Citibank's motion for continuance of trial

[elbeto77]

OK, so the Citibank (Plaintiff) & Allen Adkins their (Attorney) set a non-jury trial for next month and I now have received a copy of a motion letter submitted to the courts requesting Plaintiff's motion for continuance of trial. Here is what the document states below.

CITIBANK, N.A.

vs.

Me


Plaintiff's Motion For Continuance Of Trial

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF SAID COURT:
COMES NOW, CITIBANK, Plaintiff, and files this motion for Continuance of Trial which is currently scheduled for March 6, 2012, and would respectfully show the Court as follows:

1. This is the first request for continuance in this case
2. Plaintiff is currently in the process of compiling documents for the purpose of filing a Motion for Summary Judgment at least twenty-one days prior to trial.
3. This cause of action was filed on or about August 19, 2011.
4. This case involves a suit to recover a credit card debt. Plaintiff's counsel believes this matter may be resolved through settlement or summary judgment.
5. The parties have not made an unconditional announcement of ready. Additional discovery may be necessary.
6. In light of the foregoing, Plaintiff's counsel respectfully request that this Court continue the trial which is currently scheduled on March 6, 2012 for at least 120 days. This Motion for Continuance of Trial is not being sought for delay only, but so that justice may be done.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that this Motion for Continuance of Trial be granted.

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

I have been unsuccessful in my attempts to discuss this matter with the Defendant/Defendants counsel as said Defendant/Defendants counsel has not returned my telephone calls.


NOTICE OF ORAL HEARING ON PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL.

TO: Defendant, Me, 12345 Somewhere, City State 77041

Please take notice that an Oral Hearing on Plaintiff's Motion for Continuance of Trial is scheduled for Tuesday, February 28, 2012 at 11:00 A.M., IN THE COURTROOM OF THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 4 OF HARRIS County, Texas.


So my questions are:

Why is the Plaintiff and their Attorney setting court dates, if they don't even have all the necessary documents to proceed with the suit?

Can i file a motion to have the judge dismiss this suit, since they are trying to delay the trial?

[usagi555]

This means that they don't have what they need. You may not be able to block the continuance totally. If you can't, you might want to see if you can get it significantly reduced. 120 days to get documents that they should have had at or not long after the time they filed is totally absurd.

[elbeto77]

Well they sent me statements from when the account was opened until Feb-March 2011 statement and have also submitted a copy of a check image. What more could they need to gather to prove their case?

As for the oral hearing is set for Feb 28,2012, do i need to be present, and if so, can I object to the motion that they are requesting extension?

[usagi555]

Figure that they'll probably get the continuance because its their first one. When they asked for one with me, we were on a much tighter time schedule and they never would have gotten a 120 day continuance, but they might have gotten a 30 day continuance. I figured they were going to get one, so I rather firmly told them 10 days. If you can't stop it, you might be able to at least control it.

[BV80]

If you planned on settling, a continuance would give you time to save up some money before a summary judgment hearing.

[Seadragon]

allocation of judicial resources than summary judgment. As this is a contested matter, trial with questioning of witnesses(which they don't have) is fairer for both parties than a summary judgment proceeding.

Then you gut the continuance with reasons trial is mandatory. For instance you can say that plaintiff's have not been diligent in the prosecution of the case and have had ample time to bring pre trial motions. A trial with questioning of witnesses is preffered to hearsay declarations and will be a waste when their are found to be issues for trial.

As you are unrepresented a summary proceeding would allow them to use the summary proceeding to test their case before voluntary dismissal and would cause undue burden to you for having to prepare for SJ motion and then complying with all the pre trial necessities for trial.

and announce that you are ready for trial on the day of the Continuance motion and require a list of witnesses.

check the texas statutes for declarations and witness lists and every other pretrial motion including Motions in limine, subpoena of a witness. and get that ready.

If they do want to grant the motion, in the alternative have the discovery cutoff date remain the same.

These are some things you can do and it will seem like they are dragging azz. You can also show that they don't need SJ if they have a case for trial.

[racecar]

Law Office of Tom M. Thomas II
4144 N. Central Expressway, Suite 870
Dallas, TX 75204
Se Habla Español Tel: 214-691-6200
Fax: 214-691-6205
Toll Free: 1-855-898-DEBT (3328)
info@creditcardlawsuitdefense.com


Allen L. Adkins & Associates PC



The Law Office of Allen L. Adkins, P.C. is located in Lubbock, TX. If you are involved in an Allen L. Adkins lawsuit, there’s a good chance that you’ve been sued for a credit card debt that is somehow related to Citibank (South Dakota), N.A., since this law office is Citibank’s primary Texas debt collection law firm. In addition to credit card debt, this law firm has also been known to collect defaulted auto loans, business loans, personal credit union loans, department store loans, revolving lines of personal credit, mortgage loans, and student loans. Mr. Allen Adkins’ debt collection practice covers the entire state of Texas and takes one of the more aggressive approaches to prosecuting credit card lawsuits.

Allen L. Adkins lawsuits almost always contain a considerable amount of written discovery, including the Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests for Admissions, Plaintiff’s Request for Disclosure, Plaintiff’s First Set of Interrogatories, and Plaintiff’s First Set of Request for Production. Including discovery within the collection lawsuit is a common debt collection litigation technique that also has the effect of laying an incredibly explosive and dangerous landmine right in front of your feet - if the discovery is not timely and properly responded to or objected to, all objections are waived and you could be sanctioned by the Court (i.e. fined or worse) for failing to respond. Worse yet, all Requests for Admissions are “deemed admitted” and can be used against you at trial or in a summary judgment proceeding (like a trial based on documents alone). There are many Citibank lawsuits in Texas that were lost by consumers who timely answered the lawsuit, but who failed to respond to Citibank’s written discovery requests, thinking that the lawsuit answer was all that was required. I see this situation time and time again, almost on a daily basis.

Also keep in mind that the internet is saturated with misinformation and bad advice. Contrary to what you might have read about this lawyer and his practice, Allen Adkins files Citibank Original Creditor cases – he does not buy bad debts and Citibank cases are not defined as Debt Buyer cases. Don’t ignore an Allen Adkins/Citibank lawsuit because of something you have read elsewhere on the internet. If you do, you are likely to end up with a judgment against you.

If you have been sued by Allen Adkins for a Citibank or other credit card debt, I would be happy to visit with you about defending your case. There is no consultation fee.

[legaleagle]

Summary judgment is more efficient than a trial, in my opinion. The purpose of MSJ is to show the court that there is no material fact in dispute, and that there is no reason to waste court time with a trial that will only lead to the same conclusion. If they have a day one statement history and a cancelled check with the poster's name on it establishing payment, and they can show that there was no dispute of the account, they have a really good case for account stated. I have no clue as to what he can raise as a viable issue in the face of that much evidence.

[racecar]

Check image,Is that a copy of the check you used that you signed,or is it a check that is blank but has your name typed in that does not look like the checks the banks send.does the check have an account number and your name and address.Just checking to see if its not fake evidence made by the other side. Did affiant swear that the image is a true and correct copy of the check?

[elbeto77]

The check image is some type of over the phone check payment approval. It does not have my name, but does have my wife's first initial and last name.

[elbeto77]

So i take it that the plaintiff is trying to submit a Motion for Summary Judgement, due to the evidence they have and obviously believe that by doing so the court will grant it?

2. Plaintiff is currently in the process of compiling documents for the purpose of filing a Motion for Summary Judgment at least twenty-one days prior to trial.

[racecar]

I think its a bluff,that type of check would mean nothing,other than its some type of over the phone check thing they made to scare you in to settling with them. Can you object to their request for 120 days.Can you file no-evidence motion for summary judgment so that justice may be done.Statements from when the account was opened until Feb-March 2011 are nothing more then statements.Study up and get your case dismissed.You can do it many others have.



https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...o6PB-gJQtZLIkg

In considering a no-evidence motion for summary
judgment, the evidence is reviewed in a light most
favorable to the non-movant, disregarding all contrary
evidence and inferences. Id. at 751. A no-evidence
summary judgment is appropriate when:

(a) there is a complete absence of evidence of a
vital fact;
(b) the court is barred by rules of law or of
evidence from giving weight to the only
evidence offered to prove a vital fact;
(c) the evidence offered to prove a vital fact is
no more than a mere scintilla; or
(d) the evidence conclusively establishes the
opposite of the vital fact.

Id. As the party with the burden at trial, the non-
movant has the burden of providing evidence sufficient
to create a material fact on issue challenged by the
motion. Marsaglia v. University of Texas, El Paso, 22
S.W.3d 1, (Tex. App.—El Paso 1999, pet. denied). A
no-evidence summary judgment motion should not be
granted if the non-movant submits more than a scintilla
of probative evidence to raise a genuine issue of
material fact as to the element challenged. King
Ranch, Inc., 118 S.W.3d at 751.
The non-movant satisfies its burden if it submits
probative evidence that rises to a level that would
allow reasonable and fair-minded people to differ in
their conclusion. Id. The burden is not met if the
evidence is so weak that it creates no more than “mere
surmise or suspicion” of a fact. Id.

[elbeto77]

Originally Posted by racecar

I think its a bluff,that type of check would mean nothing,other than its some type of over the phone check thing they made to scare you in to settling with them. Can you object to their request for 120 days.Can you file no-evidence motion for summary judgment so that justice may be done.Statements from when the account was opened until Feb-March 2011 are nothing more then statements.Study up and get your case dismissed.You can do it many others have.



https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...o6PB-gJQtZLIkg

In considering a no-evidence motion for summary
judgment, the evidence is reviewed in a light most
favorable to the non-movant, disregarding all contrary
evidence and inferences. Id. at 751. A no-evidence
summary judgment is appropriate when:

(a) there is a complete absence of evidence of a
vital fact;
(b) the court is barred by rules of law or of
evidence from giving weight to the only
evidence offered to prove a vital fact;
(c) the evidence offered to prove a vital fact is
no more than a mere scintilla; or
(d) the evidence conclusively establishes the
opposite of the vital fact.

Id. As the party with the burden at trial, the non-
movant has the burden of providing evidence sufficient
to create a material fact on issue challenged by the
motion. Marsaglia v. University of Texas, El Paso, 22
S.W.3d 1, (Tex. App.—El Paso 1999, pet. denied). A
no-evidence summary judgment motion should not be
granted if the non-movant submits more than a scintilla
of probative evidence to raise a genuine issue of
material fact as to the element challenged. King
Ranch, Inc., 118 S.W.3d at 751.
The non-movant satisfies its burden if it submits
probative evidence that rises to a level that would
allow reasonable and fair-minded people to differ in
their conclusion. Id. The burden is not met if the
evidence is so weak that it creates no more than “mere
surmise or suspicion” of a fact. Id.

It just seems fishy to me that they are pleading for a motion to extended the court date out 120 days and that they are preparing documents for a summary judgment. I would think that they would have their ducks in a row and proceed with the date they have scheduled.

Can you object to their request for 120 days? I will check with the courts or do research, since this is all new to me. If anyone out there knows please feel free to chime in

Can you file no-evidence motion for summary judgment so that justice may be done. I will also look into this as well.

Thanks for the link!

[racecar]

A no-evidence summary judgment motion under Rule 166a(i) is essentially a motion for a
pretrial directed verdict; it requires the nonmoving party to present evidence raising a genuine
issue of material fact supporting each element contested in the motion. Tex. R. Civ. P. 166a(i);
Mack Trucks, Inc. v. Tamez, 206 S.W.3d 572, 581-82 (Tex. 2006).

STANDARD OF REVIEW ON APPEAL. When reviewing a no-evidence summary judgment,
we “review the evidence presented by the motion and response in the light most favorable to the
party against whom the summary judgment was rendered, crediting evidence favorable to that
party if reasonable jurors could, and disregarding contrary evidence unless reasonable jurors
could not.” Mack Trucks, 206 S.W.3d at 582 (citing City of Keller v. Wilson, 168 S.W.3d 802,
827 (Tex. 2005); Johnson v. Brewer & Pritchard, P.C., 73 S.W.3d 193, 208 (Tex. 2002)).

MUST STATE ON WHICH ELEMENT THERE IS NO EVIDENCE. It is well settled that a trial
court cannot grant a summary judgment motion on grounds not presented in the motion. Brewer
& Pritchard, P.C., 73 S.W.3d at 204; Science Spectrum, Inc. v. Martinez, 941 S.W.2d 910, 912
(Tex. 1997). Our no-evidence summary judgment rule similarly requires that the moving party
identify the grounds for the motion:
After adequate time for discovery, a party without presenting summary judgment evidence may
move for summary judgment on the ground that there is no evidence of one or more essential
elements of a claim or defense on which an adverse party would have the burden of proof at trial.

The motion must state the elements as to which there is no evidence. The court must
grant the motion unless the respondent produces summary judgment evidence raising a
genuine issue of material fact. Tex. R. Civ. P. 166a(i). We have further explained that “[t]he
motion must be specific in challenging the evidentiary support for an element of a claim or
defense; paragraph (i) does not authorize conclusory motions or general no-evidence
challenges to an opponent’s case.” Id. at Comment–1997.

RATIONALE FOR REQUIREMENT THAT GROUND / ELEMENT BE STATED.
The underlying purpose of this requirement “is to provide the opposing party with adequate
information for opposing the motion, and to define the issues for the purpose of summary
judgment.” Westchester Fire Ins. Co. v. Alvarez, 576 S.W.2d 771, 772 (Tex. 1978). We have
analogized this purpose to that of the “fair notice” pleading requirements of Rules 45(b) and
47(a). Id. at 772-73; see also Tex. R. Civ. P. 45(b) (requiring a party’s pleadings to give “fair
notice” to the opponent); Tex. R. Civ. P. 47(a) (requiring a plaintiff’s pleadings to give “fair
notice of the claim involved”).

[racecar]

http://hop-law.com/legal-briefs/defe...-7-eleven-inc/

Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion

[elbeto77]

Originally Posted by racecar

http://hop-law.com/legal-briefs/defe...-7-eleven-inc/

Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion

They simply stated that they needed more time to get the documents ready for a summary judgment. So i don't understand what the move and doesn't the State of Texas requires that you state why you are needing to

1. General Requirements

A motion for summary judgment must rest on the grounds expressly
presented in the motion.11 Unless a claim or affirmative defense is
specifically addressed in the motion for summary judgment, a court cannot
grant summary judgment on it.12 The motion must state, with specificity,
the grounds upon which the movant is relying.13 The rationale for this
requirement is to force the movant to define the issues and give the
nonmovant adequate notice for opposing the motion.

[elbeto77]

Originally Posted by BV80

If you planned on settling, a continuance would give you time to save up some money before a summary judgment hearing.

Settling

[elbeto77]

I haven t been able to find anything whether i can file a motion to ask the judge to grant the plaintiff less than 120 days and if i should file a motion to have the judge dismiss, since they filed last year in August. I would think that if you bring suite on someone you should have all paper work ready before the trial. Any help would be appreciated.

[racecar]

http://www.martindale.com/members/Ar...asr-828238.pdf

[elbeto77]

Originally Posted by racecar

http://www.martindale.com/members/Ar...asr-828238.pdf

Thanks