State of Minnesota

District Court
Civil
County of Hennepin J udicial District: Fourth
~- - - - - - ~- - ~- - - - - -
Court FileNumber:
Assigned J udge:
CaseType:
Melinda Stinchfield
Plaintiff
SUMMONS
VS.
MediCredit Inc.
Defendant
THIS SUMMONS IS DIRECTED TO MediCredit Inc.
1. YOU ARE BEING SUED. ThePlaintiff has started alawsuit against you. The
Plaintiff's Complaint against you is attached tothissummons. Donot throwthesepapers
away. They areofficial papers that affect your rights. Youmust respond tothis lawsuit
eventhough it may not yet befiledwiththeCourt andtheremay beno court filenumber
onthis summons.
2. YOU MUST REPLY WITHIN 20DAYS TO PROTECT YOUR
RIGHTS. Youmust give or mail totheperson who signed this summons awritten
response called anAnswer within 20 days of thedateonwhichyoureceived this
Summons. Youmust send acopy of your Answer totheperson who signed this summons
locatedat:
619 SouthTenth Street
Suite301
Minneapolis, MN 55404
3. YOU MUST RESPOND TO EACH CLAIM. TheAnswer isyour written
responseto thePlaintiff's Complaint. Inyour Answer youmust statewhether youagree
or disagreewitheachparagraph of theComplaint. If youbelieve thePlaintiff shouldnot
begiveneverything asked for intheComplaint, you must say so inyour Answer.
4. YOU WILL LOSE YOUR CASE IF YOU DO NOT SEND A WRITTEN
RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT TO THE PERSON WHO SIGNED THIS
SUMMONS. If you do not Answer within 20days, youwill lose this case. Youwill not
get totell your sideof thestory, andtheCourt may decide against you andaward the
Plaintiff everything asked forin thecomplaint. If you donot want to contest theclaims
EXHIBIT
1/\
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 1 of 10
stated in the complaint, you do not need to respond. A default judgment can then be
entered against you for the relief requested in the complaint.
5. LEGAL ASSISTANCE. You may wish to get legal help from a lawyer. If
youdonot havealawyer, theCourt Administrator may haveinformation about places
whereyou canget legal assistance. Even if you cannot get legal help, you must still
provide awritten Answer to protect your rights or you may losethe case.
6. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION. Theparties may agreetoor be
ordered toparticipate inanalternative disputeresolution process under Rule 114of the
Minnesota General Rules of Practice. Youmust still sendyour written response tothe
Complaint evenif you expect to usealternative means of resolving this dispute.
Dated: February 11,2014
Yl__ _ = i ? ~ .
RY~.Peterson
Attorney for Plaintiff, Melinda Stinchfield
Atty. Reg. No. 0389607
619 SouthTenth Street
Suite301
Minneapolis, MN 55404
(612) 367-6568
rpeterson@madgettlaw.com
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 2 of 10
ST ATE OF MINNESOTA
County of Hennepin J udicial District:
CaseType:
DISTRICT COURT
Fourth(Hennepin)
Civil
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - )
Melinda Stinchfield
Plaintiff
COMPLAINT
vs.
MediCredit Inc.
Defendant
PLAINTIFF, as andfor her causes of action (i.e., violation of theFair Debt Collection
Practices Act andviolation of theTelephone Consumer Protection Act), against theabove-
named defendant states andalleges asfollows:
Introduction
Thefollowing casealleges prolonged harassment by adebt collection company. Onan
ongoingbasis defendant collection agency usedanautomatic telephone dialing system
(the"Autodialing System") torepeatedly call andharass Ms. Stinchfield onher personal
cell phone. Ms. Stinchfield specifically requested that MediCredit Inc. ceasecallingher
onher personal cell phone, for which sheincursausagecharge. Despite Ms.
Stinchfield's explicit request and provision of analternative contact means, Defendant
continued calling and even increased itscalls inblatant violation of the TCPA. In
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 3 of 10
additiontothis behavior, MediCredit Inc. committed several violations of theFDCPA.
Accordingly, Plaintiff commenced this action.
Statement of J urisdiction
1. This Court has J urisdiction over thesubject matter of this action pursuant to
Minn. Stat. 484.01, theFair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"), 15U.S.C.
1692k(d), andtheTelephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"), 47U.S.C.
227(b)(3).
Venue
2. Venue isproper pursuant to Minn. Stat. 542.09becausetheevents givingriseto
Plaintiffs causes of action against Defendant occurred withinthe State of Minnesota and
theCounty of Hennepin.
Parties andLocationof Tort
3. Plaintiff Melinda Stinchfield isanadult resident of Hennepin County, Minnesota.
4. Defendant MediCredit Inc. isaforeign corporation.
5. Plaintiff is informed andbelieves, andthereon alleges, that at all times relevant
Defendant conducted business inthe Stateof Minnesota andinthe County of Hennepin.
6. Defendant isregistered todo business inthestateof Minnesota under thename
MediCredit Inc.
7. Thelocation of thetort occurred primarily at Plaintiff's homeresidence locatedin
Hennepin County.
Facts
Facts most relevant to FDCPA claim:
2
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 4 of 10
8. Plaintiff is, and at all times mentioned herein was, a"consumer" as defined by 15
U.S.C. 1692a(3).
9. Defendant is, and at all times mentioned herein was, a"debt collector" as defined
by 15U.S.C. 1692a(6).
10. The alleged debt owed by Plaintiff is a"debt" as defined by 15 U.S.C. 1692 a(5).
11. The calls mentioned herein constitute "communications" as defined by 15U.S.C.
1692a(2).
12. Phone records show numerous calls between 6/2013 and2/2014 toPlaintiffs
personal cell phone originating from(866) 215-1276 among others; upon information and
belief, saidnumbers areregistered toDefendant.
13. During each call Plaintiff toldDefendant to stopcallingPlaintiff onher cell
phone.
14. During thefirst call to Plaintiff's cell phone inwhich Plaintiff answered anda
company representative responded, Plaintiff ordered Defendant to ceasecallingher on
her personal cell phone.
15. Onseveral occasions, Defendant left amessageusing anartificial or pre-recorded
voiceonPlaintiff's voicemail. Thecontents of onesuchvoicernail read as follows:
"Hello. This isaconfidential message for... Melinda Stinchfield. Ifyou are
not. ..Melinda Stinchfield...hang upor disconnect immediately. This is
Miss Jones [emphasis added] fromMediCredit Corporation. This isan
attempt to collect adebt andany information obtained will beusedfor that
purpose. Please call our officeregarding apersonal business matter
at. ..800-242-6813. Thank you. Goodbye."
16. Onanother occasion, anagent of theDefendant identifying herself as"Chrystal
Connors" called Plaintiff onPlaintiffs personal cell phonetodemand payment for an
allegeddebt.
3
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 5 of 10
17. A search of the Minnesota Department of Commerce's debt collection license
look-up portal shows neither a "Chrystal Connors" nor any individual with the surname
of "J ones" as being registered as an individual debt collector in the state of Minnesota.
18. By failing to register its individual collectors with the Department of Commerce,
Defendant is in violation of Minn. Stat. 332.33 sub. 5.
19. By allowing unlicensed individual collectors tocollect onthealleged debt,
Defendant took action or threatened totakeactionthat could not legally betaken in
violation of15 U.S.C. 1692e(5).
20. Defendant failedto sendPlaintiff noticeof her rights within fivedays of theinitial
communication asrequired by 15U.S.C. 1692g(a).
Facts most relevant to TePA claim:
21. Plaintiff is, andat all times mentioned hereinwas, a"person" as defined by 47
U.S.C. 153(32).
22. Defendant is, andat all times mentioned hereinwas, acorporation anda"person"
asdefinedby 47U.S.C. 153(32).
23. Plaintiff is informed andbelieves, andthereon alleges, that onmultiple occasions,
all prior tothedatethis complaint was filed, Defendant contacted Plaintiff onPlaintiffs
cellular telephone viaan"automatic telephone dialing system" as defined by 47U.S,C.
227(a)(1).
24. Plaintiff isinformed andbelieves, andthereon alleges, that during thesetelephone
callsDefendant used "an artificial or prerecorded voice" asprohibited by 47U.S.C.
227(b)(I)(A).
4
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 6 of 10
25. Plaintiff is informed andbelieves, andthereon alleges, that thetelephone number
Defendant called was assigned to acellular telephone servicefor which Plaintiff incurs a
chargefor incoming calls, pursuant to47U.S.C. 227(b)(1).
26. Plaintiff is informed andbelieves, andthereon alleges, that these telephone calls
constituted calls that werenot for emergency purposes as defined by 47 U.S.C.
227(b)(1)(A)(i).
27. Plaintiff isinformed andbelieves, andthereon alleges, that Plaintiff didnot
provideexpress consent to receivecalls onPlaintiffs cellular telephone, pursuant to47
U.S.C. 227(b)(1)(A).
28. Defendant placed or caused tobeplacedthesetelephone calls inviolation of 47
U.S.C. 227(b)(1).
Specific Claims
Count I - Violation of Fair Debt Collection 15U.S.C. 1692g
29. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of theaboveparagraphs of this Complaint
asthough fully stated herein.
30. By failing toinformPlaintiff of her rights pursuant totheFDCPA, Defendant
violated IS U.S.C. 1692g.
Count II - Violation of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act 15U.S.C. 1692e(5)
5
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 7 of 10
31. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this Complaint
as though fully stated herein.
32. By allowing unlicensed individual collectors to attempt to collect payment onthe
alleged debt, Defendant took action or threatened to take action that could not legally be
taken.
33. Such activity constitutes aviolation of 15U.S.C. 1692e(5).
Count III - Negligent Violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act 47 U.S.C.
Section 227 Et Seq.
34. Plaintiff incorporates by reference all of the above paragraphs of this Complaint
as though fully stated herein.
35. The foregoing acts and omissions of Defendant constitute numerous and multiple
negligent violations of the TCPA, including but not limited to each and every one of the
above-cited provisions of 47 U.S.C. 227et seq.
Count IV- Knowing and/ or Willful Violations of theTelephone Consumer Protection
Act 47U.S.C. Section227Et Seq.
36. Plaintiff incorporates byreference all of theaboveparagraphs of this Complaint
asthoughfully stated herein.
6
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 8 of 10
37. The foregoing acts and omissions of Defendant constitute numerous and multiple
knowing and! or willful violations of the TCPA, including but not limited to each and
every one of the above-cited provisions of 47 U.S.C. 227et seq.
Jury Demand
38. Plaintiff hereby demands atrial byjury.
Relief
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests theCourt enter judgment infavor of Plaintiff
andagainst Defendant for:
(a) actual damages;
(b) statutory damages inanamount upto$1,000.00, pursuant to 15U.S.c.
1692k(a)(2)(A) ;
(c) statutory damages of$500.00 per violation, pursuant to47U.S.c.
227(b)(3)(B);
(d) statutory damages of$1 ,500.00per violation, pursuantto 47 U.S,C.
227(b)(3)(C);
(e) injunctive relief prohibiting suchconduct inthefuture;
(f) reasonable attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and cost of suit; and
(g) suchother relief asthis Court deems proper.
7
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 9 of 10
Dated: February 11,2014 Respectfully Submitted,
h.J > ?~
RyanD. Peterson
MADGETT &CHAN LLC
Atty. Reg. No. 0389607
619SouthTenth Street
Suite301
Minneapolis, MN 55404
(612) 367-6568
rpeterson@madgettlaw .com
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
Melinda Stinchfield
Acknowledgement
Plaintiff acknowledges that, pursuant toMinn. Stat. Sec. 549.21 sub. 2, theCourt inits
discretion may award costs, disbursements, reasonable attorney's fees andwitness feestothe
parties against whomcosts, disbursements, reasonableattorney's fees andwitness fees were
chargedinbad faith.
Dated: ) / 1 / j 1' 3
I r .
By: ~ V .
R1~rs~
ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF
Melinda Stinchfield
8
CASE 0:14-cv-00559-DWF-TNL Document 1-1 Filed 02/28/14 Page 10 of 10