Gorman
Gorman v. Wolpoff & Abramson, LLP
Opinion
Opinion
Ware, J.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT MBNA’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; GRANTING DEFENDANT WOLPOFF & ABRAMSON’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT; DENYING DEFENDANT WOLPOFF & ABRAMSON’S REQUEST FOR FINDING OF BAD FAITH; SETTING HEARING ON ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE RE: RULE 11 SANCTIONS
I. INTRODUCTION
John Gorman (“Gorman” or “Plaintiff’) alleges libel and violations of various state and federal fair credit reporting and debt collection statutes against MBNA and MBNA’s attorney, Wolpoff & Abramson, (“Wolpoff,” collectively “Defendants”). MBNA and Wolpoff each filed a Motion for Summary Judgment. On June 5, 2005, the Court held a hearing on Defendants’ Motions. Based on the papers filed to date and the statements of counsel at the hearing, the MBNA’s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, Wolpoff s Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED and Request for Finding of Bad Faith is DENIED.
II. BACKGROUND
Gorman is an attorney and a former holder of a MBNA Visa credit card. (Second Amended Complaint, Docket Item No. 41, “SAC” at ¶¶ 1, 4.) “In or about January and February 2003,” Gorman disputed the legitimacy of credit card charges from “Four Peaks Entertainment” (“Four Peaks”) that were posted to his…