Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Flagstaff, AZ

pac58's Achievements

Advanced Member

Advanced Member (3/6)



  1. We were able to come to a settlement with a payment plan that I can afford. Having the judge there at the PTC helped because I was unable to get them to work with me on my own. I am ok with settling and did not push the MTC because the terms were what I wanted, to begin with.
  2. I only just found this comparable case, does it add anything to my plans/oral arguments or is it saying the same things? IE will it help to convince the judge that my MTC needs to be approved? http://www.leagle.com/decision/In FDCO 20131122892/KRAUSE v. BARCLAYS BANK DELAWARE#
  3. Thank you for the quick response, this really helps put me into the right mindset.
  4. @Harry Seaward On Friday I received a package in the mail from Bursey. It is a disclosure statement with: a factual basis of claim, legal theory, a trial witness, damages, and trial exhibits. 1) factual basis of claim: "Defendant entered into an agreement with plaintiff's predecessor in interest, barclay's bank delaware barclaycard with itunes reward, on July 8, 2009. Said account was acquired by plaintiff. Subsequently, defentant(s) defaulted on their account. The present amount owed under the terms, after all setoffs, is $3,560.84. Plaintiff is the owner of that credit account. " ---My first question is to ask why they make it sound like I defaulted after they acquired the account. They bought the debt on August 28, 2015. is this some sort of perjury, alluding to a default after they took ownership when their own records show they purchased the debt 3 years after default? 2) Legal Theory: "The acts and omissions of Defendant(s) constitute a breach of contract. Plaintiff has been damaged thereby. Plaintiff's cause of action arises out of contract." ---This is probably naive, but, does midland get to claim that I had a contract with them just because they bought the debt? IE they are not the original owner. 3) trial witness: (a) custodian of records, emily walker, mycah struck, paula fruth, josh knebel, or jennifer niro, c/o bursey & associates, address, etc.; (b) they lsited me as a trial witness ---My question is who are these people listed in (a) and what is it they are giving testimony of? Shouldn't I be given some indication? 4) Trial exhibits: "(1) cardmember agreement, (2) affidavit of bryan jones, dated 5/23/17, with attachments: bill f sale; barclay's bank statements. --the cardmember agreement attached is the Juniper agreement. they shrunk it down to the point that is is illegible, except for the title of the agreement. It is literally illegible. --also attached is the affidavit of bryan jones, who makes the following points: 1) he is employed as a legal specialist with access to midland files. he is competent, over 18, etc. 2) midland keeps great records, etc. 3) defendant owes a balance 4) date account opened, date of last payment, date of account being charged off 5) attached is a bill of sale between barclays and midland and also copies of all billing statements ----Nowhere in here does he reference the name of the cardmember agreement, he just says "Barclay's Bank Delaware" ---none of the billing statements attached have the word juniper on them, anywhere. Overall, I need to know if this stuff is related to the pre-trial conference, which is also my oral arguements for motion tocompel, or if this is for the actual trial (if MTC is denied and appeal is denied). Do I need to respond to this disclosure statement? If so, are my concerns valid IE the juniper agreement isn't applicable, etc. My PTC/oral arguments for MTC date is tomorrow, Monday the 12th at 4pm. I plan to state: "Plaintiff has not shown where the "juniper" agreement came from." "I deny that I owe anything and I deny that plaintiff has standing to sue on this alleged debt." "I object to this court's jurisdiction as there is a private arbitration clause and I have a pending motion before this court regarding the improper jurisdiction" "Plaintiff is attempting to lump a group of courts together and claim they are all "small claims""
  5. Just to update: Our original pre-trial conference was today however because of my MTC it was moved back by 10 days. Plaintiff did not file a motion; the reason it looks like they did is that their opposition to my MTC was filed/labeled as a motion. Oral arguments and pre-trial conference are both set for June 12th at 4 pm. If the judge denies my MTC should I come prepared with a motion to stay a court date so that I can appeal? Do I need to have an appeal ready to submit right then?
  6. @Harry Seaward Got a letter from the court in the mail today: Notice: oral argument on motion to compel arbitration (Date/time.) "This matter will not be continued unless a motion to continue or stipulation to continue is filed with the court, based upon good cause, and granted by the court prior to the hearing date." Does this just mean that it won't be pushed back on the calendar unless a motion to continue is filed/approved before the set date? BTW I still have not received anything about Plaintiff's motion.
  7. When submitting my response at the court the clerk informed me that a date was already set and that Plaintiff had filed their own motion. The clerk wouldn't tell me what that motion is and said that it would come in the mail. I submitted my response to Plaintiff's opposition to my MTC and got it on the record, however, I'm frustrated that Plaintiff's opposition to my MTC took so long to reach me, effectively disabling me from making the most effective response possible. I looked my case up online but I don't see the second motion anywhere.
  8. I updated my response to include the fact that I got their response in the mail on May 17th. They dated their response May 11th and I just wanted to be sure that there won't be controversy over my responding more than 5 days later.
  9. Thank you, I will submit my response ASAP. I'll keep the rest in mind for court, if my MTC is denied, so that I can hit it harder. I assume that if my MTC is approved I won't go to court at all? Plaintiff will just ask me to drop the arbitration if they drop the suit?
  10. @Harry Seaward In Coconino County, we have small claims court and we have civil court that both fall under the greater "Justice Court." The difference is that small claims allow for a maximum of $3,500 whereas civil allows for a maximum of $10,000. Plaintiff is using the language from the contract of "small claims" as the common denominator between Delaware and Arizona. I'm being sued in Civil court, but they are using the "small claims" rules of the contract to keep this from going to arbitration. Something about this bothers me. I need to go have lunch and get away for a bit, I got ahead of myself. Small claims and civil both fall under civil court. http://www.coconino.az.gov/510/Flagstaff-Justice-Court
  11. I have been reading "small claims" items online because of the language in the contract but I'm being sued in civil court which has different rules.
  12. @Harry Seaward Attached is my full response to Plaintiff's opposition of MTC. Formal Response without identifiers.pdf
  13. I found a typo in the Plaintiff's response. At the end of their response, they state "Plaintiff requests that the Court deny Defendant's motion to dismiss" (emphasis mine).
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.