1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Floyd W. Bybee, SB 012651

BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC

90 S. Kyrene Rd., Ste. 5

Chandler, AZ 85226-4687

Office: (480) 756-8822

Fax: (480) 302-4186

floyd@bybeelaw.com

Attorney for Plaintiff

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

 

)

Cristi C. Kauffman; )

)

)

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

Michael P. Kauffman; Sally M. )

Colton; Cordell Law LLP; and )

Trans Union LLC; )

)

Defendants. )

)

 )

No. 

COMPLAINT

(Jury Trial Demanded)

Preliminary Statement

1. Defendant Michael P. Kauffman obtained a consumer report on

Plaintiff Cristi C. Kauffman under false pretenses from Defendant

Trans Union, LLC. Thereafter, Mr. Kauffman provided the report

to his family law attorney Defendant Sally M. Colton to use for

purposes outside the scope of permissible purposes under the Fair

Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”), 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681 et seq. Trans

Union, a consumer reporting agency, provided the report to Mr.

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 1 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

Kauffman without a permissible purpose in violation of the FCRA.

Jurisdiction and Venue

2. Jurisdiction over this action is premised upon 15 U.S.C. § 1681p

and 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 

3. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b), in that

Defendants’ conduct complained of occurred within the District.

Parties

4. Ms. Kauffman is an individual residing in Maricopa County,

Arizona. 

5. Ms. Kauffman is a “consumer” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(c).

6. Mr. Kauffman is an individual residing in Maricopa County. 

7. Mr. Kauffman is Plaintiff’s former husband.

8. Mr. Kauffman is a “person” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b).

9. Ms. Colton is an attorney licensed to practice law in the state of

Arizona.

10. Ms. Colton is a “person” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b).

11. Defendant Cordell Law LLP is a foreign limited liability

partnership which does business as a law firm within the state of

Arizona.

12. Cordell Law holds itself out as an international domestic litigation

firm which focuses on men’s divorce and all other family law

practice areas.

13. Cordell Law is a “person” as defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(b).

14. Ms. Colton is employed as an associate attorney by Cordell Law in

its Scottsdale, Arizona office.

- 2 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 2 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

15. At all times relevant hereto, Ms. Colton was acting on behalf of and

with full authority of Cordell Law.

16. Cordell Law is liable for the actions of its associate attorney

Defendant Colton taken within the scope of her employment. 

17. Mr. Kauffman hired Ms. Colton and Cordell Law to represent him

in certain family law proceedings in the Superior Court of

Maricopa County.

18. Trans Union is a Delaware limited liability company registered and

conducting business within the state of Arizona.

19. Trans Union is a “person” as that term is defined by FCRA § 1681a(b). 

20. Trans Union acts as a data repository, assembling and storing

information on consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer

reports to third parties.

21. Trans Union is a “consumer reporting agency” as that term is defined

by FCRA § 1681a(f).

Factual Allegations

22. Ms. Kauffman divorced Mr. Kauffman in or about January 2017.

23. After separation, Ms. Kauffman has kept her residential address

private from Mr. Kauffman in order to prevent harassment and

stalking. 

24. Subsequent to the divorce, Ms. Kauffman filed a petition for

contempt against Mr. Kauffman in the Superior Court.

25. During the proceedings, Mr. Kauffman provided his lawyer Ms.

Colton with a copy of a Trans Union consumer report on Plaintiff’s

private financial affairs.

- 3 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 3 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26. The Trans Union report provided by Mr. Kauffman was a

“consumer report” as that term is defined by 15 U.S.C. § 1681a(d).

27. Ms. Colton attached a copy of the Trans Union report with other

documents and submitted it for eventual use in the family law

court proceedings. 

28. Ms. Kauffman first learned of the Trans Union report when her

counsel provided her with a copy in a disclosure statement.

29. Ms. Kauffman was very emotionally upset that her ex-husband and

his attorney had obtained and were using a personal consumer

report on her in the court proceedings.

30. Upon investigation, Ms. Kauffman learned that Mr. Kauffman had

fraudulently opened a credit monitoring service through Trans

Union in Plaintiff’s name. 

31. This monitoring service allowed Mr. Kauffman complete access to

Ms. Kauffman’s personal and private credit information, including

her residential addresses.

32. Ms. Kauffman believes that part of the purpose for Mr. Kauffman’s

obtaining the consumer report was to allow him to locate and

illegally stalk her. 

33. Ms. Kauffman further learned from Trans Union that Mr.

Kauffman fraudulently posed as Plaintiff, providing Trans Union

with her personal and private identification information, including

name, address, Social Security number, and or date of birth in

order to establish the account.

34. Ms. Kauffman learned from Trans Union that the card used to

- 4 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 4 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

purchase the credit monitoring service was a credit card ending in

2198, which does not match any credit card belonging to Ms.

Kauffman. Upon information and belief, the credit card ending in

2198 belongs solely to Mr. Kauffman.

35. Ms. Kauffman also learned that the email address associated with

the credit monitoring service was mkauff1124@gmail.com, which is

an email address belonging solely to Michael Kauffman.

36. Upon information and belief, Trans Union failed to use proper care

to assure that it was Ms. Kauffman setting up the credit

monitoring service, rather than allowing Mr. Kauffman to set the

service up in the name of Plaintiff.

37. Trans Union has a duty to assure that the personal and private

information of consumers such as Ms. Kauffman is protected and

not provided to those not otherwise authorized or permitted to

obtain this information under the FCRA.

38. Trans Union provided a consumer report to Mr. Kauffman on Ms.

Kauffman without a permissible purpose allowed under the FCRA.

39. Upon information and belief, Trans Union provided four consumer

reports on Ms. Kauffman to Mr. Kauffman including two on

September 16, 2017, one on October 7, 2017, and one on October 9,

2017. 

40. Ms. Kauffman never authorized Mr. Kauffman to open a credit

monitoring service in her name.

41. Ms. Kauffman never authorized Mr. Kauffman to obtain a credit

report on her from Trans Union or any other consume reporting

- 5 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 5 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

agency in September or October 2017.

42. After acquiring the consumer report on September 16, 2017, Mr.

Kauffman shared the Trans Union report with his lawyer Ms.

Colton. 

43. Sometime thereafter, Ms. Colton and Mr. Kauffman chose to use

the Trans Union report for purposes outside the scope of the

permissible purposes allowed under the FCRA.

44. At no time did Mr. Kauffman have a permissible purpose for

obtaining a consumer report on Ms. Kauffman in September or

October 2017.

45. At no time did Mr. Kauffman or his attorney Ms. Colton have a

permissible purpose for using the September 16, 2017 Trans Union

consumer report in the Superior Court proceedings. 

46. At the time Mr. Kauffman obtained these consumer reports on Ms.

Kauffman, he knew that he did not have a legal purpose to access

these consumer reports.

47. At the time Mr. Kauffman and his attorney Ms. Colton used the

consumer report on Plaintiff, they knew or should have known that

they did not have a permissible purpose to use the report under the

FCRA. 

48. The actions taken by Defendants and complained of herein, caused

harm and damages to Ms. Kauffman within the State of Arizona.

49. Defendants knew that their actions in providing, obtaining, and or

using the consumer reports on Plaintiff without a legally

permissible purpose would cause Ms. Kauffman emotional harm

- 6 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 6 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

and damages within the State of Arizona. 

Count I. Violation of FCRA

Negligent Violation of the FCRA

50. Plaintiff incorporates the preceding paragraphs.

51. Trans Union acted negligently in allowing Mr. Kauffman to

fraudulently obtain four consumer reports on Plaintiff without a

permissible purpose.

52. Trans Union acted negligently in providing four consumer reports

to Mr. Kauffman without a permissible purpose in violation of 15

U.S.C. § 1681b(a).

53. As a result of Trans Union’s violations of the FCRA, Ms. Kauffman

has suffered actual damages, including, but not limited to, invasion

of privacy, anger, worry, fear for her safety, frustration, anxiety,

headaches, loss of appetite, upset stomach, sleeplessness, unable to

concentrate at work, and other extreme emotional distress. 

54. Mr. Kauffman, Ms. Colton and Cordell & Cordell acted negligently

in using the consumer report(s) furnished by Trans Union for

purposes outside the scope of permissible purposes in violation of

15 U.S.C. § 1681b(f).

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment

in her favor and against defendants Trans Union, Mr. Kauffman, Ms.

Colton, and Cordell & Cordell as follows:

a. pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(1), award Plaintiff her

actual damages suffered as a result of the impermissible

access to her consumer reports and use of the consumer

- 7 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 7 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

reports;

b. pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681o(a)(2), award costs of the action

and reasonable attorney fees; and

c. grant such other and further relief as the court deems just

and proper.

Count II. Violation of FCRA

Willful Violation of FCRA

55. Plaintiff incorporates the preceding paragraphs.

56. Defendant Mr. Kauffman acted willfully in fraudulently

representing himself as Plaintiff and setting up a credit monitoring

service with Trans Union in Plaintiff’s name in order to gain access

to her consumer reports. 

57. Defendant Mr. Kauffman acted willfully in fraudulently requesting

and obtaining consumer reports on Plaintiff from Trans Union

without a permissible purpose. 

58. Defendant Mr. Kauffman knowingly and willfully obtained

information on Plaintiff from a consumer reporting agency under

false pretenses.

59. Defendant Mr. Kauffman’s conduct in willfully obtaining Plaintiff’s

consumer report(s) without a permissible purpose violated 15

U.S.C. §1681b(f).

60. Defendant Mr. Kauffman’s conduct in fraudulently and willfully

obtaining Plaintiff’s consumer reports under false pretenses

violated 15 U.S.C. § 1681q.

61. Defendants Ms. Colton and Cordell & Cordell willfully used the

- 8 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 8 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

consumer report obtained on Plaintiff without a permissible

purpose in violation of 15 U.S.C. §1681b(f).

62. Defendant Trans Union acted willfully in providing consumer

reports to Mr. Kauffman without a permissible purpose in violation

of 15 U.S.C. § 1681b(a).

63. As a result of the Defendants violation of the FCRA, Plaintiff has

suffered actual damages, including, but not limited to, invasion of

privacy, anger, worry, fear for her safety, frustration, anxiety,

headaches, loss of appetite, upset stomach, sleeplessness, unable to

concentrate at work, and other extreme emotional distress. 

64. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that this Court enter judgment

in her favor and against defendants as follows:

a. pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(1)(A), award Plaintiff her

actual damages, or in the alternative, statutory damages of

not less than $100 and not more than $1,000 for each

violation of the FCRA, whichever is greater;

b. pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(2), award such punitive

damages as the Court deems appropriate;

c. pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681n(a)(3), award costs of the action

and reasonable attorney fees; and

d. grant such other and further relief as the court deems just

and proper.

Demand for Jury Trial

Plaintiff hereby demands a jury trial on all issues so triable.

- 9 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 9 of 10
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: December 1, 2017 .

 s/ Floyd W. Bybee 

Floyd W. Bybee, #012651

BYBEE LAW CENTER, PLC

90 S. Kyrene Rd., Ste. 5

Chandler, AZ 85226-4687

Office: (480) 756-8822

Fax: (480) 302-4186

floyd@bybeelaw.com

Attorney for Plaintiff 

- 10 -

Case 2:17-cv-04463-DGC Document 1 Filed 12/01/17 Page 10 of 10