MK_Dons

Members
  • Content Count

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About MK_Dons

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Minnesota

Recent Profile Visitors

134 profile views
  1. UPDATE Had the preliminary arbitration meeting by phone and Midland is pushing for resolution by dispositive motion. I am preparing my reply to its letter stating my case that in the interest of protection of the process, we need to have an in-person hearing. Anyone have experience with opposing resolution by dispositive motion? Thanks!
  2. Update 5/31/2018 AAA granted the extension and Midland sent its Answer and Counterclaim on deadline day. I've attached a redacted copy of the document for reference. Basically, Midland is rehashing the claims it made in court, and is still pushing that I had the names in the wrong order on the original arbitration form. It is also looking to get relief from its court fees and costs associated with the arbitration case -- in addition to the amount it claims I owe. I am in the early stages of looking at my options. As far as I can see, I have 14 days to answer the counterclaim. Any advice on next steps? The amount of money spent by Midland has to be more than the amount they claim I owe at this point. I'd assume they are posturing and trying to compel me to settle before the arbitrator is picked. Thanks in advance for any insight. I fully intend to keep paying this forward! RedactedCleanedMidland_AAA.AnswerCC.Respondent.pdf
  3. ***UPDATE*** Wanted to post an update for everyone in case it helps your case -- and ask a few more questions. The court granted my motion to compel arbitration, and stayed the summary judgement. The court date was canceled and the order was given to arbitrate. That was on March 8, 2018. I had already started arbitration proceedings as I originally sent Midland my notice to elect arbitration in February. AAA sent its correspondence in late April and set a deadline of May 10 for Midland to answer. Midland asked for dismissal on May 8, stating that I did not file properly because the court did not issue an order regarding my motion to compel and that Midland had a motion for summary judgement filed against me. In addition, they "respectfully" asked for an extension to formally answer AAA and pay. I promptly informed AAA that the court did indeed rule in my favor and stayed the summary judgement and ordered Midland into arbitration. Today, well past the May 10 deadline, Midland informed AAA that, even though the court issued the order on March 8, and properly served both parties (including Midland's lead counsel), it was not aware of the court order until it was "served" on May 9. In addition, they are asking for an extension to May 28 because of Midland not being "served" until May 9, and the fact that in the AAA form's case caption, I listed Midland funding first instead of my name. Even though in the rest of the paperwork its clearly listed that I am the consumer and Midland the business. Any advice? Is there a proper way to inform the court of the shenanigans going on and establishing a paper trail of falsehoods? What should my next correspondence with AAA state? I understand no one has been sworn, yet... but it's pretty bold to assert a district court did not serve a multi-million dollar law firm properly. Thanks in Advance.
  4. Well, the judge's order came down today. He ruled on both the MSJ and the MTC. It went in my favor. He ordered both sides into arbitration with AAA, and everything is stayed until the results of the arbitration. I know this is not the end, but I feel much better now. How long should I wait before sending them a settlement letter asking for everything to be expunged, dismiss with prejudice and no 1099C? Anything else I need to be aware of? I already filed with AAA and paid my fee as well. Just wanted to sincerely give you thanks. My family will be in a much better position for overall success because of the help you all so graciously offer each day.
  5. Well the court heard both the Motion for Summary Judgement and the MTC. Plaintiff did finally file a memorandum in opposition to my MTC. It wasn't served to me properly and it wasn't in time, but I was ready to defend letting the judge know the plaintiff was not following Minnesota statutes, so they presented orally. Plaintiff argued I was not acting responsibly because I waited too long. The contract clearly states both parties can elect at any time, even if litigation is in process. They also said they would be unduly prejudiced as they would have to pay for arbitration fees, in addition to the court fees they have paid so far. I am going to file my response to their memo today and note that I was not properly served. They also said they were unaware of the first hearing they skipped, even though they were properly served and all paperwork was in order. I still asked the court to compel to arbitration and stay the summary judgement until the conclusion of arbitration. So the judge will rule on my MTC, and the summary judgement. Now I wait for for his written ruling. I will have an appeal ready to go. I would say the judge was reasonable to both sides, but by the rule of law, the plaintiff has been very sloppy.
  6. Thanks, everyone. Midland did not file any opposition. It's almost like they are assuming I just won't show up and are not paying attention to the case. I will keep this on the top of my talking points. I did send a completed stipulation to the lead attorney and offered to file it. Still haven't heard anything.
  7. Thanks for that advice. I am going to propose a stipulation with Midland's attorneys in granting me leave to file my opposition after the deadline has passed. That way there is at least a record of me trying to say I made an error, but I'd still like to respond. I will be surprised if they agree to it, but we will see.
  8. I know it is not ideal, but Minnesota law generally favors leniency when it comes to timely filings. I will argue for resolution on the merits of the case. And will file my written opposition tomorrow via e-serve, after combing through their evidence. This may help: And Howard v. Frondell
  9. Thanks for the reply. Agreed, but it was clear the judge was not going to grant a default judgement since there already was another hearing date scheduled. That was an easy way to give them the benefit of the doubt and "let them slide". In MN, a response to a motion for summary judgement needs to be filed nine days before the hearing -- the hearing is in less than nine days. So the MTC will be item one on the agenda. Assuming it is denied, my assumption is I will have to layout my disputed issues of material fact at the hearing itself, correct? I've read multiple arguments against contracts having no signature, not establishing the entire debt record, etc. Any advice is certainly appreciated.
  10. First off, thank you to everyone who provides info on this forum. I never would have gotten to where I am with my defense against Midland Funding. I'm being sued by Midland Funding in MN civil court. They filed a motion for summary judgment and the hearing is next week. I did not file anything during discovery and instead elected to elect arbitration with AAA (alleged contract with Citibank NA states AAA is only option). At the same time I filed a motion to dismiss/compel arbitration. Anyway, the firm representing Midland was served properly and with enough notice and the motion hearing was this morning. No one from the firm showed up. The judge was not too happy obviously, and said that the date originally for the summary judgement next week will now be used for my motion, she will discuss what happened with the judge scheduled for that hearing and also mentioned the possibility of a default judgement in my favor due to no one showing up. So, they are in trouble. My question is what should I do to keep the boot on the throat, so to speak. I believe I have some momentum in my favor, I want to be able to take full advantage. At a minimum, they wasted my time and the court's time -- how do I hold them accountable and demonstrate to the court I respect the court's time, unlike the firm suing me. Thanks in advance.