ZBoy

Members
  • Content Count

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ZBoy

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Wisconsin
  1. Any insight on argument that Midland Funding has engaged in Robosigning and that in my case the certificate of conformity provided contains a signature that looks nothing like the name 'Carolyn E Hughes' and you can even make out an 'st' at end of signature if you look closely
  2. https://www.wisbar.org/Directories/CourtRules/Wisconsin Circuit Court Rules/Outagamie County Circuit Court Rules.pdf It doesn't state specifically for Outagamie Cty from what I can see if I can or cannot submit a motion on day of court- i attached where pdf can be found and screenshots of the civil rules if anyone else can see something I'm missing Edit/Update: I think I'm safe according to chapter 801 and 802 in WI 801.16  Filing. (1)  The filing of pleadings and other papers with the court as required by these statutes shall be made by filing them with the clerk of circuit court. The judge may require that the person filing the papers provide a copy to the judge. (2) For papers that do not require a filing fee: (a) A court may adopt a local rule, if it is approved by the chief judge, that permits the filing of papers with the clerk of circuit court by facsimile transmission to a plain-paper facsimile machine at a telephone number designated by the court. To provide uniformity, any local rule shall specify a 15-page limit for a facsimile transmission, unless an exception is approved by the assigned judge or court commissioner on a case-by-case basis. (b) If no rule has been adopted under par. (a), the assigned judge or court commissioner may permit a party or attorney in a specific matter to file papers with the clerk of circuit court by facsimile transmission to a plain-paper facsimile machine at a telephone number designated by the assigned judge or court commissioner. (c) If the facsimile transmission exceeds 15 pages or is filed in the absence of a local rule, the party or attorney shall certify that the assigned judge or court commissioner has approved the facsimile transmission. (d) If papers are transmitted to a plain-paper facsimile machine of a noncourt agency, party, or company for the receipt, transmittal, and delivery to the clerk of circuit court, the clerk of circuit court shall accept the papers for filing only if the transmission complies with the local rule or has been approved by the assigned judge or court commissioner and certified by the party or attorney. (e) Facsimile papers are considered filed upon receipt by the clerk of circuit court and are the official record of the court and may not be substituted. No additional copies may be sent. The clerk of circuit court shall discard any duplicate papers subsequently received by the clerk of circuit court, assigned judge, or court commissioner. (f) Papers filed with the circuit court by facsimile transmission completed after regular business hours of the clerk of circuit court's office are considered filed on a particular day if the submission is made by 11:59 p.m. central time, as recorded by the court facsimile machine, so long as it is subsequently accepted by the clerk upon review. The expanded availability of time to file shall not affect the calculation of time under other statutes, rules, and court orders. Documents submitted by facsimile transmission completed after 11:59 p.m. are considered filed the next day the clerk's office is open. History: Sup. Ct. Order, 161 Wis. 2d xvii (1991); Sup. Ct. Order No. 94-11, 187 Wis. 2d xxiii; Sup. Ct. Order No. 00-09, 2001 WI 33, 241 Wis. 2d xix; Sup. Ct. Order No. 14-03, 2016 WI 29, filed 4-28-16, eff. 7-1-16; Sup. Ct. Order No. 14-03A, filed 8-17-16, eff. 8-17-16; 2017 a. 365 s. 111. Judicial Council Note, 1991: Sub. (2) clarifies that papers (other than those requiring a filing fee) may be filed by facsimile transmission to the judge or clerk, if a local court rule, or the judge in a specific matter, so permits. [Re Order eff. 7-1-91.] A notice of appeal does not require a filing fee and may be filed by facsimile transmission under sub. (2). State v. Sorenson, 2000 WI 43, 234 Wis. 2d 648, 611 N.W.2d 240, 98-3107. Under sub. (1), the filing of pleadings and other papers with the court shall be made by filing them with the clerk of circuit court. The circuit court should have rejected an affidavit and proposed order submitted by a child support agency that was submitted directly and exclusively to the judge. Teasdale v. Marinette County Child Support Agency, 2009 WI App 152, 321 Wis. 2d 647, 775 N.W.2d 123, 08-2827. NOTE: Sup. Ct. Order No. 14-03 states: “The Comments to the statutes and to the supreme court rules created pursuant to this order are not adopted, but will be published and may be consulted for guidance in interpreting and applying the rule." Comment, 2016: Sub. (2) (f) is a change to circuit court law and practice. Under prior law, fax filings were required to arrive at the office of the clerk of court before the end of the regular business day in order to be considered filed on that day. In contrast, the mandatory electronic filing statute, s. 801.18 (4) (e), allows any filing made before midnight to be considered filed on that day. After July 1, 2016, parties who do not use the electronic filing system are given the advantage of the extended filing hours. Chapter 802 (2)  Motions. (a) How made. An application to the court for an order shall be by motion which, unless made during a hearing or trial, shall be made in writing, shall state with particularity the grounds therefor, and shall set forth the relief or order sought. The requirement of writing is fulfilled if the motion is stated in a written notice of the hearing of the motion. Unless specifically authorized by statute, orders to show cause shall not be used. (b) Supporting papers. Copies of all records and papers upon which a motion is founded, except those which have been previously filed or served in the same action or proceeding, shall be served with the notice of motion and shall be plainly referred to therein. Papers already filed or served shall be referred to as papers theretofore filed or served in the action. The moving party may be allowed to present upon the hearing, records, affidavits or other papers, but only upon condition that opposing counsel be given reasonable time in which to meet such additional proofs should request therefor be made. (c) Recitals in orders. All orders, unless they otherwise provide, shall be deemed to be based on the records and papers used on the motion and the proceedings theretofore had and shall recite the nature of the motion, the appearances, the dates on which the motion was heard and decided, and the order signed. No other formal recitals are necessary. (d) Formal requirements. The rules applicable to captions, signing and other matters of form of pleadings apply to all motions and other papers in an action, except that affidavits in support of a motion need not be separately captioned if served and filed with the motion. The name of the party seeking the order or relief and a brief description of the type of order or relief sought shall be included in the caption of every written motion. (e) When deemed made. In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by the statutes governing procedure in civil actions and special proceedings, a motion which requires notice under s. 801.15 (4) shall be deemed made when it is served with its notice of motion. (3)  Demurrers and pleas abolished. Demurrers and pleas shall not be used. History: Sup. Ct. Order, 67 Wis. 2d 585, 614 (1975); Sup. Ct. Order, 104 Wis. 2d xi (1981); Sup. Ct. Order, 171 Wis. 2d xix (1992); 2005 a. 253; 2007 a. 97. Judicial Council Committee's Note on sub. (1), 1981: See 1981 Note to s. 802.02 (4). [Re Order effective Jan. 1, 1982] In the absence of an answer to a cross claim and in the absence of any other responsive pleadings, a court may deem facts alleged in the cross claim and submissions filed in connection with a summary judgment motion admitted for purposes of summary judgment. Daughtry v. MPC Systems, Inc. 2004 WI App 70, 272 Wis. 2d 260, 679 N.W.2d 808, 02-2424 Another edit/update: I'm not sure if this applies - it is in chapter 801 (4) A written motion, other than one which may be heard ex parte, and notice of the hearing thereof shall be served not later than 5 days before the time specified for the hearing, unless a different period is fixed by statute or by order of the court. Such an order may for cause shown be made on ex parte motion. When a motion is supported by affidavit, the affidavit shall be served with the motion; and opposing affidavits may be served not later than one day before the hearing, unless the court permits them to be served at some other time. All written motions shall be heard on notice unless a statute or rule permits the motion to be heard ex parte. I'll have to see if I still can for a MTC? Screenshot_20190331-160043_Drive_merge.pdf
  3. Just to reiterate and help me plan accordingly: Write up and file a MTC before my motion hearing case tomorrow (11AM, court opens at 8AM), provide copies to court and plaintiff and let the judge know I filed MTC and the court is not the correct jurisdiction for this matter and that it should be moved to JAMS arbitration per the Credit Card Agreement. How will it work to get the documents to the attorneys are there by telephone conference as well? They did request this to the court but I didn't see courts answer to that so I'm assuming they granted it. Do I need to put together an answer to the MSJ as well stating I am filing to compel? Or if she doesn't grant my motion to compel I'm pretty much SOL? Or should I put together a response as a backup using the above statutes and I'll keep doing research on cases in WI that I can refer to.
  4. There is a segment on Arbitration in the original credit agreement - can they already argue I participated by attending the pre-trial on 01/02?
  5. Did you check out my post above your initial post - I edited it several times but it appears as though using statutes regarding hearsay and rule of evidence has worked in other cases (at least to avoid MSJ)
  6. My county is different in that it requires a hearing to respond to MSJ so I can respond tomorrow
  7. Wisconsin Statute 909.02 (12)(a)(b) - 'Self-authentication' is similar to the Idaho Rule of Evidence statute 902(11) (12) Certified domestic records of regularly conducted activity. (a) The original or a duplicate of a domestic record of regularly conducted activity that would be admissible under s. 908.03 (6) if accompanied by a written certification of its custodian or other qualified person, in a manner complying with any statute or rule adopted by the supreme court, certifying all of the following: 1. That the record was made at or near the time of the occurrence of the matters set forth by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge of those matters. 2. That the record was kept in the course of the regularly conducted activity. 3. That the record was made of the regularly conducted activity as a regular practice. (b) A party intending to offer a record into evidence under par. (a) must provide written notice of that intention to all adverse parties and must make the record and certification available for inspection sufficiently in advance of the offer of the record and certification into evidence to provide an adverse party with a fair opportunity to challenge the record and certification. Wisconsin Statute 908.03(6) - Hearsay exceptions; availability of declarant immaterial' may be able to be used similar to Idaho 803(6) Rules of Evidence (6) Records of regularly conducted activity. A memorandum, report, record, or data compilation, in any form, of acts, events, conditions, opinions, or diagnoses, made at or near the time by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge, all in the course of a regularly conducted activity, as shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, or by certification that complies with s. 909.02 (12) or (13), or a statute permitting certification, unless the sources of information or other circumstances indicate lack of trustworthiness. Also just found this case from WI https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.wicourts.gov/ca/opinion/DisplayDocument.pdf%3Fcontent%3Dpdf%26seqNo%3D158102&ved=2ahUKEwjcquz1zKzhAhUNVK0KHR21Cl8QFjAAegQIAhAB&usg=AOvVaw0BOjC8kKTDeWP63Nv_tKBc
  8. Is it possible to make an argument and use information from a different circuit court? The Idaho statutes mentioned are very similar to WI statues. I came across 2 good cases in Idaho, but they are the 9th circuit and Wisconsin in the 7th. https://www.hollandlawfirm.com/2015/09/24/defective-debt-buyer-affidavits-and-the-lack-of-data-integrity-other-peoples-records-opr-are-not-business-records-of-midland-funding/ Next case can be found near end of article between Rodney Miner and Cavalry SVP https://toughnickel.com/personal-finance/You-Can-Beat-Credit-Card-Debt-Collectors
  9. Unfortunately they didn't attach the affidavit to the complaint - they submitted it later with the MSJ paperwork. Running out of options not sure I have any shot at winning
  10. I responded to their original complaint orally at the pre-trial 01/02 and later they submitted a MSJ on 02/28 - the court then set a 04/01 MSJ hearing where I need to attend in person - in my county this is the required next step. I could have filed an answer with the court before this point but the court told me it was not required and I procrastinated to be honest. If you were in this situation what would you do?
  11. I came across a Facebook page called 'Stop 3rd Party Debt Collectors - No Fee Service' who provided the attached template to use as an answer. What do you guys think? FREE Template for Web Clients Midland 2018.docx
  12. Thank you - I did see the Brent case but unfortunately they have pretty solid wording in all of their paperwork so it's difficult to refute.
  13. Is it possible to use an argument that I had the 3 credit bureau's remove the Midland Funding Collection account from my credit report by using a credit restoration agency to send inquiries on my behalf and sucessfully remove them?
  14. Screenshot_20190330-003911_Drive(1).pdf Here is a pdf of the pertinent info to the case