877-444-4655

Call to my cell phone (!) for someone else, not me - don't know if it's a ploy to get me to call or a genuiune wrong number.  Law Offices of Joel Cardis LLC, 2838 Dekalb Pike, East Norriton, PA.  Collections?

I to got a call from this number to my vonage line. i did not answer it and they left no message. I had this phone number for about 5 months and one other person called from collections for someone else.

Very rude, not great grammer.  Message about urgent that you call.

The person called and identified himself as Mike Markiewicz and said he was an attorney calling for my wife about something.  After doing some research, I find that this is a collection agency using a scare tactic to get my wife to return the call.  I find out that she had already spoken with the individual.  To top it off, this is not a debt and a collection agency cannot even get involved in the situation do to mistakes of a doctors office with insurance filing.  The fact that they are willing to go as far as saying they are someone they are not in order to get people to return calls is not right.

Caller identified him (don't remember his name) and was very rude (although nicer than the last guy who called).  Stated he was from Attorney Joel Caris' office and asked if I had an attorney on file for their pending lawsuit.  I told him that the debt was not valid as I did not sign a new contract for the gym membership.  Stated they were willing to settle.  I told them no, that I did not owe anything.  He told me "see you in court" and hung up.  They always hang up when you tell them that you are willing to go to court.

The Law Offices of Joel Cardis LLC,  my be practicing law without license in your state. Check your state BAR Association..

On 12-11-07 the Law Offices of Joel Cardis located at 2838 Dekalb Pike, East Norriton, PA. Phone 1-877-444-4655 was advised to stop calling a Wisconsin resident or he would be arrested...


Wisconsin Statute  § 757.30 provides as follows:
Penalty for practicing without license.
(1) Every person, who without having first obtained a license to practice law as an attorney of a court of record in this state, as provided by law, practices law within the meaning of sub. (2), or purports to be licensed  to practice law as an attorney within the meaning of sub. (3), shall be fined not less than $50 nor more than $500 or imprisoned  not more than one year in the county jail or both, and in addition may be punished as for a contempt.
 
(2) Every person who appears as agent, representative or attorney, for or on behalf of any other person, or any firm, partnership, association or corporation in any action or proceeding in or before any court of record, court commissioner, or judicial tribunal of the United States, or of any state, or who otherwise, in or out of court, for compensation  or pecuniary reward gives professional legal advice not incidental to his or her usual or ordinary business, or renders any legal service for any other person, or any firm, partnership, association or corporation, shall be deemed to be practicing law within the meaning of this section.
 
(3) Every person who uses the words attorney at law, lawyer, solicitor, counselor, attorney and counselor, proctor, law, law office, or other equivalent words in connection with his or her name or any sign, advertisement, business card, letterhead, circular, notice, or other writing, document or design, the evident purpose of which is to induce others to believe or understand the person to be authorized to practice law or who in any other manner represents himself or herself either verbally or in writing, directly or indirectly, as authorized to practice law in this state, shall be deemed to be purporting to be licensed to practice law  as an attorney within the meaning of this section.
 
(4) No person shall practice law in this state under any other given name or any other surname than that under which originally admitted to the bar of this or any other state, in any instance in which the board of bar examiners shall, after a hearing, find that practicing under the changed name operates to unfairly compete with another practitioner or to mislead the public as to identity or to otherwise result in detriment to the profession or the public.  Any person violating this subsection shall be subject to the penalty provided in sub. (1). This subsection does not apply to a change of name resulting from marriage or divorce.
The text of this rule can be found on the Internet at Wisconsin UPL Statute. It appears that enforcement of this statute is left to the sound judgment of each county's district attorney.
Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule (SCR) 10.03(4) provides as follows:
Only active members may practice law. No individual other than an enrolled active member of the state bar may practice law in this state or in any manner purport to be authorized or qualified to practice law. A judge in this state may allow a nonresident counsel to appear in his or her court and participate in a particular action or proceeding in association with an active member of the state bar of Wisconsin who appears and participates in the action or proceeding. Permission to the nonresident lawyer may be withdrawn by the judge granting it if the lawyer by his or her conduct manifests incompetency to represent a client in a Wisconsin court or by his or her unwillingness to abide by the rules of professional conduct for attorneys and the rules of decorum of the court.
SCR 10.03(4) can be found on the Internet at Wisconsin Supreme Court Rules Regarding the Regulation of the State Bar.
The State Bar of Wisconsin has an Unauthorized Practice of Law Policy Committee. For more information, go to State Bar of Wisconsin UPL Policy Committee.
Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule 20:5.5 provides as follows:
SCR 20:5.5 Unauthorized practice of law
A lawyer shall not:
(a) practice law in a jurisdiction where doing so violates the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction; or
(b) assist a person who is not a member of the bar in the performance of activity that constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.
COMMENT
The definition of the practice of law is established by law and varies from one jurisdiction to another. Whatever the definition, limiting the practice of law to members of the bar protects the public against rendition of legal services by unqualified persons. Paragraph (b) does not prohibit a lawyer from employing the services of paraprofessionals and delegating functions to them, so long as the lawyer supervises the delegated work and retains responsibility for their work. See Rule 5.3. Likewise, it does not prohibit lawyers from providing professional advice and instruction to nonlawyers whose employment requires knowledge of law; for example, claims adjusters, employees of financial or commercial institutions, social workers, accountants and persons employed in government agencies. In addition, a lawyer may counsel nonlawyers who wish to proceed pro se.
Note that the Wisconsin Supreme Court has adopted a new set of rule of professional conduct, effective July 1, 2007, but Rule 5.5 has not changed. The "new" rule and commentary are as follows:
SCR 20:5.5 Unauthorized practice of law
A lawyer shall not:
(a) practice law in a jurisdiction where doing so violates the regulation of the legal profession in that jurisdiction; or
(b) assist a person who is not a member of the bar in the performance of activity that constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.
Wisconsin Committee Comment
This Wisconsin Supreme Court Rule does not include the extensive provisions concerning multijurisdictional practice that are contained in the Model Rule. For this reason, the ABA Comment is not included.
The following paragraph was included in the old ABA comment:
The definition of the practice of law is established by law and varies from one jurisdiction to another. Whatever the definition, limiting the practice of law to members of the bar protects the public against rendition of legal services by unqualified persons. Paragraph (b) does not prohibit a lawyer from employing the services of paraprofessionals and delegating functions to them, so long as the lawyer supervises the delegated work and retains responsibility for their work. See Rule 5.3. Likewise, it does not prohibit lawyers from providing professional advice and instruction to nonlawyers whose employment requires knowledge of law; for example, claims adjusters, employees of financial or commercial institutions, social workers, accountants and persons employed in government agencies. In addition, a lawyer may counsel nonlawyers who wish to proceed pro se.
For information on the pro hac vice rules in Wisconsin, go to Wisconsin PHV Rules.
Selected Wisconsin Cases
(1) Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Bolte, 285 Wis.2d 569, 699 N.W.2d 914 (2005).
The Wisconsin Supreme Court reprimanded a lawyer for engaging in the unauthorized practice of law (and other misconduct) in Colorado notwithstanding the lawyer's argument that his activities were reasonably incident to his pro hac vice admission before a federal court in Colorado. The Wisconsin Supreme Court indicated that "Bolte's initial activities conducted on Koscove's behalf, investigating and evaluating the ARCO lease were not, as a matter of law, sufficiently linked to the federal court proceedings to be deemed "reasonably incident" to his subsequent activities before the federal court for purposes of Spanos[v. Skouras Theaters Corp., 364 F.2d 161 (2d Cir. 1965), aff'g 235 F. Supp. 1 (S.D.N.Y. 1964), cert. denied, 385 U.S. 987 (1966)]." The complete text of the court's decision can be found on the Internet at Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Bolte.

A case worth comparing to Office of Lawyer Regulation v. Bolte is Bolte v. Koscove, decided by the Chief Judge of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin.
(2) Schaefer v. Riegelman, 250 Wis.2d 494, 639 N.E.2d 715 (2002).
A Minnesota lawyer signed the name of another Minnesota lawyer (they practiced together) to a legal malpractice complaint against a Wisconsin lawyer which was then filed in Racine County, Wisconsin Circuit Court. The Minnesota lawyer whose name was signed was admitted to practice law in Wisconsin, but the lawyer who signed that lawyer's name was not. The question for the Wisconsin Supreme Court was whether the complaint was fatally defective because it was not signed by a lawyer admitted to practice law in Wisconsin.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court held that the complaint was fatally defective. This fatal defect justified the dismissal of the case based on the circuit's failure to acquire jurisdiction over the defendant. " . . . the purpose of requiring a handwritten signature, made by the attorney of record, is not only to clarify who is accountable for an invalid claim, but also to guarantee that an attorney who is familiar with the procedural and substantive laws of this state has read the claims and has made an assessment of the claims' validity.  . . .  allowing someone who is not licensed to practice law in Wisconsin to sign a pleading runs counter to this guarantee. To hold that a failure to meet the subscription requirements is merely technical jeopardizes judicial economy, erodes attorney accountability, and lessens the essential protection that the subscription requirement affords to defendants."
While the court addressed the issue whether the defect could have been cured, the court held that it could not under the facts of the case.
Last Edited: Monday, March 05, 2007.

Call on my voicemail at work -- said he was Joel Cardis Law office and had to discuss something with me urgently. Left phone number 877 444 4655 ext. 105.

Got a call from a woman with horrible english.  Said she was from a lawfirm, and that I needed to call back.  I think it is time to call my lawyer once again.

Keep getting call after call after call for some guy named William Watson - have told Law Offices of Cardis and whomever their "client" is that there has never been any William Watson here --- this has been done about 7 times now with calls back begging to have my telephone number removed. Mind you this has been a 7 month ordeal and they call A LOT leaving weird/urgent non-descript messages.  Funny thing when you call the "Law Offices of Joel Cardis" and get into the telephone directory there is no listing for Joel Cardis and the operator NEVER picks up the phone. I SO wish I knew the guy they were looking for because I am sick of getting his harassing phone calls!

Just recieved to calls one 4/11 and one today 4/14 Miss Jones I have seen this # on my caller ID before but no message these two times there was a message saying that she is from atty Joel Cardis office you can her the hundreds of agents in the background. I am not sure what it is about.I have good credit. Possible medical bills but I have insurance. After finding this site not sure what to do will the send something in the mail...

Mike Markowitz from "Atty Joel Cardis' office.

I got a call from a mrs. burton. I talked to her and made an arrangment to pay a long overdue bill my ex husband had created and was ordered to pay threw the court. However when I called back to verify that this is going to stop all calls and pay it in full. I got a hold of the manager whom said she had no idea why i paid such an odd amount but that i owed like $500 & something more. I advised her that i was told the check will cure the account and i would owe no more money. she is "investigating it"... I get at least 2 voice mails a day from them because they can not get their act together.... GOOD LUCK TO ANY ONE WHOM DEALS WITH THEM AND SECOND GUESS THEN AND CHECK YOUR PAYMENT WITH  MORE THEN 2 PEOPLE

Someone call me too and I get my number phone recently too and say he is from a attorney from Law Firm. He said that he has my file on hand. The first person was from 1-800-864-6035 and now other call from 1-877-444-4655. How do I stop the fraud attorney from calling.

Mike Markowitz from Atty Joel Cardis extention 7107.
No operator - left a vm asking for my attorney to call him back.  Is this a real collection agency??

called twice a Ms jones, leaving the 877 number and her extension 7111 and a case number.  I have had no problems so this feels like a scam I am turning it in to our local television station that works on stuff like this

I get calls at my place of business from these people all the time.  Offices of Joel Cardis at 877-444-4655, from a "Mr. OTTO" saying that he needs to speak with me urgently about a credit matter etc etc...Very poor english as well...

I am saving the voice mails now that I have read all about thier fraud and I will NOT be returning their calls.  If the debt is valid, there will be letters from the same office as required.  Nothing seen in the mail though.  If the debt is valid, there will also be a judgement, which there isn't....

People are money hungry these days, it's sad, but true...they will scam those that work hard to make a living and take advantage of those who aren't as fortunate as those of us who refer to sites like these to "check them out"...

Good Luck to all...I'll post again if I find out any further information.

I receives a call from Ms. Jones asking me to call her.  I tried but I could not get through.

Casse #1096789.  I received a call asking me to call Ms. Jones

I received a call from a "Mr. Otto" today, do not know what this is about.
I filed Bankruptcy 8 yrs. ago and have not be deliquent on anything since than. Should I call Back?

Received a call from the law offices of Joel Cardis from a Mrs. Guysler for my wife about an "urgent credit matter".
They left a Ref # of 1080370 & an extension # of 7203, I called them back and couldn't reach anyone, operator never picked up.
Sounds like a scam to me too.
Thank you one and all.