dannlaw.com

Foreclosure Defense | Ohio | Chicago | New Jersey | Oregon | New York

Cleveland Office
216-373-0539
Cincinnati Office
513-951-7124
Columbus Office
877-475-8100
NY/NJ Office
201-355-3440

When Law Firms Face Tyranny: A Call to Lawyers from Marc Dann

Leo Jennings III

By

DannLaw founder Marc Dann
Attorney Marc Dann

The law firms targeted by President Donald Trump’s executive orders deserve our profession’s unwavering support as they defend the Constitution. Every lawyer and bar association across America should stand with them in this fight for judicial independence (the Cleveland Metro Bar was among the first to take a stand).

Yet, we must confront an uncomfortable truth: many of these same firms helped create the environment that made Trump’s rise possible.

Before becoming victims of Trump’s transparently corrupt attacks, these prestigious firms participated in the culture of behind-the-scenes influence peddling that eroded public trust in our institutions. Their lobbying practices and the revolving door between government service and private practice fostered a two-tier system of justice that alienated working-class Americans and drove them toward dangerous populist alternatives like Donald Trump. The massive donations from these firms to candidates and parties helped corrupt both Democrats and Republicans.

Most attorneys in America don’t earn their living through influence pedaling. While we must defend these targeted firms, we should recognize that they serve the wealthiest individuals and corporations in America, charging four-figure hourly rates that place them beyond the reach of ordinary citizens.

The brazen nature of President Trump’s executive orders against Paul Weiss, Perkins Coie, Covington and Burling, Jenner and Block, and Wilmer Hale was shocking. These orders prohibited these firms from representing the federal government, canceled contracts with their clients, revoked necessary security clearances and barred their personnel from federal buildings—a clear unconstitutional assault on the Sixth Amendment right to counsel.

Even more disturbing has been the capitulation we’ve witnessed. Paul Weiss’s surrender was followed by similar settlements from Skadden Arps and Wilkie Farr and Gallagher and five other firms.  These once-respected institutions abandoned their diversity, equity, and inclusion commitments and pledged millions of pro bono hours to Trump-endorsed causes. The rest of the top law firms in the country by revenue joined the hall of shame by refusing to sign a brief in support of Perkins Coie,

 

These lawyers have  chosen profit over principle when given the chance to defend our profession’s independence and the Constitution itself.

With these elite firms either fighting for survival, capitulating to presidential pressure or hiding under their desks, the rest of the bar must fill the void. Those of us who charge far less than $1,000 per hour must step forward to protect democracy and prevent authoritarian overreach.

Here in Ohio we can educate the public, represent immigrants facing deportation, defend wrongfully terminated federal employees, represent the defunded non profits and local governments that are literally  saving lives and providing vital services to our communities and bring constitutional challenges against authoritarian policies that usurp congressional authority.

Over my 38 years in practice I’ve  worked with great consumer, personal injury, domestic, bankruptcy, criminal, government and transactional lawyers representing working and middle class Americans and small businesses. These lawyer’s courtroom and analytic skills are every bit as strong as our tall building lawyer counterparts. Lawyers in every community need to organize and collaborate to make sure that every attack on individual liberty and constitutional protection is challenged as the administration continues to flood the zone with their efforts to break historic legal precedents to consolidate power and to enrich themselves and their friends at the expense of the rest of us.

As some of our profession’s most powerful institutions retreat from the field, the burden falls on us—the everyday lawyers of America—to champion individual rights and defend constitutional boundaries. The future of our republic may well depend on our willingness to answer this call.

By

CFPB Complaint DatabaseOver the Weekend President Trump fired Rohit Chopra the Director of the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau (CFPB) and today replaced him with Treasury Secretary (and hedge fund oligarch)  Scott Bessent.

Within hours Bessent directed the Agency to halt all work on pending regulations and enforcement actions.

While many of our clients, friends, family and neighbors voted for President Trump, I’m pretty sure that their primary objective in supporting him was not to allow debt collectors, payday lenders, credit card companies, banks and mortgage companies to be given license to cheat them.

This is sad to watch because the CFPB has established itself as a strong independent regulator of financial services companies, mortgage companies, small business lenders, banks and non-bank lenders.

This is particularly important right now because most of the contracts offered by many of these financially predatory companies force their customers to private arbitration and prohibit participation in class action lawsuits against them.  This means that if companies choose to cheat a little bit from a lot of people it’s even more difficult for private lawyers like those at DannLaw  to hold them accountable in a meaningful way.  If the CFPB is gone as a line of defense companies will have more license to cheat.

The consumers protected by the CFPB include all of us, even the CEOs and shareholders of the bad acting financial institutions.   But it is critical to remember that the lack of accountability for bad actors in the financial services world also punishes ethical businesses who are trying to compete with the businesses that  are cheating their customers.  It’s often more expensive and less profitable to follow the law than to find ways to avoid doing so.

Actions to scale back the CFPB’s enforcement and rulemaking efforts are going to cost millions of consumers billions of dollars over the next four years and limit the remedies available to consumers who are wronged. This is not a political opinion. This is a fact.

Fortunately for homeowners and many of our clients, federal law still prohibits arbitration provisions in mortgage contracts.  And for those who are subject to arbitration agreements we have been a leader among lawyers in using the arbitration process to protect our clients.

In light of this week’s news our Lawyers, Paralegals and support staff are committed to doubling down our efforts to use the courts and the law to hold financial predators accountable and seek justice for consumers who they victimize. Our job in protecting consumers is more important than ever and I know we are up to the challenge.

DannLaw provides representation to consumers in the following fields:

Foreclosure Defense

Mortgage Servicing Litigation

Consumer Protection Claims

Consumer Class Actions

Student Loan Litigation

Data Breach Class Actions

Lender Liability

Bankruptcy Litigation

Consumer Arbitration

Business Litigation

Lawyer Referrals are Welcome

By

An Athena Bitcoin cryptocurrency kiosk was the instrument criminals used to steal $39,000 from DannLaw client Karen Carew.

According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the FBI, Bitcoin ATM cryptocurrency kiosks (BTMs) play an essential role in “impersonation scams” that enable cybercriminals and scam artists to steal large sums of money from unsuspecting victims. Data from the FTC reveals that fraud losses at BTMs increased tenfold from 2020 to 2023 and that the amounts stolen via the kiosks are exceptionally high. But despite the well-documented rise in BTM-fueled fraud, companies like Athena Bitcoin, Inc. which operates hundreds of terminals across the U.S., have repeatedly refused to reduce or eliminate the extreme danger they pose to vulnerable populations, especially seniors.

The consumer protection team at Dann Law now represents one of those seniors: Karen Carew, a 74-year-old resident of Belmar, New Jersey. On September 4, 2024, a criminal impersonating a Microsoft tech support telephone agent convinced her to withdraw $39,000 from her bank account and deposit it into Athena BTMs located at two area convenience stores. Her money was immediately transferred into the untraceable online account or “wallet” of the scam artist. Both he and her money then vanished.

To hold Athena and the convenience stores accountable for their role in defrauding Ms. Carew and victims of similar scams, DannLaw attorneys Henry P. Wolfe, Javier Merino, and Andrew Wolfe recently filed a class action lawsuit in the Superior Court of New Jersey against the company, its CEO Matias Golenhorn, the owners of the stores where the kiosks used to facilitate the Carew scam were located, as well as other stores in New Jersey that have permitted Athena to locate and operate kiosks on site. The complaint and supporting exhibits may be viewed and downloaded here:  2024.11.25 Carew Complaint FILED

In the complaint the attorneys note that Athena openly acknowledges its kiosks are regularly used in impersonation scams as a page on the company website titled “Avoid these Bitcoin Scams” clearly illustrates:

Scammers are looking to say and do anything to convince you of an urgent need to pay through Bitcoin, and they will often “helpfully” point out nearby ATMs where you can follow their commands.

Scam artists like Bitcoin because transactions cannot be cancelled, reversed, or otherwise refunded once made.

Athena receives numerous reports of fraud per month…

The complaint also alleges that although Athena clearly recognizes the dangers posed by its BTMs it has refused to implement effective measures that would prevent or deter the use of its terminals in impersonation scams. Why? Because doing so would reduce the considerable profit realized from every dollar inserted into its BTMs by victims of those scams.

“BTMs are specifically designed to appeal to criminals, that’s why I consider them to be the AR 15s of the financial services industry,” DannLaw founder and former Ohio Attorney General Marc Dann commented. “They serve no purpose beyond enabling scam artists to wreak havoc and destruction on innocent victims and the complete and purposeful lack of safeguards enable them to inflict pain in rapid-fire fashion and disappear instantly. As Ms. Carew learned, that’s a formula for disaster.”

In addition to facilitating the impersonation scam, the complaint states that Athena refused to turn over the $39,000 Ms. Carew deposited into the BTMs after being notified of the theft even though the stolen cash was in their possession. Their refusal is based on the company’s position that all deposited into its terminals is “irreversibly” transferred as Bitcoin to the designated wallet, even if the wallet in question belongs to a criminal who has perpetrated an impersonation scam.

DannLaw contends that Athena’s position is misleading at best for two reasons: first, because Ms. Carew’s cash was still inside the company’s BTMs when they were made aware of the theft, and, second, because the hefty fee Athena charged to facilitate the crime, $10,060.04, was not transferred to the scam artist irreversibly or otherwise.

“In essence, Ms. Carew has been ripped off twice,” Dann said. “First by the criminal who robbed her and then by Athena which could, but refuses, to return her money. While their position is reprehensible, it is not surprising. Let’s face it, thieves like Athena rarely return stolen money to its rightful owners, especially if doing so would destroy their business model. It’s clear they have no intention of doing the right thing voluntarily, so we’re more than willing to use the civil justice system to both hold them accountable and educate the public about the dangers associated with Athena BTMs.”

The suit asserts four causes of action including possession of stolen property, violations of New Jersey’s RICO statute and Consumer Fraud Act, and gross negligence and seeks monetary damages for Ms. Carew and all class members

For more information, please contact Marc Dann at 330-651-3131.

By

Ohio Bankruptcy LawyerI appreciate everyone’s patience with the slow progress of our case seeking payment of the Pandemic Unemployment Supplemental Benefits that were denied to Ohioans by Governor DeWine and the Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services.  As an FYI, I emailed Judge Holbrook’s law clerk today and asked if there was anything we or opposing counsel needed to do to enable the judge to rule on the motion to amend our complaint that we filed on behalf of the plaintiffs in March of 2023 and/or the motion to dismiss the complaint that was filed by the State AG at about the same time.
That means our position is, unfortunately, no different now than it was when the motions were filed last spring.
As of this writing, she has yet to respond.When/if she responds or when/if the judge rules on the pending motions we will share that information with all of you immediately.There is another issue that I wanted to bring to your attention. Recently the Ohio Attorney General and the Department of Jobs and Family Services have begun to attempt to collect what they perceive to be overpayments to pandemic unemployment recipients. If you have received such a notice please make sure you note that there is a short period of time to appeal this finding.  Our expectation is that many of the repayment notices are inaccurate.If you’ve received one of these notices in error and are willing to speak out about your situation please email me at [email protected] and I will connect you with folks at Policy Matters.Here is the Alert that we recently shared on our Facebook Page from Policy Matters Ohio:ALERT:
Ohio has begun retroactively denying unemployment benefits to some Ohioans who received them during the COVID-19 pandemic and demanding repayment.Did you get Pandemic Unemployment Assistance (PUA)? The Ohio Department of Job and Family Services (ODJFS) recently began sending email alerts to some recipients telling them to check their PUA account for new notices. These notices may say you fraudulently received PUA and have to repay those benefits—including interest and late penalties—because you didn’t provide required identity documents. If you received PUA during the pandemic:
1. Check your email and PUA accounts immediately. ODJFS will send the alert to the email address you used when you applied for Unemployment Assistance. To log into your PUA account, visit:https://pua.unemployment.ohio.gov/Claimant/Core/Login.ASPX
2. If you did get a notice, file an appeal by the deadline and include a copy of the required identity documents. For what documents are required, see: https://jfs.ohio.gov/…/identityverificationchecklist
3. File your appeal online at https://puaa.jfs.ohio.gov OR call 877-574-0015 to provide the needed information. Call volume is often high, so we recommend filing online if possible. You can visit your local Ohio Means Jobs office if you need to access a computer.
4. If you miss the deadline, don’t panic! You can still file an appeal, but you may need to prove you had good cause for missing the deadline.
5. Once you file your appeal, watch for new notices in your PUA account and check your mail for a Scheduling Notice with a hearing date.
6. You have the right to be represented on an appeal and should arrange representation as soon as possible. If you cannot afford a private attorney, your local legal aid society or legal services program may be able to provide help at no cost. Contact your local legal aid office at 1-866-LAW-OHIO (1-866-529-6446) or visit https://www.ohiolegalhelp.org to search the legal aid directory.
7. If you didn’t get a notice, be sure to check your email frequently and log into your PUA account to read any new notices.
Marc

By

DannLaw founder Marc Dann
Attorney Marc Dann

I am pleased to announce that attorneys Kurt Jones, Alisa Adams and Andy Engel as well as paralegals Maureen Dial, Madellyn Brown, and Ivona Gates who were formerly associated with Advocate Attorneys LLP have joined DannLaw and will now represent their consumer arbitration clients as members of our outstanding legal team.

The seamless transition of the Advocate staff to DannLaw will ensure that clients continue to work with the attorneys and support staff they know and trust and that cases will proceed without undue disruption or delay.

We welcome our new colleagues, and we look forward to providing their clients with exceptional level of professional service that has made DannLaw one of the nation’s leading consumer protection and class action litigation law firms.

By

The following is an abridged version of a story by Hayley Fowler that was published by Law 360…

Law360 (July 14, 2023, 4:11 PM EDT) — Bank of America NA has been hit with a proposed class action alleging it opened credit cards without customers’ knowledge to meet sales goals, just days after the bank agreed to a nine-figure settlement with federal regulators over alleged transgressions involving its credit card rewards and overdraft policies.
DannLaw founder Marc DannDAnnLaw filed the suit in North Carolina federal court on behalf of Ohio resident Nadine Ballard and a proposed class of consumers who said they unknowingly had credit card accounts opened in their names between 2012 and 2022, which allegedly resulted in penalties for unpaid fees and impacted their credit scores. In the suit DannLaw and Ms. Ballard said the accounts were opened by employees desperate to reach “unrealistic sales quotas” as part of a money-grabbing scheme by the Charlotte-based bank.
“BoA allowed this fraud to fester for over a decade, profiting off of the harm it directly caused to the consumers who trusted BoA,” the lawsuit states. The complaint in the case, maybe viewed and downloaded here: Bank of America credit card scam complaint.
Ballard’s complaint comes on the heels of a collective $150 million in fines levied against Bank of America on Tuesday by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.
About $30 million of those penalties was attributed to the bank’s alleged failure to provide credit card sign-up reward bonuses as advertised and opening unauthorized credit card accounts to meet sales targets, which have since been eliminated.
Bank of America did not admit any wrongdoing in agreeing to pay the fines, and the CFPB said only a “small percentage” of the bank’s new credit card accounts opened between 2012 and 2020 were found to be unauthorized.
Still, Ballard said Thursday that the bank’s alleged “fee generating scheme” has impacted “many thousands of members.”
“Until the CFPB took decisive action against BoA, BoA had every incentive to continue this illegal conduct because it is a fee-generating machine that produced extraordinary profits for the bank at the expense of its consumers,” she said.
According to the complaint, Ballard discovered in March that the bank had previously opened an allegedly unauthorized account in her name. Since then, Ballard said she has “spent substantial time to correct her credit report as well as to lodge complaints with the appropriate government agencies, including the CFPB.”
Ballard blamed Bank of America’s “intense sales pressure” for the allegedly unauthorized accounts, which she said often required employees to pull consumer reports to determine a customer’s eligibility.
Bank of America allegedly knew about the scheme and took steps to hide it, she said, saying the bank was fully “aware its quotas are unrealistic for employees during normal working hours.”
Oftentimes customers only found out about the accounts when Bank of America asked them to update their account information, new debit or credit cards arrived in the mail, or missing deposits showed up in the allegedly unauthorized account, Ballard said.
As a result, customers were allegedly forced to pay monthly service fees, suffered damages to their credit reports and had to pay for identity theft protection, the lawsuit states.
“As a result of opening new accounts, BoA was able to inflate the key metrics regarding new account holder information in its [U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission] filings, and — equally troubling — was able to accrue associated fees from those accounts opened without consumer consent,” DannLaw claims in the suit.
Thursday’s complaint asserts claims for unjust enrichment and violations of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act and North Carolina’s Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
Ballard is seeking class certification, treble damages, restitution, attorney fees and pre- and post-judgment interest.
“The brazen way that Bank of America encouraged and allowed fraud to be committed against perhaps millions of its customers is one of the greatest travesties in the history of American business,” Marc Dann told Law 360. “…we look forward to holding the bank and its officers and board members accountable.”
In addition to DannLaw, Ms. Ballard and the proposed class are represented by Scott C. Harris of Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman PLLC, Israel David and Blake Hunter Yagman of Israel David LLC, James M. Evangelista of Evangelista Worley LLC, Jennifer Czeisler of JKC Law LLC, and Marc E. Dann and Brian D. Flick of Dann Law Firm.