IN RE JOHNSON
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maryland, Baltimore Division.
Filed: October 19, 2012.
23. The Court finds that the Defendants decorated the office in such a fashion as to appear to the public that it was a law office, that Scalia & Seidel is a law firm, and that Mancini is a lawyer.
24. The Defendants advertised their services in publications typically used by attorneys to advertise legal services. The Defendants designed their advertisements to appear as if they were attorneys offering legal services and legal advice.
25. On at least one web site, Mancini falsely indicates that he was licensed to practice law in Maryland.
The Linda Johnson Case26. The debtor in this bankruptcy case is Linda Johnson.
27. Prior to commencement of this case, and in connection with her intention to file a bankruptcy petition, Ms. Johnson used the internet to search for bankruptcy attorneys in Baltimore. Ms. Johnson entered her contact information into a website advertising bankruptcy services.
28. In response, Mancini (using the name Michael Scalia) contacted Ms. Johnson and informed her that he could assist her in filing for bankruptcy.
1. Congress has provided that "[t]he United States trustee may raise and may appear and be heard on any issue in any case or proceeding" under Title 11 of the United States Code (the "Bankruptcy Code"). 11 U.S.C. § 307. Additionally, various paragraphs of § 110 of the Bankruptcy Code specifically provide that the United State Trustee may bring actions to redress the misconduct alleged in this case. See, e.g., 11 U.S.C. §§ 110(i)(1), 110(J)(1).
2. The term "debtor" is defined by the Bankruptcy Code as a "person ... concerning which a case under [the Bankruptcy Code] has been commenced." 11 U.S.C. § 101(13). For purposes of these Findings, the Court applies that same definition.
3. At the hearing on this matter, the Assistant United States Trustee testified that Mancini admitted to him that the social security number listed on these documents was not Mancini's social security number but that Mancini claimed the numbers were tax identification numbers assigned to him or his businesses. However, the Assistant United States Trustee also testified that his own investigation indicated that the numbers were actually social security numbers issued to individuals living outside of Maryland. There was no evidence presented as to the identity of these individuals or that these individuals were aware that Mancini had used their social security numbers.