15-year-old judgment marked satisfied, after defendant claimed improper service of complaint

By Nicholas Malfitano | Apr 22, 2016

Philadelphia County Court Of Common Pleas  

PHILADELPHIA – A judgment that had been levied on Philadelphia defendant in a contract lawsuit more than 15 years ago has been marked satisfied, according to plaintiff counsel.

Plaintiff attorney Alan R. Mege filed a praecipe of power of attorney for satisfaction and/or termination on April 13, relating to a judgment found against Teresa Fatima Gordy on Dec. 6, 2000. According to Mege’s motion, satisfaction of the judgment with interest and costs in the instant matter was acknowledged.

The complaint alleged a judgment had been filed against Gordy. As of June 15, 2012, an amount of $7,833.33 plus court costs and interest accrued from the date of judgment to the date of satisfaction. A document certifying this was attached to the complaint and signed by a notary public in Gwinnett County, Ga.

Defense counsel Clair M. Stewart filed a motion to open the judgment on Feb. 28, noting plaintiff First Select, Inc. commenced a breach of contract and unjust enrichment action against Gordy on Oct. 24, 2000. The plaintiff obtained a judgment on Dec. 6, 2000, but Stewart alleged Gordy did not learn of it for more than 15 years, in February of this year.

Stewart claimed Gordy was never properly served with the original complaint and it was delivered to the wrong address. Further, Stewart argued the plaintiff did not include the following items: A signed verification form, a written assignment of account to the plaintiff, a written contract between the parties, itemized debt information, proof that it conducts business in Pennsylvania and information as to the exact nature of the contract (oral or written).

Further, Stewart argued the statute of limitations for collecting this amount had expired and Gordy had launched a “meritorious counter-claim” against the plaintiff, per the terms of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Therefore, the defendant had wanted the judgment stricken.

The plaintiff is represented by Valerie S. Rosenbluth Angst of Angst & Angst in Harleysville, and Mege in Bethlehem.

The defendant is represented by Stewart in Philadelphia.

Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas case 001003096

From the Pennsylvania Record: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nickpennrecord@gmail.com

More News

The Record Network