Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:08-cv-00295—GI\/IS Documenl@ Filed 07/22/2008 Page 1 of 3
%¢"E-%ET""e
at e
ttl rt
. /
cazmnw. mvnsnou (ao:) sn-ssuo i
DEPARTMENT OF JUSECE ¤~.rE?}.éi3il iiéiéii an I
Josepu R. Broan, nu 82¤"NE$`§$Q°;IiEN§3‘§“}E§ET FAX (302) t·.m¤¤¤
ATTORNEY GENERAL WILMINGTON, namwans maui TW (302) 577-5765
Please respond to: Civil Division
Jury 22, 2008
By Electronic Filing
The Honorable Gregory M. Sleet i
Chief Judge
United States District Court for the District of Delaware -
Caleb Boggs Federal Courthouse
844 N. King Street/ Lock Box 18
Wilmington, DE 19801
Re: Shahin v. Darlin et al.
C.A. No. 08-295 GMS
Dear Chief Judge Sleet:
I received Ms. Shahin’s Motion for Rule ll sanctions yesterday afternoon.
I reviewed the State Judicial Defendants’ Memorandum in Support of Motion to Dismiss
Complaint, as well as the supporting documentation utilized in preparation of the Memorandum, I
in light of Ms. Shahin’s motion. As a result, I have modified three words in the first page of the
Nature and Stage of Proceedings section of the Memorandum. (Page attached). The Y
modification is highlighted. This change more accurately reflects what occurred at the "first" ,
Justices of the Peace Courts proceeding in which the Shahins were involved. Please substitute
this corrected page in place of the page originally filed in the Memorandum. After reasonable
inquiry, and to the best of my knowledge, information and belief] the remainder of the document j
contains factual contentions that have evidentiary support.
I believe this should appropriately correct any perceived misinterpretation of the facts in
accordance with Rule of Civil Procedure ll(c)(l)(A). While Ms. Shahin has prematurely filed
her motion with the court in violation of Rule ll(c)(l)(A), the above-mentioned correction
should result in her withdrawing the motion. Should she persist, however, in pursuing the
motion, Iwill be seeking reasonable expenses and attomey’s fees associated with any successful


l
l
. . - J

Case 1 :08-cv-00295—GI\/IS Document 26 Filed 07/22/2008 Page 2 of 3 {
Hon. Gregory M. Sleet i
Jury 22, 2002. g
Page 2
opposition of her motion for sanctions. i
A Respectfully yours, i
_.
/5; Q3 win Q. Sfctttegy .
Kevin R. Slattery
Deputy Attorney General
Bar ro# 2297
I
Attachment I
Xe. Ms. Nina Shabin (by U.S. Mail)
File
L/Kevin. Slattery/Litigation/Shuhm/Subs!.i.¢u!ePt1geC0verLe!ter. doc ·
l
A
l
l

L
Case 1:08-cv-00295—GI\/IS Document 26 Filed 07/22/2008 Page 3 of 3 I
I.
l.
NATURE AND STAGE OF THE PROCEEDINGS
The plaintiff, Nina Shahin (“Shahin"), initiated three State court proceedings against a credit li
union and a complaint before the Delaware Court on the Judiciaryl that have led to the case before the
court. Some discussion of these proceedings is necessary to assist the court in understanding the
` background of this matter.
A. The ‘j‘irst” case against the Delaware Federal Credit Union
Shahin and her husband, Mazen Shahin, filed a debt action against the Delaware Federal
Credit Union (presently known as "Del-One") in Jtme of 2005. Complaint, at page l; Sha/tin v.
Delaware Federal Credit Union, CA. No. 06A-0l-004 (Opinion at page 2) (Young, J.)(August 3, 3
2006)("Slta/tin l”)(Attached at Tab "A"). The action sought reimbursement for an erroneously
assessed fee of $35.00 for insufficient funds ("NSF fee"). S/takin J, at page 2. The Honorable p
Pamela A. Darling ("judicial defendant Darling°’) was the Magistrate who presided over the Justices
of the Peace Courts trial. Upon leaming that Del-One had admitted the error and agreed to credit the
$35.00 to th Shahins’ account on the date of trial, the Magistrate dismissed the action with I
prejudice.2 Id; Justice of the Peace Civil Docket in Civil Action No. J 0507004516 (Attached at Tab
"B"). The Shahins appealed the Magistrate’s decision to the Court of Common Pleas. Id. (Tab "B"). M
In the Court of Common Pleas, the Honorable Merrill C. Trader ("judicial defendant Trader")
considered, and granted, Del-One’s motion for summary judgment. Sha/tin L at page 2; Transcript of
I As all Court on the Judiciary proceedings are confidential pursuant to the court’s Rule 17, only l
Shahin as the complainant, the judicial officer and the Court would have received a copy of the
dismissal ofthe complaint. Court on the Judiciary Rules t5(b), 8(a) and l5(a)_. Accordingly, any
discussion of the complaint rn relation to this proceeding is not possible at this stage of the
proceedings.
2 Del-One claimed that it did not learn of the error until it was served the JP Court complaint. 5
l
l

Case 1:08-cv-00295-GMS

Document 26

Filed 07/22/2008

Page 1 of 3

Case 1:08-cv-00295-GMS

Document 26

Filed 07/22/2008

Page 2 of 3

Case 1:08-cv-00295-GMS

Document 26

Filed 07/22/2008

Page 3 of 3