string

Members
  • Content Count

    318
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    20

string last won the day on December 11 2014

string had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

242 Excellent

About string

  • Rank
    Impressive 100+ postings

Profile Fields

  • Location
    California

Recent Profile Visitors

680 profile views
  1. I too would make sure notice requirements are complied with. The requirements for written depo are pretty much the same as for oral (except they have to give you info about the depo officer and don't have to specify where and when the depo will take place). Also, you have 30 days to submit cross questions (I'd be working on those now, if I were you). Sounds like this is your case, right here. Good luck.
  2. So ... there's filing (what you "file" with the court); and "serving" (what you "serve" the other side with). Everything you "file" also gets "served," but not everything you "serve" gets "filed" (e.g., discovery requests). Make sense? Therefore, whether you "serve," or "file," you need a POS (b/c you "serve" both to the other side). But the POS doesn't actually get "filed" unless/until you're filing the underlying document with the court. So always POS, but never send it to the court unless you're also sending the doc referenced to the court. (Let me know if I've only confused things further, and I'll make the effort to completely clarify.) AFAIK, CMRRR only happens if you visit the clerk at the post office. You can put whatever you want in the same envelope, with individual POS's or one POS for all. Just make sure that you've accounted for every doc served via a POS.
  3. If this is true and the time for responding has passed, you need to file an objection. Here's an example i used (at 'MIL to preclude everything'): http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/319956-sued-by-cach-llc-in-ca-update-i-win-its-over/?p=1295072 - just replace "MIL" with "Objection" and otherwise tailor to your case.
  4. All things considered, you're pretty lucky. I would: vehemently object to the ccp 98 declaration; the witness address is not within 150 miles of court, and not within CA. Therefore, you were unable to effectively subpoena the witness (CA court doesn't have jurisdiction over a non-resident), and would be deprived of your rights under the code if the declaration is admitted. File a written objection asap and/or be prepared to make the argument in court. Without admission of the ccp98 declaration, they probably will not be able to prove standing. If they served unanswered requests for admissions, and didn't file for them to be deemed admitted, you dodged a major one. Good luck!!!
  5. This important; you will not likely have a court reporter unless you bring your own. If you need to appeal, your objections will have to be on record and that's much easier to assure if you've filed written objections and a trial brief. Download documents filed by others and edit them to your case - no need to reinvent.
  6. Norwalk deadline for MILs and trial briefs is generally day of trial, but it's advisable to get them in a few days in advance to give the judge time to read everything over. That said, you should call the department to verify.
  7. My guess: trying to save a few bucks, and laziness. Saves $ by re-using it instead of requesting (and paying for) another one; and they probably would have omitted the second page if anyone had taken the time to proof what they were sending you. As always, use it against them.
  8. I had the same situation; failure to respond to ccp96 was fatal to jdb's case, but i did file a trial brief - i think it mostly addressed the documents attached to ccp98. It's here if you'd like to take a look: http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/319956-sued-by-cach-llc-in-ca-update-i-win-its-over/?p=1295072
  9. Might try sending via overnight delivery. Did they respond at all to BOP? The good news is that you're right on track for the astmedic method. Read his thread and download seadragon's timeline.
  10. I would (and did) file an Objection to the admission of any evidence or witnesses at trial.
  11. Really? They want expert witness info? As in ccp2034.210, et. seq? I haven't seen this here before, but I think you'll have to provide a statement by the date in the demand: <<2034.260. (a) All parties who have appeared in the action shall exchange information concerning expert witnesses in writing on or before the date of exchange specified in the demand. The exchange of information may occur at a meeting of the attorneys for the parties involved or by a mailing on or before the date of exchange. ( b ) The exchange of expert witness information shall include either of the following: (1) A list setting forth the name and address of any person whose expert opinion that party expects to offer in evidence at the trial. (2) A statement that the party does not presently intend to offer the testimony of any expert witness.>> Curious about the contents of their "expert information" ....