It has become increasingly more difficult for defense lawyers in Allegheny County to defend claims for non-payment of alleged credit card debt, which involve breach of contract claims. As of late, more and more Pittsburgh Judges refuse to dismiss lawsuits filed by a credit card company ("creditor") or its assignee. This is true, even when key details are missing from the suit.
This change occurred in January of 2020, when Allegheny County (Pittsburgh) switched from a system of one judge hearing all motions on creditor cases (Judge Wettick then J. Colville). Allegheny County now employs a system of rotating judges. No one judge is responsible to hear all the motions to dismiss such lawsuits, creating inconsistency.
Still Worth It to Hire a Lawyer to Oppose Such Litigation?
YES!
------
Frequently Asked Questions - FAQ
Did Credit Card Cases Often Get Dismissed in Pittsburgh?
At one point, Allegheny County, Pennsylvania was known for dismissing credit card suits -- early and often -- thanks to one man: the Honorable R. Stanton Wettick, Jr. Previously, attorney Wettick had worked as a lawyer for (then headed) the pro-debtor Neighborhood Legal Services of Westerns Pennsylvania. Then, he ascended to the position of judge on the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas in Pennsylvania.
Next, from 1976 until his retirement in 2007, he wrote opinions such as Worldwide Asset Purchasing, LLC v. Nancy A. Stern v. Scott Miller, PLJ May 13, 2005, page 111, 112. In truth, Judge Wettick perceived a hight burden on those proving a credit card debt. There, Judge Wettick noted:
“[T]he credit card holder and the issuer begins with a written application signed and submitted by the cardholder. In this application, the cardholder agrees to be bound by provisions set forth in the application. And possibly other terms and conditions that are furnished to the credit card holder at the time the card is issued. ...
The application also provides that the terms and conditions may be changed through mailings to the cardholder and accepted by the cardholder's continued use of the credit card. In this situation, the writings that must be attached to the complaint include the application signed by the cardholder and any other relevant terms and conditions which govern the issuer's claims.
Id. at 112 (emphasis added).
-----
How Did Judge Wettick's Views on Credit Card Cases Get Applied, Going Forward?
Judge Wettick -- and his successor Judge Colville -- applied the so-called "Allegheny County Rule," requiring that the Credit Card company plead and attach to the Complaint a copy of the credit card application and signed credit card agreement. Or, failing that, they must attach a copy of all statements going down to a zero balance. Otherwise, the credit card suit would be dismissed, early on.
Judge Colville also required specificity in the wording of the Complaint, often dismissing a creditor's lawsuit, where the following objection had been offered:
Plaintiff pleads in the most general of terms that there was an “account” – without indicating how or when, or through what instrumentality any alleged contract was created. See Plaintiff’s Complaint, ¶ 2. Nor does the Plaintiff plead how Defendant agreed to any particular terms -- much less 20% or more interest – prior to using the card. See the Complaint, generally.
Plus, the "Allegheny Rule" also did not acknowledge a claim for an "account stated" in the context of a credit card lawsuit.
Judge Colville continued to apply the "Allegheny County Rule," even when Superior Court's decision in DISCOVER BANK V. STUCKA, 2011 Pa.Super 241, 33 A.3d 82 (2011) appeared to sharply limit it, creating room for disagreement in these matters.
-----
When Did Allegheny County's System Change?
On December 19, 2019, Judge Colville ceases his duties as motions judge in credit card cases in Allegheny County, when appointed to the federal bench. Thereafter, in early 2020, Allegheny county abolished the single-judge system.
In its place was a system of rotating judges. Each judge serves approximately one month on the bench to hear motions to dismiss. So, for example, currently, if the Defendant moves to dismiss a credit card case, it's heard by the current motions judge this month. There, the judge might dismiss the case for reasons stated in oral argument. However, if the case is re-filed (without adequate correction in the Defendant's opinion), it might be heard by a different judge on the bench that month.
-----
Is There Less Certainty in Credit Card Debt Motion Practice in Pittsburgh?
Yes. The above switch opened the door for inconsistent - and even contradictory -- decisions in credit card case litigation. For example, in once case, Judge Klein sustained our objections to a credit card lawsuit, throwing it out for specific reasons stated orally in court. The credit card company re-filed the suit and it was heard this time by Judge McVay. Hence, we alleged Judge Klein's prior ruling had been the "law of the case" but Judge McVay was not present at the oral argument before Judge Klein, and therefore ruled:
Dated 02/11/2022. It is hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Preliminary Objections to the Amended Complaint are OVERRULED as to my uncertainty as to the applicability of Judge Kleins order and doctrine of law of the case. McVay Jr., J As per Rule 236 Notice, copies sent to all parties 02/11/2022.
-----
Ongoing Pattern into 2023 and the Present
In Allegheny County, there is no longer one consistent rule applied, to challenge credit card debt lawsuits. The outcome really depends on which judge presiding over motions court. Some are more pro-debtor, some more pro-creditor. However, one thing is certain: each judge is free to come to a different decision, as the judge sees fit. This reflects honestly and integrity on the part of the judges, collectively. However, it also creates uncertainty and potential inconsistency.
Depending on the judge, some now allow the credit card company go without pleading how or when or through what instrumentality the Defendant had "accepted" the terms of the credit card card agreement. This is a basic aspect of contract law. The plaintiff must plead and prove how the contract was formed, especially if it wants to be paid 30%+ interest. But there are some recent appellate court holdings, such as Discover Bank v. Booker, discussed. here, which further complicate the defense of all kinds of debt collection cases in PA, especially where the loan agreement or card member agreement is "unavailable."
-----
The Right Credit Card Debt Lawyer in Pittsburgh
For this reason, it is important to select a Pittsburgh lawyer who understands the shift in Allegheny County away from dismissing credit card debt cases early on.
