Ali v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC

Filing 26

MOTION by Plaintiff Syed A Ali for judgment pursuant to accepted R. 68 Offer of Judgment (Harrer, Robert)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
EASTERN DIVISION
SYED A. ALI,
)
)
PLAINTIFF,
)
Case no.: 15-cv-06178
)
v.
)
)
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC ) Judge Sharon Johnson Coleman
and BLITT & GAINES, P.C.
) Magistrate Judge Daniel G. Martin
and FREEDMAN ANSELMO LINDBERG, LLC )
n/k/a ANSELMO LINDBERG OLIVER, LLC
)
)
DEFENDANTS.
)
YASMEEN ALI,
)
as natural parent and best friend of SHA, a minor, )
)
PLAINTIFF,
)
Case no.: 15-cv-11582
)
v.
)
)
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, )
and SANJAY S. JUTLA, and KEVIN J. EGAN,
)
)
DEFENDANTS.
)
SYED A. ALI,
)
)
PLAINTIFF,
)
Case no.: 16-cv-01581
)
v.
)
)
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, )
and KEVIN J. EGAN,
)
)
DEFENDANTS.
)
SYED A. ALI,
)
)
PLAINTIFF,
)
Case no.: 16-cv-03872
)
v.
)
)
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, )
)
DEFENDANT.
)

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO ENTER JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO DEFENDANT’S
RULE 68 OFFER OF JUDGMENT
NOW COMES Plaintiff Syed A. Ali, by his attorneys The Law Office of M. Kris Kasalo,
Ltd. and The Law Office of Robert W. Harrer, P.C., and for his Motion to Enter Judgment
Pursuant to Defendant’s Rule 68 Offer of Judgment states as follows:
1.

On March 30, 2016, Plaintiff filed his complaint styled as Syed A. Ali v. Portfolio

Recovery Associates, LLC, (Case number: 16-cv-3872). (Case #16-cv-3872, Dkt. #1)
2.

On April 25, 2016, this court reassigned the above referenced case (Case #16-cv-

3872) as well as two other cases (case numbers 15-cv-11582 and 16-cv-01581) to this court
under case number 15-cv-6178. The court order Plaintiffs in all cases to file a consolidated
complaint. (Case #15-cv-6178, Dkt. #66)
3.

Plaintiffs filed their consolidated complaint on May 18, 2016. (Case #15-cv-6178,

Dkt. #74).
4.

While Plaintiffs’ filed a consolidated complaint, the cases maintained their case

numbers as the cases were reassigned to this court. (See Order in case #15-cv-6178, Dkt. #66)
5.

On November 18, 2016, Plaintiffs filed their first amended consolidated

complaint. (Case #15-cv-6178, Dkt. #127).
6.

Count IX of the operative complaint relates to case number 16-cv-3872. (See case

#15-cv-6178, Dkt. #74, ¶¶223-282, and 16-cv-3872, Dkt. #1).
7.

On November 30, 2016, Defendant served its Rule 68 Offer of Judgment on

Plaintiff via USPS regular mail and email. Defendant’s Offer of Judgement stated that judgment
shall be entered in the amount of $1500 for Plaintiff’s damages as to Count IX of Plaintiff’s
Complaint. Defendant’s Offer of Judgment further stated that judgment shall be entered against

Defendant for reasonable fees and costs incurred in prosecuting Count IX of Plaintiff’s
Complaint. (Exhibit A, Defendant’s Rule 68 Offer of Judgment).
8.

On December 14, 2016, Plaintiff timely filed his acceptance of Defendant’s Rule

68 Offer of Judgment with respect to Count IX of the operative complaint, or case number 16cv-3872, with this Court via its CM/ECF electronic filing system under that same case number.
(Exhibit B, case #16-cv-3872, Dkt. #22, E-filed Notice of Acceptance of Defendant’s Rule 68
Offer of Judgment).
9.

On December 22, 2016, Plaintiff’s counsel Rob Harrer served, via e-mail and

USPS regular mail, a copy of Plaintiff’s e-filed Notice of Acceptance of Defendant’s Rule 68
Offer of Judgment and certificate of service. (Exhibit C, E-filed Notice of Acceptance of
Defendant’s Rule 68 Offer of Judgment and certificate of service).
10.

Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 68(a) states:

(a) Making an Offer; Judgment on an Accepted Offer.
At least 14 days before the date set for trial, a party defending against a claim
may serve on an opposing party an offer to allow judgment on specified terms,
with the costs then accrued. If, within 14 days after being served, the opposing
party serves written notice accepting the offer, either party may then file the
offer and notice of acceptance, plus proof of service. The clerk must then enter
judgment.
11.

Therefore, upon filing the acceptance of the offer and notice of acceptance plus

proof of service, judgment is to be entered.
12.

Plaintiff has filed his acceptance of the offer, notice of the acceptance and proof

of service.
13.

Based on the foregoing, pursuant to Defendant’s accepted Rule 68 Offer of

Judgment, Plaintiff requests that this Honorable Court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff as to

Count IX of the operative complaint, case #16-cv-3872, in the amount of $1500 for Plaintiff’s
damages plus reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, Plaintiff, Syed A. Ali, through his counsel, The
Law Office of M. Kris Kasalo, Ltd. and The Law Office of Robert W. Harrer, Ltd. respectfully
requests that this court enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff in the amount of $1500 for Plaintiff’s
damages plus reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to Defendant’s accepted Rule 68
Offer of Judgment as to Count IX of the operative complaint, case #16-cv-3872.
By: s/ Robert W. Harrer
Robert W. Harrer

The Law Office of M. Kris Kasalo, Ltd.
20 North Clark Street, Suite 3100
Chicago, Illinois 60602
Tele 312- 726-6160
Fax [phone]
[e-mail]

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Robert W. Harrer, an attorney, certify that I shall cause to be served a copy of the
foregoing document in this case that will be served via the method stated below, upon the
following on January 5, 2017:
__X_ CM/ECF
__ Facsimile
____ Federal Express
____ Messenger
__X_ Email
____ USPS Mail

Attorney(s) for Defendant:
Avanti Bakane
Philip Barrett
Gordon & Rees
One North Franklin Street
Suite 800
Chicago, IL 6060
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
By: s/ Robert W. Harrer
Robert W. Harrer