RubyTuesday

Members
  • Content Count

    130
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

RubyTuesday last won the day on April 14 2017

RubyTuesday had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

64 Excellent

2 Followers

About RubyTuesday

  • Rank
    Impressive 100+ postings

Profile Fields

  • Location
    California

Recent Profile Visitors

685 profile views
  1. So Glad to hear things are looking up for you qbert! Ditto on the awesomeness of this site and the amazing help that is offered. If one can do the work and put one foot in front of the other, dot the i's and cross the t's, you can get the support needed here to prevail. I too will always be thankful for finding the soft landing this forum has to offer.
  2. Congrats to you @sadinca!! You got one for you!!!! You deserve this win not only for yourself but for all the peeps you've helped on this board!! Very Very happy for you...have a fabulous stress-free holiday!!
  3. The response time for the Meet & Confer is whatever you ask for...I gave them 15 days. I just asked for further docs for REQUEST NUMBER 2: ALL DOCUMENTS relating to or constituting ANY assignment to plaintiff of the account referred to in the complaint. For me I figured that the 2 years of statements Winn sent me would probably satisfy the judge and I really didn't want them producing any more statements. (tho' technically they should provide statements from the inception of the account..but they never really do) So I just put my efforts toward the assignment issue which I knew they were unwilling or unable to provide. Take a look at my post #111 and tailor it to your case. Calawyer helped me tremendously and wrote a killer M & C that perhaps you can use, at least in part. One of the key points in the M & C is that because Winn/Cavalry has blanket objections to providing many docs, it's hard to know what documents you should be receiving. In other words they are not being clear about which docs they are not giving you and which specific objection they are using in order to not give you those docs..So you really don't even know which docs to ask for or which docs they are withholding. In my case the bill of sale they provided mentioned the forward flow agreement, but of course no forward flow agreement was forthcoming so we know at least that document is missing. Calawyer uses that point in the M & C. Let me know if you have any problems downloading the M & C. Also for some reason whenever I typed a b i got a smiley face....with sunglasses!
  4. Congrats @So Cal Gal! It's so great to see another win! It's a fine club this winner's circle ....awesome job!
  5. Congratulations @John4600!! Great job! So happy you got the better of 'em!!
  6. yes..this actually happened to me. The plaintiff forgot a signature and the clerk rejected the dismissal and mailed it back to plaintiff. Thankfully I wasn't on a time crunch w/trial around the corner. The whole thing took about a month. But if the trial was scheduled before the "corrected" dismissal was entered, I would've gone to court as if the dismissal hadn't even been attempted. Cause..you know...you can't trust 'em. (as Anon said)
  7. Whoa! Is it with or without prejudice? In my book it's great either way since odds are they're not coming back!! I believe a congrats is in order!!!! BIG Congratulations John 4600!!!
  8. I found a letter and comments that calawyer had written for another poster.....I just copied it and filed it but I don't know the original thread...it applies to your 5 witnesses per CCP 96..... CCP 96 requires Plaintiff to list 1) the names and addresses of 2) the witnesses it intends to call at trial. Plaintiff has done neither. Instead it has listed the names of 5 witnesses it may call at trial. Nor has it provided addresses. Instead it has given the address of plaintiff's counsel. Plaintiff's failure to identify the witnesses it intends to call at trial (or provide true addresses), has hampered Defendant's ability to prepare for trial. Please take notice that Defendant intends to object if Plaintiff attempts to call any of these witnesses at trial. calawyer comments: If it gets that far (I think they may be bluffing and don't really have any of these witnesses), they will tell the Judge it is so difficult to know who will be available to testify 30 days out from trial. Tough. This is a professional litigant who files tons of cases in this Court. It files against unrepresented individuals who are nonetheless required to follow the rules. It should not get a "pass" because it finds the rules inconvenient. If it has a problem with the law, it should employ its extensive lobbying powers to have the legislature change the law. It should not be permitted to rewrite the law itself as it sees fit. And you have been prejudiced. These "legal specialists" are simply paid testifiers. Trial testimony may be found to impeach them. But you can't search for the testimony of 5 possible witnesses. That is why the legislature requires plaintiff to identify the witness it intends to call at trial.
  9. @sadinca Unfortunately I'm pretty useless at this stage of the game...I do have a M & C but it's regarding the lack of a full response to my discovery. I'll look around at other threads tho. @John4600 Wishing the best outcome for you!! We're all on the same team..Good Luck.
  10. Thank you @debtzapper. I know the first steps well enough but after that I leave it to the experts!
  11. I received for my RFPD's, exactly what you received for your Meet & Confer for your BOP. (plus the 2 years of statements and generic customer agreement that they had already sent me for my BOP) I don't believe you would want to press for the Forward Flow Agreement in your MTC for your Bill of Particulars. That would be something you would address in a MTC for your RFPD requests, I believe. Winn sent me 2 years of statements and a generic customer agreement for my BOP. I could have pushed for ALL the statements in a MTC for the BOP, I chose not to. My time was limited and I thought I would pursue the RFPD Motion to Compel instead. If they had sent only one or a few statements I would have pursued the MTC for the BOP route. In your case I think you said they sent you 1 year's worth. If you have the time (and the money..there is a filing fee for motions..you'll have to check your court for the exact fees) it's a good message to JDB's and a great way to get experience dealing with the court. Even if you don't win that motion, you have made Winn law group work, and spend precious time and money. You could move on to RFPD's and go through the same thing...with a Meet & Confer and then when they don't send you what you asked for, file a Motion to Compel for those docs...which would most definitely include the Forward Flow agreement Shellie mentioned. Hopefully the Cali super crew will chime in with their ideas and opinions!
  12. Echo what Shellie and Anon said. I would also add you may not want to deliver empty threats. If you "threatened" to Motion to Compel in your Meet & Confer letter, that might be another good reason to follow through with that, particularly if they don't respond at all. For now, see what actually comes your way in response to the M & C....
  13. Just saw this.....Big Congratulations! " we are the champions...my friend"......Very happy for you! That's 4 just this week...