit Lender's rights, in the case of payment default, to require immediate payment in full and foreclose if not paid. This Security Instrument does not authorize acceleration or foreclosure if not permitted by regulations of the Secretary.
64. Mr. McCafferty (on behalf of the finn) testified that the Non-Lawyer Defendants
make no independent undertaking to determine whether the FHA regulations have been complied
with before they (i.e. the non-lawyers) file the lawsuits that they (i.e. the non-lawyers) have
written up, signed and filed without a lawyer having reviewed the document:
Q. Does the firm have a practice when it gets a new case to sue somebody for foreclosure in the situation of an FHA loan, that the firm will undertake affirmatively to determine whether or not the FHA regulations were complied with that are prerequisites to filing the foreclosure case?
A. There's no independent undertaking.
Q. What does that mean?
A. It means that the firm does not go back and examine whether the client has complied with whatever regulations.
Q. The FHA regulations?
14
NO. GD-1O-021437
A. Correct.
65. In fact, during its deposition taken on September 21, 2010, Mr. McCafferty
testified that the non-lawyers who are filing these lawsuits have no training with regard to FHA
regulations:
Q. Does the finn have any training of its employees or continuing legal education requirements that lawyers who sue people to take their houses from them have a good understanding about what the regulations are in the event the loan is an FHA loan?
A. I would say that the staff is not trained in FHA regulations.
66. On information and belief, the non-lawyers working at the finn knowingly filed
lawsuits against Mortgagors - that had not been reviewed by any attorney - and they did so
despite knowing that the Mortgagors had absolute defenses to the lawsuits premised upon the
failure of the creditors to comply with FHA regulations.
67. The lawsuits were filed despite the fact that they were meritless because the Non-
Lawyers knew that the Mortgagors were either too unsophisticated to appreciate the defenses
available to them, to economically destitute to hire a lawyer to raise the defenses on their behalf,
or both.
VI. 42 PA.C.S. §2424(a) Has Been Repeated1y Violated
6S. The preparation and filing of a pleading constitutes the practice of law in this
Commonwealth.
69. The federal courts applying Pennsylvania law have held that the filing of petitions
in bankruptcy by non-lawyers constitutes the unauthorized practice of law. See In Re: Poconos
Land. LLC, 343 B.R. lOS, 112 (MD Pa. 2005)(" ... this Court concludes that the filing of the
15
NO. GD-1O-021437 petitions at issue by non-attorneys on behalf of an artificial business entity constitutes the practice
oflaw in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.")
70. In Pennsylvania, the unauthorized practice of law is a crime and is regulated by
statute, 42 Pa.C.S. § 2524(a) which states, in relevant part:
(a) General Rule. -- Except as provided in subsection (b), any person, including, but not limited to, a paralegal or legal assistant, who within this Commonwealth shall practice law, or who shall hold himself out to the public as being entitled to practice law, or use or advertise the title of lawyer, attorney at law, attorney and counselor at law, counselor, or the equivalent in any language, in such a manner as to convey the impression that he is a practitioner of the law of any jurisdiction, without being an attorney at law or a corporation complying with 15 Pa.C.S. Ch. 29 (relating to professional corporation), commits a misdemeanor of the third degree upon a first violation. A second or subsequent violation of this subsection constitutes a misdemeanor of the first degree.
71. In Pennsylvania, an "attorney at law" is a person "admitted to the bar of the courts
of this Commonwealth." See 42 Pa.C.S. § 2521.
72. To practice law a person must demonstrate a reasonable mastery of legal skills and
principles, be a person of high moral character and maintain a continuing allegiance to a strict
code of professional conduct.
73. The requirements that must be met to engage in the practice law exist so that the
public is protected. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Shortz et al. v. Farrell, 327 Pa. 81, 193
A. 20 (pa. 1937) has explained this purpose as follows:
"While in order to acquire the education necessary to gain admission to the bar and thereby become eligible to practice law, one is obliged to 'scorn delights, and live laborious days,' the object of the legislation forbidding practice to laymen is not to secure to lawyers a monopoly, however deserved, but, by preventing the intrusion of inexpert and unlearned persons in the practice oflaw, to assure to the public adequate protection in the pursuit of justice, than which society knows no loftier aim.".
16
NO. GD-IO-021437
74. The non-lawyers working at GMM whose conduct is described hereinabove are
engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.
75. When each and every complaint in foreclosure has been filed that has been written
by a non-lawyer, had a lawyer's name signed to it by a non-lawyer, and been filed by a non-lawyer
without any attorney having read the document, the crime of the unauthorized practice of law has
been committed.
76. GMM has authorized the conduct of the non-lawyer defendants, and has profited
from it as described hereinafter. GMM is vicariously liable for the conduct of its non-lawyer
employees who are defendants herein.
77. The non-lawyers are being paid by their "clients", through payments made to
GMM, to engage in habitual drafting and filing of legal instruments that are filed in courts across
the Commonwealth without any lawyer having read same. This constitutes the practice of law.
Northampton County Bar Ass'n. v. Young, 1 Monroe L.R. 94, 26 North 363 (1939) See also Matter
of Bradford ARTHUR 15 B.R. 541; 1981 Bankr. LEXIS 2522 (B.R. ED Pa. 1981)
78. It is axiomatic that a corporation may appear and be represented in our Courts only
by an attorney duly admitted to practice. Walacavage v. Excell, 331 Pa. Super. 137; 480 A.2d 281
20l0)(citing Spirit of the Avenger Ministries v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 767 A.2d 1130
(Pa Cmwlth 2001); McCain v. Curione, 106 Pa Cmwlth 552, 527 A.2d 591 (1987); Winters v.
Sheporwich, 1952 Pa. Dist. & Cnty. Dec. LEXIS 311; 83 Pa. D. & C. 484 (l952)
85. Federal Courts construing Pennsylvania law are in accord with Judge McCarthy's
holding. See Marin v. Leslie, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 80287 (WD Pa. 2008) affirmed in part and
modified in part by Marin v. Leslie, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 15138 (3d Cir. Pa., July 8,
2009)("When a non-lawyer has commenced a proceeding on behalf of a legal entity, the court fails
to obtain jurisdiction over the lawsuit.") See also, Eveready Battery Co. v. Clements Export &
Import, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14197; 20 Fed. R. Servo 3d (ED Pa. 1991)("Since the defendant
corporation's Answer and Counterclaim was executed by the sole corporate shareholder and not by
an attorney, said Answer and Counterclaim must be stricken.")
86. Every foreclosure action pending in every Court of Common Pleas in this
Commonwealth that has been prepared by and filed by the Non-Lawyer Defendants, without
attorney review, should be dismissed on the basis that the Court lacks jurisdiction over the lawsuit.
87. According to the testimony ofGMM, Mr. Goldbeck and Mr. McKeever - set forth
hereinabove - the Non-Lawyer Defendants engaged in this practice from at least 2006 through at
least December 8, 2009.
88. However, on information and belief, and for reasons that will be made clear
hereinafter, P1aintiff avers that the Non-Lawyers continued their criminal conduct even after
December 8, 2009. Moreover, on information and belief, the practice of the Non-Lawyer
19
NO. GD-I0-021437 Defendants filing lawsuits for third parties without any lawyer having read the lawsuit pre-dated
2006.
VII. Violation ofPa.R.C.P. l023.l(c)
89 Each and every time that a Non-lawyer Defendant signs an attorney's name to a
foreclosure complaint - knowing that no lawyer has read or reviewed the complaint - and that
docwnent is subsequently filed with the Court, in addition to being the final act in the commission
of a crime, the conduct also violates Pennsylvania Rule of Court 1023.1(c).
90. Pennsylvania Rule of Court 1023.l(c) states:
(c) The signature of an attorney or pro se party constitutes a certificate that the signatory has read the pleading, motion, or other paper. By signing, filing, submitting, or later advocating such a docwnent, the attorney or pro se party certifies that, to the best of that person's knowledge, information and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances,
(1) it is not being presented for any improper purpose, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or needless increase in the cost of litigation,
(2) the claims, defenses, and other legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law,
(3) the factual allegations have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery; and
(4) the denials offactual allegations are warranted on the evidence or, if specifically so identified, are reasonably based on a lack of information or belief.
91. When the Non-Lawyers sign lawyer's names to complaints and file those
documents with the Courts knowing that the documents have not been read or reviewed by the
lawyers, the certification appearing on the document (i.e. the signature) is fraudulent and the Non-
Lawyers are knowingly committing a fraud on the Court for at least three reasons.
20
NO. GD-IO-021437
92. First, the certification that a lawyer had read the lawsuit is blatantly false.
93. Second, the certification that the lawyer whose named has been signed to the
document has performed a reasonable inquiry into the merit of the case is blatantly false since no
lawyer has done any inquiry, let alone a reasonable inquiry.
94. Third, certification that the "claims" set forth in the Foreclosure Complaint are
meritorious and nonfrivolous is blatantly false. Each of these complaints sets forth claims for
"attorney fees". Since no attorney has prepared, signed or done any work filing the lawsuits, no
attorney's fees are due. Moreover, and more fundamentally, since the Complaint itself is a nullity,
the claim for attorney's fees is frivolous, false and fraudulent and can never exist even if a lawyer
does read it sometime thereafter and actually work on the file. A nullity is a nullity and the
criminal "bell" can't be un-rung.
95. Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1023.3 permits the Court to sua sponte issue
a Rule to Show Cause upon Defendant GMM and the Non-Lawyer Defendants requiring them to
show cause why they are not culpable of the widespread, systematic violation of Rule 1023.1 ( c).
96. Because the Non-Lawyer Defendants engage in their criminal conduct under the
auspice of the letterhead of the law firm GMM, and because they often use electronic signatures to
further their criminal purposes, they have hidden the true nature of their conduct from both the
public, the mortgagors they have sued, and from the Honorable Judges of the Courts of Common
Pleas. Plaintiff brings this action to not only advise the Courts of the widespread conduct, but to
enjoin it as well.
VIII. The Attorneys' Fees Claims of Non-Lawyers
97. The most egregious course of conduct - aside from the commission of the
unauthorized practice oflaw as part of taking someone's home - is that the non-lawyers who fi1e
21
NO. GD-I0-021437 these cases without attorney review include claims for attorneys' fees as part of the relief
requested. These claims for attorney's fees are false, fraudulent, frivolous and unfounded.
98. Plaintiff is a trial lawyer who firmly believes that all persons - including creditors
such as Banks who have issued mortgage loans - have the right to enforce their rights, including
the contractual right to foreclose where permitted by both the law and the facts. Plaintiff in no
way believes or seeks to enjoin creditors from legally pursuing their rights. However, the Non-
Lawyers and the "clients" they serve are blatantly violating the law, and they are taking from
Mortgagors far more than they are legally entitled to.
99. The Non-Lawyer Defendants are claiming substantial sums of money from
Mortgagors - in the form of alleged attorneys fees - that are not due and owing by the
Mortgagors. Thus, all Mortgagors who have paid "attorney fees" have been wronged, and the
Non-Lawyers and their Bank "clients" have converted the Mortgagors' property.
100. The Non-Lawyers and their clients are not desirous of Mortgagors reinstating their
loans, even though such reinstatements do result in payment of illegal "attorneys fees".
101. The Non-Lawyers and their "clients" prefer foreclosure. This is because at
foreclosure, they can illegally claim higher amounts of illegal attorney fees which are paid from
the sale of the mortgaged property or, on information and belief, by various government programs
and/or insurers.
102. In order to achieve foreclosure, however, the Non-Lawyers must commit other
criminal and fraudulent conduct. The non-lawyers file Writs of Execution and other documents
(including affidavits of last known address) upon which they forge lawyers' signatures, often
before a notaries public working at the finn, such as Defendant Hand and Defendant Black, both
of whom knowingly violate their duties as a Notaries Public, (as set forth in great detail below).
22
NO. GD-1O-021437 103. The property is then sold and "attorney's fees" are recovered by Defendants, even
though no attorney has worked on the matter and/or even though the "attorney fees" recovered
bear no relationship, let alone a reasonable relationship, to any work that was done by an attorney.
104. Importantly, the right to claim any attorney's fees arises out of the documents upon
which the lawsuits are filed, to wit, the Note andlor the Mortgage.
105. There is no question that neither the Note, nor the Mortgage, nor the law authorize
or permit Mortgagees/Noteholders to collect "attorneys fees" where no lawyer has done any work
or as a reward for the commission of a crime.
106. In other cases where non-lawyers have sued Mortgagors, the Mortgagors are able to
scrape up the money to pay the demands being made upon them by non-lawyers. These monies
include alleged "attorney fees" even though no lawyer has done anything to prepare or file the
foreclosure action. These Mortgagor/Homeowners overpay to reinstate their loans.
107. All of the monies recovered by the Non-Lawyers and their "clients" as a result of
the foreclosure actions filed by these Non-Lawyers should be accounted for, and returned to the
Mortgagors from whom they were taken.
IX. The Forgeries
108. While the admissions of the law finn GMM, Goldbeck and McKeever during
deposition testimony set forth hereinabove clearly establish the basis of this action, Plaintiff
independently confirmed that documentary evidence exists that corroborates the testimony. This
documentation is discussed below, and some of it (but certainly not all of it) is attached hereto by
way of exemplar.
109. In connection with collecting "attorney's fees" as a reward for committing the
unauthorized practice of law, and in order to obtain those fees by effectuating the sale of the
23
NO. GD-10-021437 foreclosed upon home, the non-lawyers routinely forge lawyers names on documents other than
complaints, including affidavits that purport to be signed in the presence of a Notary Public. The
non-lawyers working at GMM know such documents are fraudulent but they use them
nevertheless as the instrumentalities of their widespread commission of the unauthorized practice
oflaw.
110. By way of example, an Amended Complaint in Foreclosure was filed October 7,
2008 in the matter of Bank of New York as Trustee for the Certificateholders of CWMBS 2005-Rl
v. Kimberly Robinson, No. GD06-030787. The signature page of the document is attached as
Exhibit 1 and purports to be signed by Michael T. McKeever, Esquire whose signature appears as
follows:
By: bruIt ~~~
GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER By: MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER, ESQUIRE ArrORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
111. The signature of Mr. McKeever in Robinson is much different than the signature of
Mr. McKeever on a Complaint filed 11/03/08 in JPMorgan Chase Bank Natl Assoc vs Hays-
McGinley GD-08-023649, Allegheny County. The signature page in Hays-McGinley is attached
as Exhibit 2 and the signature appears as follows:
24
NO. GD-I0-021437
cCAFFERTY & McKEEVER
T. KEEVER, ESQUIRE
FOR PLAINTIFF
112. Indeed, in the Hays-McGinley case, Mr. McKeever's alleged signature on the
complaint (supra) is different that his signature on the verification to the Complaint attached as
Exhibit 3, which appears as follows
ichael T. cKeever, PA I.D. #56129
113. Another example of Mr. McKeever's alleged signature, appearing on the signature
page (attached as Exhibit 4) on a Complaint filed 11103/08 in Citimortgage Inc. vs Boland GD-08-
023651, Allegheny County, where the signature appears as follows:
25
NO. GD-10-021437
By:
--~~----~~L--'r- __ -L-L~~~~~~~ __
GOLDB CK cCAFFERTY & McKEEVER By: MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER, ESQUIRE ArrORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
114. Even when signed before ! Notarv Public, the signature of Mr. McKeever
appears in many different forms.
115. For example, his name is signed to an "Affidavit of Last Known Address"
allegedly signed by Mr. McKeever before Notary Public Barbara Hand on February 5, 2008 and
filed of record on February 6, 2008 in the case of Countrywide Home Loans Inc. vs Raeder etal,
GD-07-018833, Allegheny County. This affidavit is attached as Exhibit 5 and the signature
appears as follows:
26
NO. GD-I0-021437
Affidavit of Last Known Address
I, Michael T. McKeever, Esquire, hereby verify that I am counsel of record for the Plaintiff, COUNTRYWIDE
HOME LOANS INC.; that as such and in my capacity as such, I am authorized to execute the within Affidavit for and
on behalf of Plaintiff; that to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. the names and last known addresses
of the Owner(s} and Defendant(s} in the above referenced proceeding are MARK A. RAEDER, 3037 SW 5th Avenue, Cape Coral, FL 33914 and DEBRA J. RAEDER, 5231 Brightwood Road #1, Bethel Park, PA 15102; I
further understand that false statements herein made are subject to Ihe provisions set forth in 18 Pa.C.S.A. 4904
relating to unsworn falsifications 10 authorities.
AHorney for Plaintiff
Sworn to and subscribed Before me this __i_ day of ,2008
COMMONWEALTH OF P£NN~YANIA NOTARIAl.. seAl.
8AABARA L HAND. NoIary PIdc City DI PNIadeIphIa, PhDa. Cotny
My CommissIon ElIpjras June 19, 20','
116. Mr. McKeever allegedly appeared before Notary Public Barbara L. Hand and
signed his name to an affidavit (attached as Exhibit 6) filed April 7, 2009 in Citimortgage Inc. vs
Boland GD-08-023651, Allegheny County, and his signature on the affidavit in Boland appears as
follows:
27
NO. 00-10-021437
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ACT 6 OF 1974.41 P.S. 101. ET.SEQ.
AND ACT 91 OF 1983
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA} )
) SS:
)
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY )
Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary- Public in and for th aid Cou and
Commonwealth, personally appeared Michael T. McKeever, attorney fo e Plai IT, who being duly
sworn according to law deposes and says that on ,Defendanl(s) was! re rna' a Notice(s) of
Homeowner's emergency Mortgage Assistance Act of 1983 and 6 N' s) of Intention 10 Foreclosure
by certified mail, return receipt requested and f1JSt class U.S. M
Notary Public
SWORN TO AND SUSSCRI ME THIS 1A_ DAY
COM~fONWEAl.TI-I OF PENN6YLVANIA NOTAAIAL SEAL.
BARBARA L HAND, Notary PLdIIic City of F'hDa~ PhRa. Coonty My CommlssiolJ &-pires June 19, 2010
117. The alleged signature of Mr. McKeever on the Affidavit of Compliance set forth
below was allegedly signed in the presence of Notary Public Barbara L. Hand. The document,
attached as Exhibit 7, was filed May 1, 2009 in LaSalle Bank National Association vs Moore etal
OD-08-023656, Allegheny County:
28
NO. GD-10-021437
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ACf6 OF 1974,41 P.S. 101, ET.SEQ.
AND ACf 91 OF 1983
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA) )
) SS:
)
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY )
Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the said County and Commonwealth, personally appeared Michael T. MeKeever, attorney for the Plaintiff; who being duly sworn according to law deposes and says that on, Defendant(s) waslwere mailed a Notice(s) of Homeowner's emergency Mortgage Assistance Act of 1983 and Act 6 Nolicel:S) of Intention to Foreclosure by certified mail, return receipt requested and first class U.S. Mail.
\l\~ t· \ 1LXl HfJ)
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED, EFORE
ME THIS 22:> DAY OF 2009,
Notary Public
COMMONWEAlTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NOTARIAL SEAl ~R8AAA L HAND. NotaJy Public City of Phtladelphla, PhHa. County My Commission Expires June 19, 2010
118. On January 23, 2009, an Affidavit of Compliance, attached as Exhibit 8, was
allegedly signed by Mr. McKeever before Notary Public Barbara L. Hand in the case of National
City Mortgage Co. vs Cancilla GD-08-023703, Allegheny County, and the signature appears as
follows:
29
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ACT6 OF 1974,41 P.S. 101, ET.SEO.
ANDACf91 OF J983
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA) )
) SS:
)
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY )
NO. GD-IO-021437 I
I
Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the said County and Commonwealth, personally appeared Michael T. McKeever, attorney for the Plaintiff, who being duly . SWOrn according to law deposes and says that on, Defendant(s) waswere mailed a Notice(s) of I Homeowner's emergency Mortgage Assistance Act ~f 1983 and Act 6 NOlice(s) of Intention to Foreclos~re
by certified mail, return receipt requested and first class U.S. Mail. I
I
I
! 1
I
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS ADAY
119, Mr. McKeever allegedly signed an "Affidavit Pursuant to Rule 3129", attached as
Exhibit 9, before Notary Public Antoinette Black on July 15,2008 that was filed on July 17,2008
in Deutsche Bank National Trust Company vs Johnson GD-07-020865, Allegheny County, as
follows:
30
NO. GD-1O~021437
DATED: July 15, 2008
!Ir~~J!oot!f{!J&M
BY: Micb3d T. M~, Esq. Attorney ref plainlilf
Sworn to I!lld subsaibed 1Iclin IIICIhisL day
or ~ ,2008
~f1oll
NoIaryPubIi:
_IWEALT1ICF:>DIIISIt.VANIA HOTARJALSfAL AHTONIElTE M. BIJCI(, IlCiIJ Nil:
120. In the same case, Deutsche Bank National Trust Company v. Johnson, No. GD-07-
020865, Mr. McKeever's signature appears on a notarized "Affidavit of Last Known Address",
attached as Exhibit 10, as follows:
31
NO.OD-I0-021437
AtfIdavll of LasI: KnoWTI Add ..... s
I. Michael T_ McKeever, Esquire. hereby verify thaI I am covnsel of reccrd ror!he Plalnlilf, DEUTSCHE
BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY. AS TRUSTEE OF ARGENT MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC_, ASSET BACKED PASS THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2oos.Ml UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING
AGREEMENT DATED AS OF JUNE 1.2006, WITHOUT RECOURSE; thai as such and In my capacity as ouch, I
em au!hori;!ed to execute !he within Afrodavil ror and on behalf crt Plalnlilf; !hal 10 the best of my """"'edge.
unswom falsifications to authonUes_
121. The signature of Mr. McKeever appearing on the Affidavit of Compliance filed in
Cancil1~ see ,-r 86 supra, is vastly different than the signature of Mr. McKeever appearing on the
Complaint filed in the very same case (i.e. Cancilla) which appears immediately below (signature
page from Complaint in Cancilla attached hereto as Exhibit 11):
...........
.---------,1"
BY:~'lYl____t_L\.~~~----'==\--~-\ ~_____;:eM~~-·-
GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER By: MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER, ESQUIRE ArrORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
122. On information and belief, Defendant McKeever did not sign all of the documents
reference hereinabove, nor did he appear before a Notary Public and sign all of the documents
described hereinabove that were allegedly signed in the presence of a Notary Public.
32
NO. GD~10~021437 123. The alleged signature of Joseph Goldbeck appears on an "Affidavit of Last Known
Address" attached hereto as Exhibit 12, filed 12/29/06 in the case of MTGLO Investors LP vs
Kobulinsky et al, No GD-06-023420:
Affidavit of Last Known Address
I, Joseph A. Goldbeck, Jr., Esquire, hereby verify that I am coonsel c:i record for !he Plaintiff, MTGLQ INYESTORS,LP; that as such and in my capacity as such,l am authorized 10 execute the within Alf'mvit for and 00
beha~ of Plaid, that 10 !he best of my knCMfedge, informalion, and belief,the names and last kroMI addresses of !he OM!er(s) and Defendanl(s} in !he above refereR:ed proceeding are ROOIN A. KOOULlNSKY, 710 ChllCh SlreetExt, Turtle Creek, PA 15145 and RICHARD W. KOBULINSKY, 710 Church Street Ext, Turtle Creek, PA
15145; I further understand thal raise sla!ements herein made are subject 10 the jI'OYisions set rcrth in 18 Pa.C.sA
4904 relating 10 unsworn IaIsificatioos ID aulhorilies.
Sworn to and subscribed Be ore me this _df_ day
124. The signature of Mr. Goldbeck appears on the Complaint filed in the Kobulinsky
matter is very different that the signature filed in the same case before Notary Public. The
signature appearing on the signature page of the complaint, which is attached hereto as Exhibit 13,
looks like this:
33
NO. GD-IO-021437
GOLl"~~ By: OSEPH A. GOLDBECK, JR.) ESQUIRE
A TIORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
125. The signature of Mr. Goldbeck appears on an Affidavit of Last Known Address,
attached hereto as Exhibit 14, filed on 5/31107 in the case of Citifinancial Services Inc. vs Harper
etal, GD-06-023422, Allegheny County, as follows:
34
NO. GD-I0-021437
Affidavit of Last Known Address
I, Joseph A. Goldbeck, Jr., Esquire, hereby verify that J am coonsel of reccro for the Plaintiff, QmFINANCIAl
SERVICES INC.; thaI as sucll alld in my capacity as sucll, I am authorized to exearte the within Affid~V1l for alld on behalf of Plaintiff; !hat 10 the best or my knt:1Medge, information, alld belief, the names aM lasl knoYm addresses of
the Owner(s) alld Derendan~s) In the above referenced proceeding are JAMES E HARPER, 1190 Fores! Ave Apt #4, Pittsburgh, PA 15236 alld MARGARET M HARPER, 1190 Fores! Ave Apt #4 ittsburgh, PA 15i36: I further
unsworn falsificafions to authorities.
ulldersland that false slatemllflts herein made are subject to the provisions s
Sworn to and subscribed
·s lL_ day
COMMONWEALTH Of PENHSYLVAHI4 NOTAfIAI.
BAII!ARA L 1W'l,1tWyN* ely d ~ Ptta.Cr#tI My CUrmsakII~.bIa 19,2O.1D
126. The signature of Joseph Goldbeck appears on the signature page of the complaint,
attached hereto as Exhibit 15, filed in Citifinancial Services Inc. vs Arthur GD-06-023421,
Allegheny County as follows:
35
NO. GD-10-021437
DB CK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER B : JOSEPH A. GOLDBECK, JR., ESQUIRE
A RNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
127. On information and belief, Mr. Goldbeck did not sign all of the documents set forth
above that bear his signature and, on information and belief, there are hundreds ifnot thousands of
documents that bear his signature that he has not signed which documents have been signed by the
non-lawyers working at GMM who are engaged in the widespread unauthorized practice of law.
128. The reason that no lawyers are signing the documents utilized in foreclosing on
homes across Pennsylvania is because no lawyers are, in fact, involved in filing these lawsuits, no
lawyers are involved in defaulting the Mortgagors, and no lawyers are involved in reducing the
defaults to judgment and sale at foreclosure. Rather, the lawsuits are being filed and prosecuted to
conclusion by non-lawyers who are engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.
129. On December 29, 2009, a Verification of Non-Military Service attached hereto as
Exhibit 16 was filed in the case of Citimortgage Inc. vs Lower, Allegheny County, MG-09-002231
as part of a Praecipe to Enter Default Judgment. The document is notarized by Defendant Hand
and purports to bear the signature of Mr. McKeever.
130. On information and belief, the signature appearing on Exhibit 16 IS not Mr.
McKeever's.
131. On December 31, 2009, an Affidavit of Compliance was filed in Lower as part of a
Praecipe for Writ of Execution. The document attached hereto as Exhibit 17 is notarized by
Defendant Hand and purports to bear the signature of Mr. McKeever.
36
NO. GD-I0-021437 132. On information and belief, the signature appearing on Exhibit 17 is not Mr.
McKeever's.
133. The complaint in JPMorgan Chase Bank NA. vs Morgan, Allegheny County, MG-
09-003126 was filed December 9, 2009.
134. The signature on the complaint purports to be that of Mr. McKeever, but on
information and belief the signature is not Mr. McKeever's signature and was placed there by one
of the Defendant Non-Lawyers engaging in the unauthorized practice oflaw.
135. A Praecipe for Default Judgment was filed in the Court of Cornmon Pleas of
Allegheny County on January 21, 2010 in Morgan. Appended to the document was a Verification
of Non-Military Service, sworn before Defendant Hand. This document, attached hereto as
Exhibit 18, was sworn January 21, 2010, but is dated January 19, 2010.
136. On December 9, 2009, a foreclosure complaint was filed in Citimortgage Inc. vs
Alberts et ai, Allegheny County, MG-09-003129, purportedly signed by Mr. Mckeever.
137. On information and belief, the complaint in Alberts was not signed by Mr.
McKeever.
138. On December 11, 2009, a foreclosure complaint was filed in Deutsche Bank
National Trust Company vs Sisco, Allegheny County, MG-09-003150. Both the signature page to
the complaint and the verification to the complaint, attached hereto as Exhibits 19 and 20,
respectively, purport to be signed by Mr. McKeever.
139. On information and belief, one of the Non-Lawyer Defendants engaged in the
unauthorized practice of law signed Exhibits 19 and 20.
37
NO. GD-10-021437 140. On December 14, 2009, a foreclosure complaint was filed in Wells Fargo Bank
Minnesota vs. Wheeler et al, Allegheny County, MG-09-003174.
141. The signature page to the complaint, attached hereto as Exhibit 21, purports to be
signed by Mr. McKeever.
142. On information and belief, Mr. McKeever did not sign the complaint in Wheeler
but, rather, the document was signed by Non-Lawyer Defendants engaged in the unauthorized
practice oflaw.
143. On December 17,2009, a foreclosure complaint was filed in Citimortgage Inc. vs
Boyle et al, Allegheny County, MG-09-003204 and the signature on the complaint, attached as
Exhibit 22, purports to be that of Mr. McKeever.
144. On information and belief, Mr. McKeever did not sign the complaint in Boyle.
145. On February 4,2010, Defendant Boschetti signed her own name to a "Verification
of Military Service" in Boyle that purports to be an affidavit of Mr. McKeever. This document is
attached as Exhibit 23. The document is sworn to and subscribed before a notary public, to wit,
Defendant Hand. The opening paragraph of the document states, "MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER,
hereby verifies that he is attorney for the Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, and that on
information and belief, he has knowledge of the following facts, to wit. .. "
146. In other words, Defendant Boschetti swore to an affidavit on behalf of Mr.
McKeever, swearing that she knew what information was inside Mr. McKeever's mind, which is
so patently absurd it bears no further comment, except to note that apparently Notary Hand had no
problem permitting this outrageous conduct.
147. On June 17, 2010, Defendant Keenan (who is a secretary) filed an affidavit
claiming to be Mr. McKeever in Boyle. This document is attached hereto as Exhibit 24.
38
NO. GD-I0-021437 148. Plaintiff has reviewed numerous documents filed of record wherein Defendant
Keenan signed affidavits purporting to swear to the knowledge that was inside Mr. McKeever's
head. One such affidavit was an Affidavit Pursuant to Rule 3129 filed June 24, 2010 in
Citimortgage Inc. vs Turner Jr., Allegheny County, MG-I0-000405, which is attached hereto as
Exhibit 25, and which document was notarized by Defendant Black. The document bears the date
June 15,2010 but the notary stamp indicates that it was signed June 21,2010.
149. In a Supplemental Affidavit filed August 27,2010 in Deutsche Bank National Trost
Company vs Lemp et al, Allegheny County, MG-I0-000406, Defendant Keenan (a legal secretary)
again signed an affidavit, attached hereto as Exhibit 26, purporting to know what is inside Mr.
Mckeever's head. The document purports to be notarized by Defendant Black, however,
Defendant Black did not even sign the document, revealing either that Defendant Black is careless
with her notary seal, or she has given it to others who are so anxious to take people's homes while
engaged in the unauthorized practice oflaw that they cannot even "properly" forge a document.
150. In an affidavit attached hereto as Exhibit 27 and filed September 17, 2010, BAC
Home Loans Servicing L.P. vs HUe, Allegheny County, MG-1O-001409 Defendant Keenan again
executed an affidavit before a notary that purports to attest to the knowledge inside Mr.
McKeever's head.
151. On information and belief, in addition to the documents described hereinabove,
Defendants Hand and Black (the Notary Public Defendants) notarized hundreds, if not thousands
of documents in violation of the Notary Public Law, Act of August 21, 1953, P.L. 1323, as
amended, 57 P.S. § 168.
152. The documents that have been notarized by Defendants Hand and Black, such as
the documents set forth hereinabove, have been used by the Non-Lawyer Defendants to foreclose
39
NO. GD-1O-021437 on homes and to collect illegal so-called "attorneys fees" that are being charged by non-lawyers
committing the crime of the unauthorized practice oflaw.
153. Defendants Hand and Black have knowingly aided and abetted the non-lawyers to
engage in the unauthorized practice of law; they have violated their duties as Notaries; they have
stained and undermined the truth finding process and the integrity of the Judicial System. Their
conduct is criminal, and their conduct is outrageous.
154. Defendants Hand and Black should be enjoined from aiding and abetting in the
unauthorized practice of law.
x. JUDGMENTS OBTAINED ILLEGALLY
155. The widespread criminal conduct described herein is not the result of excusab1e
neglect or inadvertence. Rather, it is the result of greed on the part of the Non-Lawyers and the
"clients" they serve while hiding under the letterhead of the law finn Goldbeck, McCafferty &
McKeever. Since Non-Lawyers can never have "clients" as that term is used by Courts and those
who have earned the right and obtained the honor of being admitted to the practice oflaw, Plaintiff
puts the word "clients" in quotations when referring to the "clients" ofthe Non-Lawyers.
156. The prohibition against the unauthorized practice of law set forth in 42 Pa.C.S.
2524(a) specifically contemplates that paralegals and legal assistants hiding under the letterhead of
a law finn may attempt to engage in the unauthorized practice of law, and the law specifically
makes such conduct a crime. 42 Pa.C.S. § 2524(a) states:
(a) General Rule. -- Except as provided in subsection (b), any person, including, but not limited to, a paralegal or legal assistant, who within this Commonwealth shall practice law, or who shall hold himself out to the public as being entitled to practice law, or use or advertise the title of lawyer, attorney at law, attorney and counselor at law, counselor, or the equivalent in any language, in such a manner as to convey the impression that he is a practitioner of the law of any jurisdiction, without being an
40
NO. GD-IO-02l437 attorney at law or a corporation complying with 15 Pa.C.S. Ch. 29 (relating to professional corporation), commits a misdemeanor of the third degree upon a first violation. A second or subsequent violation of this subsection constitutes a misdemeanor ofthe first degree. (Emphasis added.)
157. On information and belief, no lawyer working at Goldbeck, McCafferty &
McKeever instructed these Non-Lawyer Defendants to prepare and file false affidavits, or to claim
and/or recover "attorney fees" in cases where no lawyers had done any work whatsoever.
158. Where a non-lawyer has engaged in the unauthorized practice of law and has
obtained a judgment on behalf of his or her "client", any such judgment should be vacated. The
Court had no jurisdiction over the lawsuit, the judgment is the result of the commission of a crime,
and neither the non-lawyer nor the "client" of the non-lawyer should profit from such conduct.
159. The Prothonotary in all such cases was without authority to enter judgment against
the defendants. The judgments are, therefore, void ab initio. See Mullen v. Slupe, 360 Pa. 485,
490,62 A.2d 14, 16 (1948) (judgment "entered without authority ... is no judgment at all so far as
it affects the rights of the defendants.") (quoting Long v, Lemoyne Borough, 222 Pa. 311,31871
A. 211,212 (1908)).
XI. PENDING FORECLOSURE CASES FILED IN VIOLATION OF LAW
160. With respect to pending foreclosure actions filed by non-lawyers at GMM engaging
in the unauthorized practice of law, such lawsuits should be immediately dismissed, as the Court
has no jurisdiction over them. The lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured by having attorneys come
in and claim that they will now respect the rule of law. These Complaints were a nullity when the
were filed.
41
NO. GD-IO-021437 161. Anything less than dismissal of cases filed in violation of the prohibition against
the unauthorized practice of law by non-lawyers encourages such conduct to be repeated. (See
Chase v. City of Earle, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48230 (ED Ark. 2010)("When a non-lawyer
attempts to represent the interests of other persons, the practice constitutes the unauthorized
practice of law and results in a nullity. Jones ex rei. Jones v. Correctional Medical Services, 401
F.3d 950, 952 (8th Cir. 2005). Moreover, a later appointed attorney cannot cure the complaint of
its original defect. Davenport v. Lee, 348 Ark. 148, 155, 72 S.W.3d 85, 88 (2002). This nile
protects the courts interests in ensuring that parties are represented by people knowledgeable and
trained in the Jaw. Jones, 401 F.3d at 952.")
162. Plaintiff avers, on information and belief, that the clients of GMM knew of,
directed, and profited from the conduct of the non-lawyers described herein. As such, the
"clients" of these Non-Lawyers who are profiteering from the unauthorized practice of law by the
non-lawyers have hands that are as unclean as the Defendants' hands.
163. For example, and without conceding in any manner that their knowledge did not
exist prior to December of 2009, there is no question that Bank of America (which, on information
and belief purchased Countrywide Home Loan, Inc. in July 2008) and BAC Home Loan
Servicing, LP (formerly Countrywide Home Loan Servicing, LP) became aware of the conduct
described hereinabove in December 2009. These entities are onI y two of the entities who the N on-
Lawyers file foreclosures on behalf of.
164. On information and belief, on December 8, 2009, John Smith, Esquire, who was at
the time a current employee of Bank of America and who in 2007 was First Vice President of
Foreclosure, Bankruptcy and Real Estate for Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., was sitting in the
courtroom when Mr. McKeever testified (as set forth hereinabove) that it was "standard practice"
42
NO. GD-I0-021437 for the Defendant Non-Lawyers to engage in the unauthorized practice of law. As an attorney,
Mr. Smith knew of and understood the significance of Mr. McKeever's testimony, to wit, that
non-lawyers working at GMM were and had been filing lawsuits that had not been reviewed by
attorneys and they had been doing it for several years. On information and belief, Mr. Smith also
knew that such conduct was criminal, such lawsuits were nullities, and all such lawsuits should be
dismissed.
165. The next day, December 9, 2009, during court proceedings presided over by
Federal Judge Thomas Agresti in the case of in DeAngelis v. Countrywide Home Loans. Inc. (In
Re: Hill), 2010 Bankr. LEXIS 3313 (Bankr. WD Pa. 2010), Judge Agresti stated on the record:
THE COURT: But I'm a little concerned about what I'm hearing about the
Goldberg finn's handling of cases, filing by paralegals without being, you know, foreclosure actions being filed without attorneys reading them or reviewing
them before it's filed, filed under signatures that are -- somebody's authorized to sign a signature -- a name. It's a matter we're going to take up. I don't know if it's relevant to our proceeding today, but I'm quite concerned with what I'm
hearing.
166. Despite the fact that Bank of America and its lawyers knew, with certainty, in
December of 2009 that hundreds, if not thousands of foreclosures cases pending had been filed by
the non-lawyers in violation of the prohibition against the unauthorized practice of law, they did
not dismiss any of the pending cases filed by the Non-Lawyers for the reason that said cases were
a nullity and, instead, they continued to permit the Non-Lawyers to prosecute those cases to
conclusion - an act of pure greed and disrespect for the Rule of Law.
167. On October 5, 2010, Judge Agresti issued an opinion in In Re: Hill wherein he
stated:
During the trial the Court also became aware of some apparently routine practices at GMM that raise issues that cannot be ignored. McKeever testified to a procedure at his finn whereby foreclosure complaints are prepared and filed by non-attorneys and ~ reviewed by an attorney, even though the "signature" of
43
NO. GD-I0-021437 an attorney appears on the document. 12/8 Tr. at 83-84. TIlls would seem to be a violation of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, which provide that the signature of an attorney on a document filed with a Pennsylvania court is a certification that the document has been read by the attorney. See Pa.R. Civ.P. 1023.1 (c). Even though these foreclosure actions are not being filed in this Court and thus do not expose GMM to sanctions, concern for our sister courts in this Commonwealth compel the Court to at least make publicly known what it learned during the trial.
In Re: Hill, at **117-118. (emphasis added)
168. Plaintiff is unaware as to whether or not Judge Agresti's efforts have had or will
have any effect on the Non-Lawyer Defendants and their "clients" and, therefore, Plaintiff seeks
an injunction to preserve the integrity of the judicial system and the rule of law in this
Commonwealth, as well as to protect the thousands of Mortgagors who have unknowingly been
sued by Non-Lawyers engaged in the unauthorized practice of law and who have paid and/or face
the clear and present danger of paying illegal and fraudulent "attorneys fees" to these Non-
Lawyers and their "clients".
169. On information and belief, there are hundreds, if not thousands of mortgage
foreclosure actions pending in Courts of Common Pleas across the Commonwealth of
Pennsylvania that have been filed by the non-lawyers at GMM in violation of 42 Pa.C.S. §2S24(a)
and which are being prosecuted toward judgment by these same individuals. These actions must
be enjoined from further prosecution.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant the following relief:
1. Declaration that the conduct of the non-lawyers working at Goldbeck, McCafferty & McKeever, P.C. described herein constitutes the unauthorized practice oflaw in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania;
44
NO. GD-I0-021437
2. An injunction barring the non-lawyers at Goldbeck, McCafferty & McKeever, P.C. from engaging in the unauthorized practice oflaw within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania;
3. An injunction enjoining continued prosecution of any case filed within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in violation of 42 Pa.C.S. §2524(a) by the non-lawyers at GMM;
4. Issuing a Rule to Show Cause Upon GMM to show cause why all pending foreclosure actions in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in which GMM has entered an appearance should not be dismissed as having been filed in violation of 42 Pa.C.S. §2524(a) by the non-lawyers at GMM;
5. Issuing a Rule to Show Cause Why all alleged "attorneys fees" that have been recovered by the Non-Lawyers or their "clients" in foreclosure lawsuits filed in violation of 42 Pa.C.S. §2524(a) in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania should not be accounted for and returned to the MortgagorsiHomeowners from whom they were taken;
6. Issuing a Rule to Show Cause Upon Defendants to show cause why every judgment entered in favor of Defendants "clients" in a foreclosure action filed and prosecuted in violation of 42 Pa.C.S. §2524(a) should not be opened and/or vacated;
7. Enjoining Defendants from supporting claims or cases in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with false and fraudulent "affidavits" notarized illegally;
8. Enjoining Barbara L. Hand and Antoinette Black from aiding and abetting in the commission of the unauthorized practice oflaw in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania by notarizing documents in violation ofthe Notary Public Law which documents are being utilized by non-lawyers at GMM to prosecute foreclosure actions in violation of 42 Pa.C.S. §2524(a)
9. Enjoining Eric Keenan from signing his name to any legal document to be filed in any court in this Commonwealth.
10. Enjoining all Non-Lawyer Defendants from signing their names, or the names of anyone else, upon any document to be filed in any lawsuit pending in this Commonwealth except in a lawsuit wherein the non-lawyers are parties, such as this lawsuit.
11. Costs of suit;
12. Any other relief this Honorable Court deems appropriate.
45
NO.OD-10-021437
Respectfully submitted,
P a k J. Loughren, Esquire Pa. ID. 80449
Appearing Pro Se
Address
Loughren, Loughren & Loughren, P .C. 310 Grant Street, Suite 2800 Pittsburgh, Pa 15219
412-232-3530
patrick@loughren.com
46
8. If the Mortgage is reinstated prior to a Sheriff's Sale, the Attorney's Fees set forth above may be less than the amount demanded based on work: actually performed, The Attorney's Fees requested are in 'conformity with the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law. Plaintiff is entitled to collect Attorney's fees ofup to 5% of the remaining principal balance in the event the Property is sold to a third party purchaser at Sheriff's Sale or if the complexity of the action requires additional fees in excess of the amount demanded in the Action.
9. Plaintiff is not seeking a judgment of personal liability (or an "in personam" judgment) against the Defendants in this Action but reserves its right bring a separate Action to establish that right, if such right exists. If Defendants have received a discharge of their personal liability in a Bankruptcy proceeding, this Action of Mortgage Foreclousre is, in no way, an attempt to re-establish the personal liability that was discharged in Bankruptcy. but only to foreclose the Mortgage and sell the Property pursuant to Pennsylvania law.
10. The within mortgage is insured by the Federal Housing Administration under Title II of the National Housing Act and, as such, is not subject to the provisions of Pennsylvania Act No. 91 of 1983.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands judgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum of $66,584.36, together with interest at the rate of $8.1 0, per day and other expenses incurred by the Plaintiff which are properly chargeable in accordance with the terms of the mortgage, and for the foreclosure and sale of the mortgaged premises.
BY:~~rw~)lIl,I....._pId ~~WA~U'l-!=--~ __
GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER By: MICHAEL T. McKEEVER, ESQUIRE ATfORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
EXHIBIT
I
_------::-==
~D- 06- 030"81
liability that was discharged in Bankruptcy, but on1y to foreclose the Mortgage and sell the Property pursuant to Pennsylvania law.
8. Notice of Intention to Foreclose and a Notice of Homeowners' Emergency Mortgage Assistance has been sent to Defendants by certified and regular mail, as required by Act 160 of 1998 of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on the date(s) set forth in the true and correct copy of such notice(s) attached hereto as Exhibit ''B''. The Defendants have not had the required face-to-face meeting within the required time and Plaintiff has no knowledge of any such meeting being requested by the Defendants through the Plaintiff, the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, or any appropriate Consumer Credit Counseling Agency.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a de terris judgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum of $45,058.97, together with interest at the rate of $8.17, per day and other expenses, costs and charges incurred by the Plaintiff which are properly chargeable in accordance with the terms of the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law until the Mortgage is paid in full. and for the foreclosure of the Mortgage and Sheriff's Sale of the Property.
cCAFFERTY & McKEEVER
NW'aff~ET. KEEVER, ESQUIRE
rr'\V~ .. jT"""FOR PLAINTIFF
EXHIBIT
I A
D- 08-D2364'9
VERIFICATION
Michael T. McKeever, Esquire, hereby states that he is attorney for PLAINTIFF in this matter, that Plaintiff is outside the jurisdiction of the Court and/or the Verification could not be obtained within the time allowed for the filing of the pleading
that he is authorized to make this verification pursuant to
Pa.R.C.P 1024 (c) and that the statements made in the foregoing pleading in the Civil Action in Mortgage Foreclosure are based upon the information supplied by Plaintiff and are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
Furthermore, it is the undersigned's intention to substitute a verification from Plaintiff as soon as it is received by counsel.
The undersigned understands that this statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C. S. Sec. 4904 relating to
unsworn falsification to authorities.
Date: J I /6 ().. l 0 C(
EXHIBIT
I 3
D- 08- 02.364'1
8. Plaintiff is not seeking a judgment of personal liability (or an "in personam" judgment) against the Defendant in this Action but reserves its right to bring a separate Action to establish that right, if such right exists. If Defendant has received a discharge of their personal liability in a Bankruptcy proceeding, this Action of Mortgage Foreclosure is, in no way, an attempt to re-establish the personal liability that was discharged in Bankruptcy, but only to foreclose the Mortgage and sell the Property pursuant to Pennsylvania law.
9. Notice of Intention to Foreclose and a Notice of Homeowners' Emergency Mortgage Assistance has been sent to Defendant by certified and regular mail, as required by Act 160 of 1998 of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on the date(s) set forth in the true and correct copy of such notice(s) attached hereto as Exhibit "B". The Defendant have not had the required face-to-face meeting within the required time and Plaintiff has no knowledge of any such meeting being requested by the Defendant through the Plaintiff the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, or any appropriate Consumer Credit Counseling Agency.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a de terrisjudgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum of5138,899.92, together with interest at the rate of $19.30, per day and other expenses, costs and charges incurred by the Plaintiff which are properly chargeable in accordance with the terms of the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law until the Mortgage is paid in full, and for the foreclosure of the Mortgage and Sheriff's Sale of the Property.
By. !lJid1~ ~-
GOLDB~CCAFFERTY & McKEEVER By: MICHAEL T. McKEEvER, EsQUIRE ATIORNEY FOR PI..AlNTIFF
exHIBIT
I y
'D-OB- 023651
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
Plaintiff
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
) CIVIL ACTION LAW
) ACTION OF MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE )
) GD-07-018833
)
COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS INC.
Vs.
MARK A. RAEDER DEBRAJ.RAEDER
Defendant(s)
Affidavit of Last Known Address
I, Michael T. McKeever. Esquire. hereby verify that I am counsel of record for the Plaintiff, COUNTRYWIDE
HOME LOANS INC.; that as such and in my capacity as such, I am authorized to execute the within Affidavit for and
on behalf of Plaintiff; that to the best of my knowtedge. Information. and belief, the names and last known addresses
of the Owner(s) and Defendant(s) in the above referenced proceeding are MARK A. RAEDER, 3037 SW 5th Avenue. Cape Corat, FL 33914 and DEBRA J. RAEDER, 5231 Brightwood Road #1. Bethel Park. PA 15102; I
further understand that false statements herein made are subject to the provlsons set forth in 18 Pa.C.S.A. 4904
relating to unsworn falsifications to authorilies.
Attorney for Plaintiff
Sworn to and subscribed Before me this 5" day
Of~'_2008
COMMONWEALTH OF PENN~YANrA NOTAAIALS
~BARA L HAND, NotaIy PIAIGc City of PhHadelphla, Phlla. CoII'dy My ComlTllssion ElqJims June 19,20','
EXHI8IT
I s
. D - 01-018833
...
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
CITIMORTGAGE INC. SIBIM ClTIFINANCIAL MORTGAGE COMPANY, INC.
CIVIL DIVISION
Plaintiff
NO.: GD-08-023651
vs.
JOANN BOLAND as Executrix of the Estate of Anna M. Crogan, Deceased
Defendant(s)
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE WITH ACf 6 OF ]974.41 P.S, 101. ET.SEO.
AND ACf91 OF 1983
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA) )
) SS:
)
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY )
Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the aid Cou and .
Commonwealth, personally appeared Michael T. McKeever, attorney fo e Plai ff, who being duly
sworn according to law deposes and says that on, Defendant(s) was! re mai a Notice(s) of
Homeowner's emergency Mortgage Assistance Act of 1983 and 6 N' s) of Intention to Foreclosure
by certified mail, return receipt requested and first class U.S. M
Notary Public
SWORN TO AND SUBSC ME THIS ~_ DA'l
COM~,fONWEAL TH OF PENNsYLVANIA . EXHIBIT
NOTARIAl SEAL
B~BAHA L HAND, Notary Public ~ I
City of ~~adelphia, PhiIa. County I (?
My ComllllSSlon Expires June 19, 2010 D-08-0236SI
•
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA LASALLE BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR CERTIFICATEHQLDERS OF BEAR STEARNS ASSET BACKED SECURITIES I, LLC, ASSET~BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-HE7
CNIL DNISION
NO.: GD-08-023656
Plaintiff
vs.
MAMIE A. MOORE
WILLIAM B. MOORE Defendant(s)
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCEWlTIl ACf6 OF 1974,41 P.S.I01.ET.SEO.
AND ACT 91 OF 1983
COMM.oNWEALTII OF PENNSYLVANIA) )
) SS:
)
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY )
Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the said County and Commonwealth, personally appeared Michael T. McKeever, attorney for the Plaintiff, who being duly sworn according to law deposes and says that on , Defendant(s) was/were mailed a Notice(s) of Homeowner's emergency Mortgage Assistance Act of 1983 and Act 6 Notice(s) oflntention to Foreclosure by certified mail, return receipt requested and first class U.S. Mail.
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED, EFORE ME THIS 2_2J DAY OF
-~-'+'-+----....:<
Notary Public
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NOTARIAL SEAL BARBARA L HAND, Notary PUblic City of Philadelphia, Phila. County My Commission Expires June 19, 2010
EXHI.BIT
I 7
D- 08 - 025(:£1;
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
, NATION AL CITY MORTGAGE, CO., FIKJ A NATIONAL CITY MORTGAGE, A DIVISION OF NATIONAL CITY BANK
Plaintiff
CIVIL DIVISION
NO.: GD-08-023703
vs.
DEANA M. CANCILLA Defendant(s)
AFFIDAVIT OF COMPUANCE WITH ACT 6 OF 1974.41 P.S. 101, ET.S£O.
AND ACT 91 OF 1983
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA) )
) SS:
)
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY )
Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the said County and Commonwealth, personally appeared Michael T. McKeever, attorney for the Plaintiff, who being dUlY" sworn according to law deposes and says that on , Defendantls) was/were mailed a Notice(s) of Homeowner's emergency Mortgage Assistance Act tif 1983 and Act 6 Notice(s) of Intention to Foreclosu,re
by certified mail, return receipt requested and first class U.S. Mail. I
Notary Public
EXHIBIT
D- 08-02.3(03
I
I
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
! I
I
I
I
t
,
I
I
I
..
DATED: July 15,2008
.
i!JIIJAJ/wZ:!!di!J!f/!
BY: Michael T. McKeever, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff
Sworn to and subscribed
-
Before me this .l2__ day
of ~ ,2008
~
Notary Public
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NOTARIAL SEAl ANTONIETTE M. BLACK. Notary Pubic City of Philadelphia. Phila. County
My Commission Expires June: 27. 2010
EXHIBIT
-I i
. D- 01- 020865
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF AllEGHENY COUNTY. PENNSYLVANIA
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY. AS TRUSTEE OF ARGENT MORTGAGE SECURITIES. INC .• ASSET BACKED PASS THROUGH CERTIFICATES. SERIES 2006-M1 UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING' AGREEMENT DATED AS OF JUNE 1, 2006. WITHOUT RECOURSE
Plaintiff
Vs.
BARRY W. JOHNSON Defendant(s)
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PlEAS
) OF AllEGHENY COUNTY
) CML ACTION LAW
) AcnON OF MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE )
) GD-07~020865
)
Affidavit of Last Known Address
I. Michael T. McKeever, esquire. hereby verify that I am counsel of record for the Plaintiff, DEUTSCHE
BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY. AS TRUSTEE OF ARGENT MORTGAGE SECURITIES. INC .• ASSET BACKED pASs THROUGH CERTIFICATES. SERIES 2006-M1 UNDER THE POOLING AND SERVICING
AGREEMENT DATED AS OF JUNE 1, 2006. WITHOUT RECOURSE; that as such and In my capacity as such. I
am authorized to execute the within Affidavit for and on behalf of Plaintiff; that to the best of my knowledge,
information, and belief, the names and last known addresses of the Owner(s) and Defe referenced proceeding are BARRY W. JOHNSON. 3450 McClure Avenue. Pitts rgh. A 15212; I further
unswom falsifications to authorities.
Sworn
COMMONWEA.L,.H Of ~ENN8YLVANIA
EXHIBIT
I /0
D-O"l-020865
9. Notice of Intention to Foreclose and a Notice of Homeowners' Emergency Mortgage Assistance has been sent to Defendant by certified and regular mail, as required by Act 160 of 1998 of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on the date{s) set forth in the true and correct copy of such notice(s) attached hereto as Exhibit "B", The Defendant have not had the required face-to-face meeting within the required time and Plaintiffhas no knowledge of any such meeting being requested by the Defendant through the Plaintiff, the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, or any appropriate Consumer Credit Counseling Agency.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a de terris judgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum of $119,410.49, together with interest at the rate of $22.08, per day and other expenses, costs and charges incurred by the Plaintiff which are properly chargeable in accordance with the terms of the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law until the Mortgage is paid in full, and for the foreclosure of the Mortgage and Sheriff's Sale of the Property.
By: (_ot)~haRJ)\.lY1eJtRQ~.
GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER By: MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER., EsQUIRE ATIORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
EXHIBIT
I rt
D- 05- 023 103
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
MTGLQINVESTORS,LP Plaintiff
Vs.
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
) OF ALlEGHENY COUNTY
) CIVIL ACTION LAW
) ACTION OF MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE )
) GD-06-023420
)
ROBIN A. KOBULINSKY RICHARD W. KOBULINSKY Defendant(s)
Affidavit of Last Known Address
I, Joseph A. Goldbeck, Jr., Esquire, hereby verify that I am counsel of record for the Plaintiff. MTGLQ INVESTORS, LP; that as such and In my capacity as such, I am authorized to execute the within Affidavit for and on behalf of Plaintiff; that to the best of my knowledge, Information. and belief, the names and last known addresses of the Owner(s) and Defendant{s) in the above referenced proceeding are ROBIN A. KOBULINSKY, 710 Church Street Ext, Turtle Creek, PA 15145 and RICHARD W. KOBULINSKY, 710 Church Street Ext, Turtle Creek. PA
15145; I further understand that false statements herein made are subject to the provisions setforth In 18 Pa.C.SA 4904 retating to unsworn falsifICations to authorities.
Sworn to and subscribed Be ore me this L day of
EXHIBIT
I J~
. D-06-02.3420
, liability that was discharged in Bankruptcy, but only to foreclose the Mortgage and sell the Property pursuant to Pennsylvania law,
9, Notice ofIntention to Foreclose and a Notice of Homeowners' Emergency Mortgage Assistance has been sent to Defendants by certified and regular mail, as required by Act 160 of 1998 of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on the date(s) set forth in the true and correct copy of such notice(s) attached hereto as Exhibit "BU, The Defendants have not had the required face-to-face meeting within the required time and Plaintiff has no knowledge of any such meeting being requested by the Defendants through the Plaintiff. the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, or any appropriate Consumer Credit Counseling Agency,
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a de terris judgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum of $68,039.32, together with interest at the rate of$17.34. per day and other expenses, costs and charges incurred by the Plaintiff which are properly chargeable in accordance with the terms of the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law until the Mortgage is paid in full, and for the foreclosure of the Mortgage and Sheriff's Sale of the Property,
GO By:
EXHlalT
I I)
D-06-023420
t·'
~ ..
.
. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF AlLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANlA ~
CITIFINANCIAl SERVlCES INC.
) IN THE COURT OF COMMON PlEAs
) OF AllEGHENY COUNTY
) CIVIL ACTION LAW ~,
) ACTION OF MORTGAGE FORECLPSURE )
) GD-06-023422
)
Plaintiff
Vs.
JAMES E HARPER
MARGARET M HARPER Oefendant(s)
Affidavit of Last Known Address
" Joseph A. Goldbeck, Jr., Esquire, hereby verify that I am counsel of record for the PlaIntiff, GITIFINANCIAl SERVICES INC.; that as such and In my capacity as such, I am authorized to execute the within Affid4vil for and on
•
behalf of Plaintiff; that to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief. the names and last known addresses of the Owner(s) and Defendant(s) In the above referenced proceeding are JAMES E HARPER, 1190 Forest Ave Apt #4, Pittsburgh, PA 15236 and MARGARET M HARPER, 1190 Forest Ave Apt #4 ittsburgh. PA 15~36; I further
understand that false statements herein made are subject to the provisions s unsworn falsifications to authorities.
Sworn to and subscribed Before me ~s 2JJ day
Of~ ~
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSY\.VANIA NOrAAW.
BARBARA l. HAND. Notmy NtGc CUy of ~ PIta. (),uty' My CommiaSkIn ecpras ..... 18, 20.10
EXHIBIT
l I.~
i_~ :::-:::--:-:::.
-06- 02.3422
attached hereto as Exhibit "B". The Defendant has not had the required face-to-face meeting within the required time and Plaintiff has no knowledge of any such meeting being requested by the Defendant through the Plaintiff, the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency. or any appropriate Consumer Credit Counseling Agency.
WHEREFORE. Plaintiff demands a de terrisjudgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum of $74,60 1.02. together with interest at the rate of $21.21, per day and other expenses costs and charges incurred by the Plaintiff which are properly chargeable in accordance with the terms of the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law until the Mortgage is paid in full. and for the foreclosure of the Mortgage and Sheriffs Sale of the Property.
By: __ -¥-'Io.l-:'....f--Ij~:---L~~_;__ _
G DB CK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER
B : JOSEPH A. GOLDBECK, JR., EsQUIRE
A RNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
EXHIBlT
I 15
D-OO- 0204 21
GOLDBECK, MCCAFFERTY & MCKEEVER By: Michael T. McKeever
Attorney 1.0. #56129
Suite 5()()()..Mellon Independence Center 701 Market Street
Philadelphia. PA 19106
215-627-1322
ATfORNEY FOR PlAINTIFF
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CNiL DIVISION
CITIMORTGAGE INC.
Vs.
No. MG-09-002231
ALISON R. LOWER
ALLEGHENY COUNTY
VERIFICATION OF NON-MIUTARY SERVICE
MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER, ESQUIRE, hereby velifies that he is attorney for the Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. and thalon information and belief, he has knowledge of the foRowing facts, to wit
(a) that the defendant is not in the Military or Naval Service of the United States
or Its Allies, or otherwise within the provisions of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief h;t of Congress of 1940, as amended.
(b) that defendant AlISON R. LOWER is over 18 years of age. and resides at
3602 Shadewell Avenue, Pittsburgh. PA 15227.
(e) that defendant, AliSON R. LOWER is over 18 years of age, and resides at 3602 Shadewell Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15227.
This statement Is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER Attorney for Plaintiff
December 29, 2009
Sworn to and subscribed Before me this :Lq day
of <iAtt;;:
Notary u
COMMONWEALTH OP PENNSYLVANIA NOTARIAL SEAL BARBARA L HAND, Notary Public City of Philadelphia, Phlla. County My Commission expIres June 19,2010
CXHIBIT
I 16
Mq- Oq- 002231
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA CITlMORTGAGE INC.
Plaintiff
ClVIL DIVISION
vs.
NO.: MG-09-0022l1
AUSON R. LOWER
Defendant(s)
AFFJDA VIT OF COMPLIANCE WJTH ACT 6 OF 1974,41 P_S. 101. ET.SEQ.
AND ACT 91 OF 1983
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA) )
) SS:
)
COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY )
Before me, the undersigned authority, a Notary Public in and for the said County and Commonwealth, personaJIy appeared Michael T. McKeever, attorney for the Plaintiff, who being duly sworn according to law deposes and says that on, Defendant(s) was/were mailed a Notice(s) of Homeowner's emergency Mortgage Assistance Act of 1983 and Act 6 Notice(s) of Intention to Foreclosure by certified mail, return receipt requested and first class U.S. Mail.
SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE
METHIS 9Le:c_ ,2009,
Notary Pub ic -
II
M Gy- 09 - 00223i
GOLDBECK. MCCAFFERTY & MCKEEVER By: Michael T. McKeever
Attorney 1.0. #56129
Suite 5000-Mellon Independence Center 701 Market Street
Philadelphia. PA 19106
215-627-1322
A DORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CIVIL DIVISION
JPMORGAN CHASE BANK. N.A .• AS ACQUIRER OF CERTAIN ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK FROM THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION ACTING AS RECEIVER F/KlA WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK. FA
Vs.
No. MG-09-003126
CHARLES M. MORGAN
ALLEGHENY COUNTY VERIFICATION OF NON-MILITARY SERVICE
MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER. ESQUIRE. hereby verifies that he is attorney for the Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, and that on information and belief. he has knowledge of the following facts. to wit
(a) that the defendant is not in the Military or Naval Service of the United States
or its Allies. or otherwise within the provisions of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of Congress of 1940, as amended.
(b) that defendant CHARLES M. MORGAN is over 18 years of age, and resides
at 1115 Bakerstown Road. Tarentum, PA 15084.
(c) that defendant. CHARLES M. MORGAN is over 18 years of age, and resides at 1115 Bakerstown Road, Tarentum, PA 15084.
This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn
falsification to authorities. ~
By.~~~~~~~====~~~~~ __
GOLDBECK MCCAFFERTY & MCKEEVER
Michael McKeever Pa. 1056129
Gary Mccafferty Pa. 10 42386
Lisa Lee Pa.ID 78020
Kristina Murtha Pa. 1061858
David Fein Pa. 10 82628
Thomas Puleo Pa. ID 27615
Attorneys for Plaintiff January 19, 2010
Sworn to and subscribed Before me thisL..( day
of ~2010
Notary Public
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANlA NOTARiAl SEAl BARBARA L. HAND, Notal)' Public City of Philadelphia, Phlla. County My Commlsslori ExpIres June 19.2010
EXHIBIT
I 18
ME.!-Oc{ - O()312b
8. Plaintiffis not seeking a judgment of personal liability (or an "in personam" judgment) against the Defendant in this Action but reserves its right to bring a separate Action to establish that right, if such right exists. If Defendant bas received a discharge of their personal liability in a Bankruptcy proceeding, this Action of Mortgage Foreclosure is, in no way, an attempt to re-establish the personal liability that was discharged in Bankruptcy, but only to foreclose the Mortgage and sell the Property pursuant to Pennsylvania law.
9. Notice of Intention to Foreclose and a Notice of Homeowners' Emergency Mortgage Assistance has been sent to Defendant by certified and regular mail. as required by Act 160 of 1998 of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on the date(s) set forth in the true and correct copy of such notice(s) attached hereto as Exhibit "B". The Defendant have not had the required face-to-face meeting within the required time and Plaintiff has no knowledge of any such meeting being requested by the Defendant through the Plaintiff, the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, or any appropriate Consumer Credit Counseling Agency.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a de terris judgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum of $125,440.92, together with interest at the rate of $23.61, per day and other expenses, costs and charges incurred by the Plaintiff which are properly chargeable in accordance with the terms of the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law until the Mortgage is paid in full, and for the foreclosure of the Mortgage and Sheriff's Sale of the Property.
By: MICHAEL T. McKEEVER, EsQUIRE ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
EXHIBIT
I lq
__ .;.......::_-
M -Oq- 003150
VERIFICATION
Michael T. McKeever, Esquire, hereby states that he is
attorney for PLAINTIFF in this matter, that Plaintiff is outside
the jurisdiction of the Court and/or the Verification could not be
obtained wi thin the time allowed for the filing of the pleading
that he is authorized to make this verification pursuant to
Pa.R.C.P 1024 (c) and that the statements made in the foregoing
pleading in the Civil Action in Mortgage Foreclosure are based upon the information supplied by Plaintiff and are true and
correct to the best of his knowledge, infonnation and belief.
Furthennore, it is the undersigned's intention to substitute a
verification from Plaintiff as soon as it is received by counsel.
The undersigned understands that this statement is made
subj ect to the penal ties of 18 Pa. C. S. Sec. 4904 relating to
unsworn falsification to authorities.
Date: \:t -tD' DC)
ll&ebOJPj- UcL~
Michael T. McKeever, Esquire
PA 1. D. #-56129
#-91461FC THOMAS DONALD SISCO
8 Monte Carlo Drive Pittsburgh, PA 15239
EXHIBIT
8. Plaintiff is not seeking a judgment of personalliabiIity (or an "in personam" judgment) against the Defendants in this Action but reserves its right to bring a separate Action to establish that right, if such right exists. If Defendants have received a discharge of their personal liability in a Banbuptcy proceeding, this Action of Mortgage Foreclosure is, in no way, an attempt to re-establish the personal liability that was discharged in Bankruptcy, but only to foreclose the Mortgage and sell the Property pursuant to Pennsylvania law.
9.· Notice of Intention to Foreclose and a Notice of Homeowners' Emergency Mortgage Assistance has been sent to Defendants by certified and regular mail, as required by Act 160 of 1998 of the Conunonwea1th of Pennsylvania, on the date(s) set forth in the true and correct copy of such notice(s) attached hereto as Exhibit "B". The Defendants have not had the required face-to-face meeting within the required time and Plaintiffhas no knowledge of any such meeting being requested by the Defendants through the Plaintiff, the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, or any appropriate ConswnerCredit Counseling Agency.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a de terris judgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum ofS170,330.38, together with interest at the rate ofS47.00, per day and other expenses, costs and charges incurred by the Plaintiff which are properly chargeable in accordance with the tenus of the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law until the Mortgage is paid in full, and for the foreclosure of the Mortgage and Sheriff'S Sale of the Property.
By: ~lLLD 1· MC~l}J/\__.
GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER By: MICHAEL T. McKEEVER, EsQUIRE ATIORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
EXHIBIT
I 2\
Mq- oq - 0031]1
liability that was discharged in Bankruptcy, but only to foreclose the Mortgage and sell the Property pursuant to Pennsylvania law.
9. Notice ofIntention to Foreclose and a Notice of Homeowners' Emergency Mortgage Assistance has been sent to Defendants by certified and regular mail, as required by Act 160 of 1998 of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, on the date(s) set forth in the true and correct copy of such notice(s) attached hereto as Exhibit "B". The Defendants have not had the required face-to-face meeting within the required time and Plaintiffhas no knowledge of any such meeting being requested by the Defendants through the Plaintiff, the Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency, or any appropriate Consumer Credit Counseling Agency.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff demands a de terris judgment in mortgage foreclosure in the sum of $1 06,814.63, together with interest at the rate of $15.09, per day and other expenses, costs and charges incurred by the PIaintiffwhich are properly chargeable in accordance with the terms of the Mortgage and Pennsylvania law until the Mortgage is paid in full, and for the foreclosure of the Mortgage and Sheriff's Sale of the Property.
By: GOLDB~~~R\y~WM1
By: MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER, EsQUIRE ATIORNEY FOR PLAnmFF
EXHIBIT
I 22
M -Oq-003Z04
GOLDBECK, MCCAFFERTY & MCKEEVER By: Michael T. McKeever
Attorney I.D. #56129
Suite 5000-Mellon Independence Center 701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
215-627-1322
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CIVIL DIVISION
CITIMORTGAGE, INC. S/B/M ABN AMRO MORTGAGE GROUP, INC.
Vs.
No. MG-09-003204
JAMES M. BOYLE JR DIANE J. SCHMIDT
ALLEGHENY COUNTY VERIFICATION OF NON-MILITARY SERVICE
MICHAEL T. MCKEEVER, ESQUIRE, hereby verifies that he is attorney for the Plaintiff in the above-captioned matter, and that on information and belief, he has knowledge of the following facts, to wit:
(a) that the defendant is not in the Military or Naval Service of the United States
or its Allies, or otherwise within the provisions of the Soldiers' and Sailors' Civil Relief Act of Congress of 1940, as amended.
(b) that defendant JAMES M. BOYLE JR. is over 18 years of age, and resides at
3105 DeE!f'1NOOd Drive, Allison Park, PA 15101.
(c) that defendant, DIANE J. SCHMIDT is over 18 years of age, and resides at 3105 Deerwood Drive, Allison Park, PA 15101.
This statement is made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unswom falsification to authorities.
February 3,2010
BY: TINAMARIE!cSCh£.#i
.-""'-_ day of_-----:~'\--r-_., 2010
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA NOTARIAl SEAL BARBARA L HAND, Notary Public CIty of Phfladelphla, Phlla. County My Commission ExpIres ~une 19, 2010
EXHIBIT
I Z3
IY16J-Oq- 0032.04
GOLDBECK McCAFFERIT & McKEEVER BY: Michael T. McKeever. Esquire
Attorney 1.0.#56129
Suite 5000 - Mellon Independence Center 101 Market Street
PhiJadelphia, PA 19106
215-621-1322
Attorney for Plaintiff
CITIMORTGAGE. INC. SIBIM ABN AMR.O MORTGAGE GROUP, INC., 1000 TecJmology Drive O'Fallon. MO, 63304
vs.
Plaintiff
lAMES M. BOYLE JR. and DIANE 1. SCHMIDT Mortgagor(s) and Reeerd Owner(s)
nos Deerwood Drive Allison Park,
PA 15101
AFFIDAVIT
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
OF Allegheny COUNlY
No. MG-09-OO3204
CITIMORTGAGE, INC. SlBIM ABN"AMRO MORTGAGE GROUP, INC., by its specially appointed counsel. Michael T. McKeever, represents as follows;
1. I am the attorney for and representative of Plaintiff. I am authorized to make and do make
this affidavit on behalf of Plaintiff; and that the facts set are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief.
2. I collected $0.00 towards my client's debt
EXH,BIT
I 24
Mq-OQ-003204-
BY: Michael T. McKeever Attorney 1.0.#56129
Suite 5000 - Mellon Independence Center 701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA ]9106
215-825-6320
Attorney for Plaintiff
GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER
CITJMORTGAGE, INC. 1000 Technology Drive O'Fallon, MO 63368
Plaintiff
vs.
BOWARD M. TURNERJR Mortgagor(s) and Record Owoer(s)
] 0 II 0 Pearl Road Pittsburgh, PA 15235
Defendant(s)
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
of Allegheny County
CIVIL ACfION - LAw
ACTION OF MORTGAGE FOREcLOSURE
Tenn
No. MG-l1U)00405
AFFIDAVIT PURSUANT TO RULE 3129
CITIMORTGAGE. INC .• Plaintiff in the above action, by its attorney. Michael T. McKeever, Esquire, sets forth as of the date the praecipe for the writ of execution was filed the following information concerning the real property iocated at
2. Name and address ofDefendant(s) in the judgment: ,._~~~~_ ... EXHIBIT
10110 Pearl Road Pittsburgh, PA 15235
l.Name and address ofOwner(s) or Reputed Owner(s):
EDWARD M. TURNER JR 10110 Pearl Road Pittsburgh, PA 15235
EDWARD M. TURNER JR 10110 Pearl Road Pittsburgh, PA 15235
25
M_Q-IO- 000405
3. Name and last known address of every judgment creditor whose judgment is a record lien on the property to be sold:
PA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE - Bureau of Child Support Enforcement
Health and Welfare Bldg. - Room 432 Harrisburg,. PA 17105-2675
DOMESTIC RELATIONS OF ALLEGHENY COUN1Y 440 Ross Street
Pittsburgh. PA 15219
4. Name and address of the last recorded holder of every mortgage of record:
5. Name and address of every other person who has any record interest in or record lien on the property and whose interest may be affected by the sale:
6. Name and address of every other person of whom the plaintiff has knowledge who has any record interest in the property which may be affected by the sale.
7. Name and address of every other person of whom the plaintiff has knowledge who has any interest in the property which may be affected by the sale.
TENANTS/OCCUPANTS 10] ] 0 Pear] Road Pittsburgh, PA 15235
(attach separate sheet if more space is needed)
I verify that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my personal [
knowledge or infonnation and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of I 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities. ; I I
I
I
DATED: June 15,2010
GOLDBECK McCAFFER1Y & McI.CEEVER BY: ERIC KEENAN
Legal Secretary
Sworn to and subscribed
me this _",Q}=I- __
b'TH OF PENNSYLVANIA
NOTARIAL SEAL ANTONI£'fTE M. BLACK. Notal)' Public CIty of PhfladGlphia. Phlla. County
My CommissIon Expires June 27. 2010
BY: Michael T. McKeever Attorney LD.#56129
Suite 5000 - MeUon Independence Center 701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
215-825-6320
Attorney for Plaintiff
GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER
DElIT'SCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS lRUSTEEFOR TIlE CERTIFICA TEHOLDERS OF SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 20()6.()PT5, ASSETBACKED CERT1FICA TES, SERIES 2006-OPT5 4650 Regent Blvd
Irving. TX 75063
Plaintiff
vs.
KARILEMP MICHAEL LEMP
Mortgagor(s) aod Record Owoer(s)
3735 Oakton Road Pittsburgh, PA 15227
Defendant(s)
IN TfJE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
of Allegheny County
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
ACl10N OF MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE
Tenn
No. MG-10-0OO406
SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVIT PURSUANT TO RULE 3129
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE CERTHICATEHOLDERS OF SOUNDVIEW HOME LOAN TRUST 2006-0PT5, ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-0PT5, Plaintiff in the above action, by its attorney, Michael T. McKeever, Esquire, sets forth as of the date the praecipe for the writ of execution was filed the following information
concerning the real property located at: :
3735 Oakton Road Pittsburgh, PA 15227
l.Name and address ofOwner(s) or Reputed Owner(s):
KARILEMP
3735 Oakton Road Pittsburgh, PA 15227
MICHAEL LEMP 3735 Oakton Road Pittsburgh, PA 15227
EXHIBIT
j 2b
M6f-IO- 000406
2. Name and address of Defendant(s) in the judgment:
KARILEMP
3735 Oakton Road Pittsburgh, PA 15227
:MlCHAEL LEMP 3735 Oakton Road Pittsburgh. PA 15227
3. Name and last known address of every judgment creditor whose judgment is a record lien on the property to be sold:
DOMESTIC RELATIONS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY 440 Ross Street
Pittsburgh. PA 15219
PA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE - Bureau of Child Support Enforcement
Health and Welfare Bldg. - Room 432 '
P.O. Box 2675
Harrisburg, PA 17105-2675
MICHAEL LEMP
3735 OAKTON ROAD PIDSBURGH, PA 15227-3573
4. Name and address of the last recorded holder of every mortgage of record:
S. Name and address of every other person who has any record interest in or record lien on the property and whose interest may be affected by the sale:
6. Name and address of every other person of whom the plaintiff has knowledge who has any record interest in the property which may be affected by the sale.
7. Name and address of every other person of whom the plaintiff has knowledge who has any interest in the property which may be affected by the sale.
TENANTS/OCCUPANTS 3735 Oakton Road Pittsburgh, PA ] 5227
(attach separate sheet jf more space is needed)
I verity that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my personal
knowledge or information and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
DATED: August 23, 2010
GOIDBECMCCAFFERTY & McKEEVER BY: ERIC KEENAN
Legal Secretary
Sworn to and subscribed Before me this ~" day Of~.2010
Notary Public
· .
BY: Michael T. McKeever Attorney 1D.#56129
Suite 5000 - Mellon Independence Center 701 Market Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
215-825-6320
Attorney for Plaintiff
GOLDBECK McCAFFERTY & McKEEVER
BAC HOME LOANS SERVICING, LP FICA COUNlRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP 7105 Corporate Drive
PTXC-35
Plano, TX 75024
Plaintiff
vs.
TRUDYIDrn
Mortgagor(s) and Record Owner(s)
1928 Rhine Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15212
Defendant(s)
IN TIlE COURT OF o)~ON PLEAS
of Allegheny County
CIVIL ACTION - LAW
ACTIONOFMORTGAGEFO~SURE
Term
No. MG-IO-OOl409
AFFIDAVIT PURSUANT TO RULE 3129
BAC HOME LOANS SERVICJNG, LP FKA COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS SERVICING LP.
Plaintiff in the above action, by its attorney, Michael T. McKeever, Esquire, sets forth as of the date the praecipe : for the writ of execution was filed the following information concerning the real property located at: .
1928 Rhine Street Pittsburgh, P A 15212
l.Name and address ofOwner(s) or Reputed Owner(s):
TRUDYHITE
311 Faber Street Pittsburgh, PA 15214
TRUDYffiTE
311 Faber Street Pittsburgh, P A 15214
2. Name and address ofDefendant(s) in thejudgment: ---EX-H·IBI·T-~
I 21
M61-IO- OOl40Q
3. Name and last known address of every judgment creditor whose judgment is a record lien on the property to be sold: .
- ' I ...
PA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WELFARE - Bureau of Child Support Enforcement Health and Welfare Bldg. - Room 432
P.O. Box 2675
Harrisburg, PA 17105-2675
DOMESTIC RELATIONS OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY 440 Ross Street
Pittsburgh, P A 15219
4. Name and address of the last recorded holder of every mortgage of record:
5. Name and address of every other person who has any record interest in or record lien on the property and whose interest may be affected by the sale:
6. Name and address of every other person of whom the plaintiff has knowledge who has any record interest in the property which may be affected by the sale.
7. Name and address of every other person of whom the plaintiff has knowledge who has any interest in the property which may be affected by the sale.
TENANTS/OCCUPANTS 1928 Rhine Street Pittsburgh, PA 15212
(attach separate sheet ifmore space is needed)
I verify that the statements made in this affidavit are true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge or infonnation and belief. I understand that false statements herein are made subject to the penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. Section 4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
DATED: September 14,2010
GOLDBECK McCAFFERlY & McKEEVER BY: ERIC KEENAN
Legal Secretary
Sworn to and subscribed Before me this 15 day
of Jepltz«£;i 2010
~~!tt~
Notary Public
VERIFICATION
I, Patrick J. Loughren, hereby verify that the averments contained in the foregoing First
Amended Complaint in Equity are true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and
belief.
I understand that the statements and averments herein made are subject to the penalties of
18 Pa. C.S.A. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
1, k J \ I {
~
GD-10-021437
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, hereby certify that I served upon the following a true and correct copy of the
foregoing First Amended Complaint in Equity via first class mail, postage pre-paid this
26th day of April 2011 :
James R. Schadel, Esquire Weinheimer, Schadel & Haber 602 Law & Finance Building Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219