Zero Liability

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Zero Liability

  • Rank

Profile Fields

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

310 profile views
  1. Late to the party, but... for what it's worth: You really need to have cited to 12-1502 in the MTC or risk having it fall on deaf ears. Trying to invoke statute by "new argument" in a Reply memorandum could technically give the judge a reason to disregard that portion of a Reply on the basis of ARCP 7.1(a). Basically a Response argues in oppositon to a motion. The moving party may (but is not required to) Reply to rebut anything in your Response or object to evidence submitted with the Response... but the movant must limit Reply argument to the matters raised in Response. New argumen
  2. Sounds like you're pretty deep down the rabbit hole already. Your affirmative defenses are not counterclaims, and if you attempted to present them as counterclaims then that's probably why they've been denied. Counterclaims are claims you're bringing against them with respect to the matter on which they are suing you. Those would likely be something akin to "I paid these original creditor and will present receipts to prove it; not only that, but I OVERPAID those people and these people now OWE ME some money if they claim to own this account now." There are other possibilities for counterc
  3. I'm relatively new to all this but wanted to offer a thought... perhaps someone else could speak to it with more certainty. EDIT: I believe I'm echoing BV80 on this, but I could be wrong. So long as somewhere in writing it is stipulated that if payment doesn't clear that the satisfaction is void... would that not cover you? I'm not certain that using "fail safe" language like that is appropriate or would hold - but it makes decent sense. Same with other actions they are required to take in the agreement if you would specify them that way... no? If x, y, and z do not happen by such and such dat
  4. Just to preface: I've lurked here for a short while working on my own cases and am by no means the most knowledgeable or experienced here. So, take what I offer with that in mind. I didn't catch what county OP is in on the device I'm using at present; if it happens to be Maricopa County, however, I wanted to add my two cents as to filing and fees. The Justice Court website (again, Maricopa County) version of the fee schedule is overly simplified. And apparently, by my own experience, applying something so basic as rules about which fees are required to file documents appears to be a challenge
  5. I'm hoping one of the more experienced folks here can speak to this, then. It was my (probably underinformed) impression that if one wants attorney fees as provided under a contract that one must plead that fact. Perhaps that can be done orally, although at a settlement meeting, does that count for anything as opposed to open court? In the context of a settlement conference, my thinking is that merely mentioning the notion of fees is more a negotiation tactic... as things brought up in settlement negotiations apparently (again, if I have this correct) can't be used at trial. At very least, t
  6. I was reading through, and rarely have a lot to say as I'm a relative newcomer. However, one thing that seems to be missing in the BHLM complaints I have seen is a specific demand for attorney fees. Does anyone else find this unusual? Don't they have to demand them from the outset? I suppose they could always amend - but why would this not be boilerplate so they can grab them without question on default without the need for additional paperwork? Or are they taking a percentage on these cases? There currently appears to be only one person in their Phoenix office with over 5 years experience...
  7. Since the topic of MTC Arbitration here parallels an issue I am having... and potentially the OPs issue... let me pose this question: Suppose the Complaint does not allege in any way when the alleged account was opened/created? In my case, no agreement attached and no way to determine what generic agreement online would apply without a date of agreement even vaguely referenced. Can one move to compel arbitration if one does not know of a particular set of terms and conditions that might apply to their allegations? Could one rightfully wait until disclosure/discovery to discover the agreement t
  8. And one more thing I'm looking to figure out in the short-term to help me look into things more completely. In their reply to my MTD for failure to state a claim they are saying they pleaded a Breach of Contract claim. I keep seeing the explanations of "stated" and "open" accounts. Am I correct in assuming they can "flip-flop" on this and resort to an "alternate theory" such as one of those - assuming that's what they are called, correction welcome.
  9. @Harry Seaward So, from the Rule 121 list I would do something like this? (1) A list of trial witnesses: Defendant reserves the right to call any witness or all witnesses disclosed by Plaintiff. Defendant has no witnesses to disclose at this time. Defendant reserves the right to amend this disclosure with a list of witnesses subject to ongoing discovery. (2) A list of other people with knowledge: The Defendant lacks knowledge of any other person(s) with knowledge in this matter at the time. Defendant reserves the right to amend this disclosure with a list of other people with knowledg