Pleading Wizard



Christine Baker

[deleted]

Fax: (571) 222-1000

Email: christine@

In Pro Per

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

| |) | |

|Christine Baker; |) | |

|Plaintiff, |) |CIV-03-0525-PCT-RCB |

|v. |) | |

|Fair, Isaac & Company, et al; |) | |

| |) |PLAINTIFF’S REPLY TO THE VERIZON WIRELESS OBJECTION TO HER MOTION |

|Defendants. |) |FOR |

| |) |LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE HER |

| |) |FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT |

| |) | |

| |) | |

| |) | |

| |) | |

| |) | |

| |) | |

Plaintiff Christine Baker hereby submits her Reply to the Verizon Wireless (“Verizon”) Objection to her Motion for Leave of Court to File Her First Amended Complaint. Verizon filed a 14 page Objection on 3/28/06 and Plaintiff is not only overwhelmed by the long filing, but Verizon’s 4/4/06 Reply in Support of its Motion for Summary Judgment almost gave Plaintiff a heart attack, she can not understand why Verizon continues to claim that the debt Verizon collected was legitimate. Plaintiff apologizes for the late Reply, but she was in no condition to do so on the 4th.

Plaintiff requests that the Court grant Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave of Court to File Her First Amended Complaint, but allow her to submit a revised version of the First Amended Complaint, excluding the claims against Nelnet (settled) and restating her claims against Verizon.

The Court Should Grant Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave of Court to File Her First Amended Complaint.

1) Plaintiff attaches the proposed amended complaint striking through text to be deleted and underlining text to be added.

Plaintiff apologizes for failing to attach the version of the complaint with the proposed changes, she had reviewed the motion for leave to amend in case 05-1300-PHX-SRB, apparently attorney Hyung S. Choi had not complied with LRCiv 15.1.

Unlike Verizon, Plaintiff acknowledges her mistakes, she apologizes and does whatever she can to make things right.

2) Plaintiff did NOT Request Leave to Amend her Complaint in Bad Faith

Verizon and its attorney Rodrick Coffey continually act in bad faith and viciously defame and antagonize Plaintiff, claiming that the entirely fraudulent debt Verizon collected is legitimate. Plaintiff submitted her documentation with her Objection to the Verizon Motion for Summary Judgment as Exhibits AU.

Plaintiff attaches Exhibits AX:

AX-1: Plaintiff’s 4/4/06 blog posting with her e-mail to Verizon attorney Rodrick Coffey.



Plaintiff asked why Mr. Coffey continues to claim that Plaintiff owes Verizon $105. Plaintiff did not receive a response from Mr. Coffey.

Therefore, Plaintiff sent her Open Letter to the management at Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP:

AX-2: Open Letter to Management at Stinson Morrison Hecker LLP re. Verizon Wireless



AX-3: Plaintiff’s Second Supplemental Responses to the Verizon interrogatories.

INTERROGATORY NO. 4:

Describe in detail all damages you seek from Verizon in this lawsuit. Your response should include an explanation of the basis for each item of damage claimed, the amounts and any calculations used to arrive at those amounts.

Punitive damages: I think the jury will decide punitive damages and hopefully award enough $5,000,0000 to start a consumer organization with staff attorneys who will assist the disadvantaged, the ill, the elderly, the retarded, the illiterate, the poor, the immigrants and everybody else who can’t protect themselves from criminal enterprises like Verizon.

While Plaintiff does not consider herself to be illiterate or retarded, she is obviously is not smart enough to prevail against the corporate law firms. Nobody should EVER have to go through the agony and anguish Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer because she chose to pay her bills only once.

3) Is Verizon’s Objection a Motion to Dismiss?

Most of Verizon’s 14 page filing would be more appropriate in a motion to dismiss and Plaintiff will not argue her claims in this Reply. Verizon is free to file a motion to dimiss or a motion for summary judgment after the First Amended Complaint has been filed, giving Plaintiff sufficient time to respond appropriately.

Plaintiff spent a great deal of time wondering which laws Verizon violated by collecting a disputed and entirely fraudulent debt. Verizon advised Plaintiff that extortion is not a cause of action. Plaintiff finally realized that the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act was enacted for exactly that purpose: to prevent the collection of fraudulent debts.

While creditors are generally not liable for violations of the FDCPA, a creditor who uses someone else’s name so as to suggest to the debtor that a third party is involved in the debt collection process, when in fact that party is not involved, can be treated as a “debt collector” under the FDCPA. Nielsen v. Dickerson, 307 F.3d 623 (7th Cir., 2002).

CONCLUSION

In the interest of justice, Plaintiff requests that the Court grant Plaintiff’s Motion For Leave Of Court To File Her First Amended Complaint and allow Plaintiff to submit a revision without the Nelnet claims and to restate her claims against Verizon.

RESPECTFULLY submitted April 5, 2006.

/s Christine Baker

Plaintiff Pro Per

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the 4th day of April, 2006, I electronically transmitted the foregoing to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants:

Rodrick J. Coffey

STINSON MORRISON HECKER LLP

1850 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2100

Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4584

Attorneys for Defendant Verizon Wireless

Scott Kirkner

JONES DAY

3 Park Plz Ste 1100

Irvine CA 92614-2592

Attorneys for Experian Information Solutions and

A copy mailed USPS to:

HONORABLE ROBERT C. BROOMFIELD

United States District Court

Sandra Day O’Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 626

401 West Washington Street, SPC 61

Phoenix, AZ 85003-2158

s/ Christine Baker

-----------------------

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download