Fraud Case Against Pa. 07 Congressional Candidate Bob Brooks To Move Forward, Sez Judge

Bob Brooks is the Democratic nominee in the upcoming Pa. 7th Congressional District race against incumbent Ryan Mackenzie. Brooks portrays himself as an Everyman. In a way, he probably is. He presents himself as a woke liberal to the Bernie Sanders and Jamie Raskins of the Democratic left, while simultaneously positioning himself as conservative Democrat to Josh Shapiro and his herd. He tries to be all things to all people. I call him shady. 

A lawsuit filed in Northampton County on February 17 alleges that he and his current wife (who has pretty much the same name as Wife #1), have engaged in what amounts to a fraudulent conveyance to avoid a judgment he owes his former mother-in-law. An attempt to dismiss this lawsuit has been dismissed by Judge Jennifer Sletvold in an 11-page Opinion filed July 27. She has ordered Brooks and his current wife to file an Answer within 20 days. (You can read her Opinion and Order below). 

Let me give you some background. In 2008, Brooks' in-laws transferred a residential property to Brooks and his Wife #1. They even fronted the cost of subdividing the property to the tune of $55,000. Everyman Brooks promised to pay the money back but never did. Eventually, he and Wife #1 signed a promissory note for the money, but he never paid a cent. He was sued, and a $130,000 award was entered against him in 2020. In an effort to string things along, he appealed. He lost in a unanimous Pennsylvania Superior Court ruling. In 2022, judgment was entered against him for $130,000. 

That judgment remains open of record. 

After screwing over his in-laws, he and his wife eventually parted ways, with a divorce being granted in 2018. Then, in the midst of two mortgage foreclosures and lawsuits by two credit card companies, Brooks quitclaimed his interest in the property to a person who I thought was Wife #1 in 2022. But according to the lawsuit filed against Brooks, he actually quitclaimed his interest to Wife #2 in a Quitclaim Deed that both he and Wife #2 executed. 

I've told you that Wives  #1 and #2 have virtually identical names. Wife #1 is Jennifer Lynne Brooks. Wife #2 is Jennifer Lynn Brooks. There is no "e" in "Lynne" in Wife #2's name. The lawsuit avers that the Quitclaim was a fraudulent attempt to obscure the real identity of Wife #2 in order to avoid paying a $130,000 judgment. As a bonus for Brooks, this alleged subterfuge would have and did enable Wife #2 to obtain a $330,000 mortgage. 

According to the lawsuit, the signature in the Quitclaim is different than the Note signed by Wife #1 and Brooks for the cost of subdividing their property.  

The lawsuit, filed on behalf of the mother-in-law, now seeks $160,000 from Brooks and from Wife #2. In addition, punitive damages are sought for "outrageous" and "malicious" subterfuge that "shock the conscience"

Instead of just paying the judgment and getting rid of something that paints him in a negative light right before an election. Brooks instead had the hubris to file preliminary objections based on a supposedly expired statute of limitations and the argument that the Complaint against him is legally insufficient. Judge Sletvold has ruled that he's wrong on both counts.

She observed that Brooks' Statute of Limitations argument, which alleges that it's too late to execute on a judgment entered in 2022, to totally misses the point. The suit has been filed as a result of a fraudulent conveyance, not the actual judgment. 

More importantly, Judge Sletvold dismissed Brooks' argument that the Complaint, on its face, is legally insufficient. Not so, according to Judge Sletvold. She observes that Brooks' mother-in law has alleged facts that show fraud was afoot. 

Plaintiff alleges particular facts to claim how Defendants actually intended to defraud Plaintiff, the judgment creditor. The Complaint alleges that the judgement in the 2018 lawsuit was entered on January 10, 2022, and the quitclaim deed, transferring ownership of the Property from Mr. Brooks and Second Wife to solely Second Wife, occurred in close proximity, approximately two months. The quitclaim deed was a transfer to an insider, Second Wife. The debtor, Mr. Brooks, still resides in the Property and uses it as his primary residence. The transfer of the property was for $10.00 when the value of the property was $413,200.00 at the time of transfer. Second Wife immediately encumbered the property with a $330,000 mortgage, and the loan proceeds were not used to pay the debt owed to Plaintiff by Mr. Brooks. See Compl. ¶¶ 21-31. We find these allegations to be pled with particularity and are legally sufficient to sustain causes of action under 12 Pa. C.S.A. § 5104. Accordingly, this preliminary objection is overruled.

Brooks is no working-class hero. He's shady. While there might be an innocent explanation to these allegations of forgery, there's no denying that Brooks has adamantly refused to pay a family loan, not just a bank loan, for the home in which he lives.  

He's no everyman. He's shady. He was actually soliciting campaign contributions for fellow Democrat Lamont McClure. Before stabbing McClure in the back, Brooks called McClure a "strong Democrat with a proven track record of putting out fires and a long history of standing up to corruption." 

He's no Bernie Sanders or Josh Shapiro. He's shady.

Brooks' mother-in-law is represented by David Dunn, Esq., who said he's looking forward to moving ahead with the case. Brooks is represented by GREENBERG TRAURIG LLP, a nationally known law firm with offices in Pjiladelphia.

Judge Rules That Fraud Case Against Pa. 07 Congressional Candidate Can Move Forward by BernieOHare