• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

21 Excellent

About xmasbaby420

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

171 profile views
  1. @RyanEX - I've been curious as to why they just didn't send the witness to testify. It makes complete sense that those scumbags would use the ccp98 as their 1st level of intimidation and then successful service of the witness as the 2nd level of trying to intimidate. You are probably so right in thinking that and I completely agree! I wonder if one of these days, they'll actually start to send the subpoenaed witnesses to testify. That might not be good for defendants who get stuck w/ pro plaintiff judges. Like in my case, I think they would have had a chance if they just sent their witness. And for an 8k case, I would think it would've been worth it for them. Go figure.
  2. Hi mimi. Just thought I'd chime in because your case appears to be very similar to mine. All the facts are exactly the same except for the amount being sued...mine was a little higher. The bank, plaintiff, cause of action and the fact that no discovery was sent on either side... all same. So this is what happened in my case. I was sued by PRA. I filed general denial with the same affirmative defenses as you. No discovery or communication on either side throughout. On the 45th day before trial, I sent my ccp96 via cmrrr. On the 30th day before trial, I received from pra, their ccp98 declaration, notice to attend trial, witness list, exhibit list, their ccp96 request, memo of costs and their proposed judgment. On the 20th day before trial, I subpoenaed pra's ccp98 declarant (mark lozano, he works for pra in san diego and i think he's assigned to the us bank cases). I did use the San Diego Sheriff to serve the subpoena because I had a fee waiver. If you don't have a fee wavier, you will have to hire a process server to do this. PRA's declarant was served and the sheriff sent me the proof of service. At this point I did freak out a little because as others were having a hard time serving these subpoenas, I had no problem getting him served. Throughout all this, I was preparing my trial brief and objection to ccp98. And once I got word that the ccp98 declarant was served, I nixed my objection to ccp98 and had to prepare to cross-examine him at trial. Then about 5 days before trial, i received a request for dismissal from pra. I do believe I got somewhat lucky in that pra, for some reason, didn't want to send their witness to testify. Hopefully the same will happen for you. I don't know why they didn't want to send their declarant. Maybe they expect to win only by default or with a ccp98 declaration...and if you actually subpoena their witness, they don't want to send them. Or it definitely could've been complete luck, that maybe their witness just wasn't available for trial on that specific date. So i think you can hope for the best but be prepared for anything and everything. I didn't initally send a bop because I was advised that a bop was not appropriate for an account stated only cause of action. And I wouldn't send any discovery at this point only because of the timing. There probably won't be enough time to enforce their responses, if necessary. (ie, motion to compel) And anyway, you should get what you need (or what you would've received through discovery) from their response to your ccp96 request. My advice would be to make sure to follow all rules and procedures. Send your ccp96 between 30-45 days before trial. And once they send you their ccp98 declaration (pra must serve this at least 30 days prior to trial), make sure to subpoena the declarant 20 days before trial. And then prepare, prepare, prepare! Everything you need to prepare can be found here on the forums...you just may need to tweak the documents, notes, questions a little to fit your case. And if there's something you can't find or don't know, just ask. The members here are some of the nicest, most helpful, and encouraging people I've had the pleasure of chatting with. And I'm not too familiar with going through arbitration. But I do remember reading somewhere on this forum that in california, its better to litigate and let the court decide rather than go through arbitration, as we've had many successful pro per defendants here, including me! =)
  3. @calawyer Thank you!!! I appreciate you so much for helping me and so many others, just because. And there's no way I would have been able to or even had the courage to fight these JDB's without you and the support of others on this site. Thank you for taking the time.
  4. @RyanEX i agree its not that big of a deal getting it dismissed w/o prejudice, but like you said i did kinda want to stick it to them for making me go through all this stress. And i really hope you're right and they don't come after me again, but if they do, at least i'll know what to do thanks to you and all the other helpful members on this site! I wish i had a current ccp book though so i could check for sure if that section 581.5 is in there. It'd be good to confirm for other members and future reference. Thanks for the tip on costs. I did have a fee waiver so my only costs were mainly copying, mailing and gas, which I'm not sure are recoverable. In any event, it's just not worth the trouble of having to deal with the court and jdb any further. I'm just very happy w/ the fact that everything got dismissed.
  5. Thank you @Anon Amos. Couldn't have done it w/o your help and advice. Thank you so so much! @credit2011 A lot of credit goes to you too my friend! Thank you for your tips and support....it really meant a lot!!! @sadinca Thanks! I was so stressed about having 2 trials in a row but thank goodness both were dismissed w/o having to actually try the case. Being there for 2 days, I didn't see even 1 trial go forward. Some settled right before trial, and in a couple of cases, the defendant didn't show up, so they entered the ccp98 declaration and jdb won judgment. All they're looking for is an easy judgment. If defendant puts up a fight and does everything timely and by the rules, these jdb's back down. I'm so confused as to why the judge wasn't able to find ccp581.5 in his ccp book. After he couldn't find it, he had his clerk look for it and she couldn't find it either. They found ccp 581 and all its subsections but couldn't find 581.5 specifically at all. I showed him exactly what you wrote above (without the website info) but because he couldn't find it himself in the book, he didn't believe me.
  6. My 2nd case was dismissed too!!! Before the judge came in, I saw PRA's rent-a-lawyer from yesterday try and settle with another girl who was also there for trial. After that, when she didn't try and settle w/ me, I had an idea that she might dismiss. Then she started chatting with another rent-a-lawyer about my case and how she was going to dismiss since PRA didn't provide an address in their ccp98 declaration. So that's when I knew for sure and that I could relax instead of stressing about trial. Apparently, someone at PRA really messed up because she said there were a stack of these ccp98 declarations (with no address) that were sent out. So make sure you go through all the documents these JDB's send very carefully. So anyway, the judge comes in and I finally get called up. Rent -a-lawyer asks for dismissal w/o prejudice. I then ask the court for a dismissal w/ prejudice as I followed all rules and came prepared for trial. (per calawyer's tips) I also mentioned ccp581.5 re consumer debt and how the court has discretion to dismiss w/ prejudice. The judge could NOT find this ccp section in his book. He even asked his clerk to look and she couldn't find it either. I did have a printout from the internet of ccp581.5 and showed it to him but because he couldn't find the section in his book, he dismissed w/o prejudice. He was already in a bad mood today because of the prior hearings he had, so he seemed irritated at the fact that i found this ccp581.5 online. He said i should've gone to the law library and actually looked at the book. whatever dude.... just dismiss my case, is what i wanted to say. But I just said thank you and left w/ a dismissal w/o prejudice. Is ccp581.5 current? Maybe it was an old code from years prior? I have no idea but I did find it on this forum and online so I thought it was valid but homeboy couldn't find it in his book. I did fuss about it a little but when i saw him getting irritated, I thought forget it, said I'm sorry and that dismissal w/o prejudice was fine. At least it's all over for me for now. Thank you everyone for all the encouragement, support and help with my cases. I appreciate you all so much!!!
  7. @calawyer wow... thanks for that great tip! so glad to know that i could object to a live witness, in case that happens. just wondering though... they didn't comply w/ ccp98 by not providing an address for service. The point in getting an address is to subpoena her to show up at trial. So if she willingly shows up on her own, then wouldn't that make my objection invalid, since the end game was to get her to trial anyway?
  8. Thanks calawyer. I was thinking the same thing... that they might just send a witness. But for a case that's worth less than 2k? They couldn't even send one for 8k. I'll have to prepare for anything i guess since I can't figure out what their strategy might be. And is it of any importance that although they did list their ccp98 delcarant on their witness list, they did specifically say that she would be "testifying via written declaration"? I'm thinking this is probably a non-issue but thought I'd ask, just in case.
  9. Went to court this morning. Their rent-a-lawyer showed up and asked for dismissal w/o prejudice, so my 1st case has officially been dismissed. Thought they might try something sneaky but it was pretty straightforward. Since I was the 2nd to last case called, there was a lot of waiting but I didn't mind at all because it gave me a chance to observe other proceedings. Just so happy that $8k case is over for now. Now I just have 1 more trial tomorrow morning. I really thought they'd dismiss this one as well for the simple fact that they didn't comply with ccp98 in their declaration. Not sure what they're planning to do with this less than $2k case. I mean this case was pretty much identical to my 1st case, except for the OC, amount owed (considerably less than 1st case), and the fact that their oc affidavit did comply with ccp2015.5. Those were the only differences. But the mere fact that they did not provide ANY address where their ccp98 declarant could be served, even after my m&c letter, should've made them dismiss this one too! Hopefully the judge agrees with me tomorrow and i get this case dismissed as well. And I will be asking for dismissal w/ prejudice per ccp581(e) if it goes to trial. Thank you everyone for the support and encouragement. Now back to prepping!
  10. @Anon Amos @credit2011 I'm a little stressed out but hopefully all goes well and i'm definitely taking my copy of the request for dismissal. Thank you for the well wishes!
  11. Hi @credit2011! My 1st trial (the one where i received the dismissal) is/was set for tomorrow morning so I called the clerk today and finally got through after trying multiple times. She mentioned that although it shows that the trial is off calendar online, it is, in fact, still scheduled for tomorrow morning since JDB's request for dismissal was rejected. She said what most likely will happen is that JDB will send an appearance attorney to dismiss the case. So I told her I'd be there tomorrow morning as well so I can confirm for myself. And since I do have another trial set for Wednesday in my 2nd case, I'm preparing for both trials tonight...just in case. Hopefully, all goes well tomorrow and they just dismiss my 1st case without any problems. I'll keep you updated.
  12. In all the excitement of receiving a request for dismissal, I may have jumped the gun although I hope not. As I was just reviewing the dismissal request again for the hundredth time, I noticed that they dismissed w/o prejudice but they checked the "other" box and didn't specify what "other" was, instead of checking the "complaint" or "entire action" box. So I checked the court docket online again, and sure enough, their request for dismissal was rejected and sent back Friday for that exact reason. Now I'm wondering whether this was just an inadvertent mistake or are they being sneaky, trying to make me think they're dismissing, when in fact they're planning on going to trial. Or maybe they were just trying to dismiss the doe defendants? I know that is required with default, but I'm not aware of any such requirement pre trial. Also, I was sued for an account stated only in this case. So is there any other possibility for their request other than a full dismissal of the complaint? The court docket did show that the trial set for next Tuesday is off calendar. So is it safe to assume it was just an inadvertent error on their part and that the case will be dismissed?
  13. @sadinca LOL! Thanks!!! I feel SO relieved. 1 down 1 more to go!
  14. The JDB is PRA and they have their main office in Virginia (this is where I served all papers). But they apparently also have an office in SD where their attorneys and legal assistants aka "witnesses" work. That's the address they provided in their ccp98 and where I was able to serve the subpoena, using the SD Sheriff.
  15. @calawyer Thanks so much! It definitely wouldn't have been possible without amazing people like you and other helpful members on this great site. I was a little taken aback too by the fact that they dismissed my 1st case. I keep having to check the request for dismissal to make sure the case no is the right one! I am checking the court docket and it hasn't been entered yet. And if its not entered by the day before my trial, I will go to court on my trial date and make sure its entered!