Mopar2u

Members
  • Content Count

    23
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Mopar2u last won the day on June 26 2015

Mopar2u had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

28 Excellent

About Mopar2u

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    California

Recent Profile Visitors

438 profile views
  1. 20 days before the trial, fill out a Subpoena and have it stamped by the court clerk and then have the Sheriff Dept in the county where the address is listed attempt service. If the Sheriff in the county does not offer Subpoena service for Civil cases, then use a process server, or have a friend or relative attempt service. Be sure the server knows that service needs to be to the witness ONLY. It's the law. Have them attempt service 3 times on different days at different times. The witness will most likely not be there. If service is unsuccessful (which is very likely), then you can submit a Motion in Limine (or an Objection) just before trial to get the CCP 98 affidavit tossed out. With no witness they have no way to back up the docs they want to use for evidence. Without a witness to validate the docs they are hearsay. In addition to your Motion in Limine (or Objection), with case law from CACH v. Rodger and Target v. Rocha, you also need to file a Trial Brief before trial. Besides ASTMedic's guidelines, I also highly recommend the following two links that this forum lead me to, and which were particularly helpful to me. The first is a little old now, and was prior to Target v. Rocha and Cach v. Rogers, but contains actual filed court docs: http://www.plainsite...sandra-pacheco/ The second is the opinion from CACH v. Rodgers: http://www.courts.ca...ve/JAD14-11.PDF
  2. vondutch0481, Have you read ASTMedic's topic: How I beat Midland in California? If not, you really should. You would find that the next step is: "subpoena the witness that is listed on the CCP 98 at the closest address to the court. The reason for this is that 99% of the time that person isn't going to be available for personal service there. Notice I say personal service, per CCP 1987(a) the service of a subpoena must not be in care of. It has to be to the witness. DO NOT let the JDB try and side step this. (Edit 6/25/13 - there is now Cali case law about the CCP 98 service. Calawyer posted a thread about it on the forum. Be sure to include it in your brief and MIL because they will attempt to side step the fact that service was unsuccessful.) So per CCP 98 you can attempt to serve the witness 20 days before trial at the address given. They address they give must be 150 miles at MAX from the court. If it's further it doesn't follow the code. So fill out a Subpoena and have the Sheriff Dept in the county where the address is listed attempt service. If they don't then use a process server. Be sure the server knows that service needs to be to the witness ONLY. It's the law. If service is unsuccessful then you can submit a Motion in Limine just before trial to get the CCP 98 affidavit tossed out. With no witness they have no way to back up the docs they want to use for evidence. So next is the Motion in Limine and the Declaration in support of it. This will get the affidavit in lieu of testimony tossed and basically kill the case. No witness to back up the docs then the docs are hearsay and they can't prove they have standing. You also need to file a Trial Brief before trial. This presents your case to the judge. This will educate, him or her, as to why the JDB has no case. It has case law and references to codes of civil procedure in it."
  3. Listen, I am not a lawyer and I am not an expert, by any means, but I've been reading this forum for over a year, and now that I have also had some experience in these matters, I feel compelled to make a few observations about (what seems to me to be) the general strategy that JDBs (junk debt buyers) use, at least in California. 1st – The JDBs depend upon the fact that most defendants are not going to answer the complaint filed against them, which allows the JDB to receive a default judgement, winning the case, and allowing the JDB to then proceed to garnishing the defendant's wages. 2nd – If the defendant does file an answer, the JDB's attorney will attempt to trick the defendant into admitting guilt or into making an error when responding to discovery requests, which the attorney will use to win their case. 3rd – JDB's attorney sends the defendant a CCP 98 (affidavit in lieu of live testimony) that will allow JDB to enter as evidence any documents attached, unless the defendant subpoenas the witness listed in the CCP 98 and files an objection to the CCP 98. 4th – The JDB's attorney, almost always, knowingly lies on the CCP 98 when they say that the witness will be available for service for the 20-days prior to the court date at an address within 150 miles of the court. It has been my experience, and it seems to me that in most cases filed in California, that a defendant has an excellent chance of getting their case dismissed if they simply follow the guidelines provided by ASTMedic in his topic: How I beat Midland in California. In addition, since ASTMedic's case, there have been two excellent cases that provide even more case law to use against the JDBs' strategy: Target v. Rocha and CACH v. Rodgers. Besides ASTMedic's guidelines, I also highly recommend the following two links that this forum lead me to, and which were particularly helpful to me. The first is a little old now, and was prior to Target v. Rocha and Cach v. Rogers, but contains actual filed court docs: http://www.plainsite...sandra-pacheco/ The second is the opinion from CACH v. Rodgers: http://www.courts.ca...ve/JAD14-11.PDF
  4. Received a check today from Resurgence Legal Group in payment of my costs and pursuant to my Memorandum of Costs. Thanks again to this forum! I wouldn't have known to file an MC-010 if I hadn't read it here. Unfortunately, I can't collect anything for all of the time I spent on this case, but it feels good to at least get back my filing fee.
  5. Seadragon, I wish I could take the credit, however I have to admit that I don't remember whether I borrowed those words directly from something I found on this forum, or if it is a summary of several themes that I found here. I do know that it was not an original idea that I came up with. As a matter of fact, I would have been dead in the water if I had not found this forum. I cannot express how thankful I am for the information and guidance provided by the many committed and caring contributors. I also wanted to post a couple of links that this forum lead me to that I have not seen promoted recently. So, at the risk of being repetitive, I am going post them for the benefit of any newbies. The first one is pre Target v. Rocha and Cach v. rogers, but I believe is where ASTMedic borrowed from. The second is the opionion from CACH v. Rogers. http://www.plainsite.org/dockets/13y9cbsre/superior-court-of-california-county-of-san-mateo/midland-funding-v-sandra-pacheco/ and http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/archive/JAD14-11.PDF
  6. Be sure to send them your CCP 96 exactly 45 days before the trial. They will almost certainly send you a CCP 98 (affidavit in lieu of live testimony). Be sure to subpoena the witness that is listed on the CCP 98 at the closest address to the court exactly 20 days before trial. In most cases the witness isn't going to be available for personal service there. The address they give must be 150 miles at MAX from the court. If it's further it doesn't follow the code. Fill out a Subpoena and have it stamped by the court clerk and then have the Sheriff Dept in the county where the address is listed attempt service. If the Sheriff in the county does not offer Subpoena service for Civil cases, then use a process server, or have a friend or relative attempt service. Be sure the server knows that service needs to be to the witness ONLY. It's the law. Have them attempt service 3 times on different days at different times. The witness will most likely not be there. If service is unsuccessful (which is very likely), then you can submit a Motion in Limine just before trial to get the CCP 98 affidavit tossed out. With no witness they have no way to back up the docs they want to use for evidence. Without a witness to validate the docs they are hearsay. In addition to your Motion in Limine with case law from CACH v. Rodger, you also need to file a Trial Brief before trial.
  7. I just came across some helpful info from calawyer on post #306 of Portfolio Recovery / Hunt & Henriques regarding the use of a table of contents and table of authorities that I should have incorporated into my brief, since it was longer than 10 pages. "The rule is that they are required in any brief exceeding 10 pages. Here is the rule: http://www.courts.ca...nkid=rule3_1113 " 2015 California Rules of Court Rule 3.1113. Memorandum (f) Format of longer memorandum A memorandum that exceeds 10 pages must include a table of contents and a table of authorities. A memorandum that exceeds 15 pages must also include an opening summary of argument. (Subd (f) amended and lettered effective January 1, 2007; adopted as part of subd (d); subd (d) previously amended and relettered as subd (e) effective January 1, 2004)
  8. Response to Requests for Admission - Redacted.pdf Response to Request for Production of Docs - Redacted.pdf Response to Form Interrogatories - Redacted.pdf Objection to Declaration In Lieu - Redacted.pdf
  9. Let me start by thanking ASTMedic for laying out the guidelines in "How I beat Midland in California" that I basically copied and then updated with the Target v. Rocha info that Calawyer and several others pointed out. Because of what I learned here I was able to get Absolute Resolutions to dismiss their case the morning of the trial. If it had not been for this forum and the many helpful contributors I don't know what I would have done. Now it is my time to give back, so I am attaching redacted copies of the documents that I spent so much time researching and typing up. I hope this will help someone else as much I was helped by the other contributors to this forum.
  10. Filed my trial brief and objection with the court and sent copies to plaintiff's lawyer last Friday. My trial is this Monday. Today, I received an overnighted settlement letter from Plaintiff's lawyer. The title is SETTLEMENT COMMUNICATION PROTECTED UNDER EVIDENCE CODE 1152. They are offering to dismiss with prejudice, but I have to sign agreement that includes CONFIDENTIALITY, BEAR MY OWN LEGAL FEES, HOLD THEM HARMLESS, ETC., ETC. I am not sure I want to give in to all of these things and also I am concerned about the possibility that another JDB will just sue me next week for the same account. I would appreciate any advice or comments. Thank you everyone that has posted previously. I could have never made it to this point without the help from string, shellieh98, RyanEX, Anon Amos, and the previous threads from CalLawyer, Homeless, ASTMedic, and eyoung27. Running out of time, so please chime in if you have advice. And, thanks again everyone!