Jump to content

Mistymouse4590

Members
  • Posts

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Arizona

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Mistymouse4590's Achievements

CIC Member

CIC Member (4/6)

0

Reputation

  1. Thanks, I will do that now. Should I mention the part about how the Plaintiff's original response to the granted motion (to compel) indicated that they suggested a reasonable 90-day stay, and not 60-days as they are now mentioning in their reply? And is it a good idea to include as exhibits the printouts of the two emails I sent them to discuss a settlement? (they claimed in their reply that I dind't try to contact them, which is false). Finally, what is this response actually called? "RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFF'S REPLY TO RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT"? (Kidding, but this seems complicated). or "RESPONSE IN SUPPORT OF PREVIOUS RESPONSE TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT"?
  2. Yes, the court ordered arbitration. The order says: On XXXX date, the Defendant filed a motion requesting the following relief: To compel private/contractual arbitration and dismiss, or in the alternative, to stay the proceeding pending arbitration. The Plaintiff filed a response to the motion on XXXX date. The Court, has considered that which has been submitted by the parties. IT IS ORDERED Granting said motion. It is further ordered to compel arbitration. I did comply. I filed for arbitration exactly 80 days from the day the order was signed, after contacting the Defendant first via email and then after receiving no response, again via email, this time receiving a reply telling me I had to call, and then again via phone two more times to discuss a settlement. Again, in the Plaintiff's response to my motion to compel, they stated they have no issue with arb, and would prefer to stay for a reasonable period of 90 days in lieu of dismissal. contrary to their reply to my response to their MSJ, arbitration is NOT untimely.
  3. Hey everyone, Happy Thanksgiving! Just an update on this. I filed the response to the MSJ. Two weeks later, the Plaintiff filed a reply to my response. Their points: Defendant failed to provide more than speculation and conclusory objections in the opposition of summary judgment." They correctly summarize that in my response, i made the point that the court should strike their MSJ because of pending private arb. They then claim, "The fact that there is a pending arbitration does not negate the authority the Court holds in this matter nor does it automatically force the Court to stay the matter." They mention that the Court granted a stay, but did not set a deadline by which the Defendant must initiate the arbitration, and that they waited "a reasonable 60 days" to allow the Defendant to initiate arbitration. "During that 60 days, Defendant failed to contact Plaintiff" (not true, I called twice to discuss a settlement) "and Defendant failed to initiate the Arbitration. Because of this, the Defendants' request for arbitration is untimely." Defendant Response fails to show any genuine issue of material facts Conclusion: "Defendant's response fails to describe any genuine issues of material facts. Plaintiff proved through its affadavit that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Therefore, Plaintiff requests this Court grant Summary Judgment in its favor." Something interesting here is that the Plaintiff responded to my initial Motion to Compel Arbitration with the following: "Plaintiff has no objection to Defendant's Motion to Compel, however, opposes dismissing the case at this time. In the alternative, Plaintiff requests the Court stay the proceedings in this case for a reasonable period of 90 days to allow the Defendant to initiate Private Arbitration Proceedings, rather than dismissing the present action." How funny that they're replying to my response to their MSJ with a claim that they waited "a reasonable 60 days" to allow me to initiate arbitration, when their original response to my motion asked the court to stay for "a reasonable period of 90 days" for me to initiate Private Arbitration. My decision to wait to initiate arbitration was premised DIRECTLY on their preference for a 90-day stay, and during the initial 45 days or so, I was focused on contacting them to discuss a settlement, and to begin to learn how to properly initiate a private arbitration case. This is just silly, and wasting the court's time. The Plaintiff still lacks jurisdiction as the Court has ordered private arbitration and Arizona state law supports this. I would like to response to this nonsense immediately, but would love to hear any thoughts on proper strategy or verbiage. Also, I have been sent a bill by JAMS for $250, and I'm now hesitant to pay it in the event this crazy MSJ is granted!
  4. Thank you so much @Bulldoger, @Harry Seaward, @nobk4me, and @HueyPilot. I appreciate your guidance very much. I will finalize and submit, and will keep you all posted on this fun matter...:)
  5. I've drafted a response using the memorandum provided by @HueyPilot as a guide (with some edits). I'd love your opinion on whether or not this is overkill (maybe i just need to use paragraph 1 and then the last 2, so that i mention only the lack of jurisdiction and say the motion is moot pending arb): Thanks in advance for any feedback you can provide!
  6. Oh that's good to know. Thank you for the reference. In the thread referenced by @Bulldoger above, @HueyPilotsuggests a memorandum to the judge in lieu of a formal response: Is that a good strategy (obviously replacing the North Carolina-specific parts), or is it better to write a formal response? I suppose I can use some of the content in that memo. though...
  7. I neglected to suggest a stay duration on my motion (I requested dismissal or an unspecified stay), and the Plaintiff suggested 90 days on their response to my motion. The ruling is a form with checkboxes and says "it is ordered granting said motion" and then says "It is further ordered to compel arbitration". No stay was mentioned in the ruling. There was no conversation between opposing and me. No judge present.
  8. Summary: Sued by JDB Responded with answer and motion to compel private arbitration requesting dismissal or a stay (didn't specify the length of stay) JDB responded to motion claiming no objection to arbitration, but requested a 90-day stay in lieu of dismissal Judge granted my motion "to compel arbitration". There was some confusion about whether the case was stayed, since I didn't specify a timeframe on my motion. The order didn't include any detail about whether or not the case was stayed and if so, for how long, but the clerk tells me the judge granted the JDB's response to my motion, which I assume means the case would have been stayed for 90 days, since that's what they specified. It took me some time to understand the arb process, but finally filed 2.5 months later (still less than 90 days) JDB filed motion for summary judgement before being notified of arbitration, and before the 90 days had expired. Is this a tactic to get me in default? Obviously I need to respond with a motion of opposition. Given that the judge granted my motion and ordered arbitration, and given that less than 90 days have passed since that motion, aren't I entitled to pursue a solution through arbitration without having to deal with summary judgement? Aren't there issues of controversy? Would love some insight here on the best strategy to deal with this (I still have some time to file my response). Thanks!!!
  9. Hello, in the main post, it is suggested not to make mention of the lawsuit in the Demand for Arbitration form. However, the JAMS demand form requests that the following be sent to JAMS: C. Entire contract containing the arbitration clause (2 copies) • To the extent there are any court orders or stipulations relevant to this arbitration demand, e.g. an order compelling arbitration, please also include two copies. In my case, my motion to compel was granted, so there is a court order. Is there any reason not to include that in the submission? Thanks.
  10. @Xtreme98, was this settled? I would love the update of the JDB backing out prior to paying fees!
  11. Hello again, just revisiting this as my Motion to Compel Private Arb was granted by the judge, so I'm clear to proceed. The plaintiff had no objections to my motion to compel private arbitration. I have researched AAA's arbitration fees, and see that as the consumer, I am limited to a $200 filing fee, and then the business will be responsible for a $300 filing fee, a $1,400 case management fee, $1,500 for arbitrator compensation, and possibly a $500 virtual/telephonic hearing fee (unless it's a "desk/documents only arbitration"). So that's about $3,200 - $3,700 in fees for the Plaintiff. I see that the AAA's rules limit me to $200 (and I don't believe the AAA's rules supersede the promissory note, do they?). Re-reading my note, this line still makes me think I'm responsible for paying the Plaintiff's fees over $1,000 ("You" = lender): Does this mean that Plaintiff pays their own administration fees in full ($300 filing fee, $1,400 case management fee) and then the first $1,000 of the $1,500 arbitrator fee, and that I'm responsible for the extra $500? Or does it mean that I'm responsible for all fees paid by the Plaintiff over $1k? If the arbitrator rules against me, would there be a new judgement against me for the original disputed amount plus the plaintiff's arbitration fees? Thanks!
  12. Next update: my motion to compel private arbitration was granted. and the case is stayed. Mediation was vacated (does that mean I don't have to submit the rule 121 disclosure statement?) Plaintiff already submitted theirs to me, including lots of original loan records with their disclosure statement, including chain of title documents, a notice of assignment and a list of witnesses they expect to call at trial. I think it's now time to file the initial arbitration paperwork immediately. Is it time to propose a settlement offer?
  13. Just wanted to post an update in case anyone is having fun following this: After the court ordered mediation, the JDB filed a response to my MTC as well as a motion to "Waive Appearance of Real Party in Interest". In their response to my MTC, they state, And then the motion to Waive Appearance of Real Party in Interest, they argue that a representative of the plaintiff being present is not necessary for the parties to reach resolution, and since the purpose of mediation is to resolve the case prior to trial, that can be accomplished with plaintiff's counsel appearing on behalf of plaintiff at mediation. And counsel has full settlement authority for plaintiff and is able to resolve the outstanding issues at the mediation without involvement from the a representative from Plaintiff's company. "Therefore, the Plaintiff requests the Court to waive the appearance of the real party in interest at the mediation in this matter." Seems like they have no issue with arbitration. And should I respond to the Motion to waive appearance of real party in interest? Would love some feedback and thoughts! Thanks everyone.
  14. Thanks to everyone for the helpful responses. Not sure what will happen with my MTC, but for now, I'll plan to show up to the mediation prepared to admit nothing and stick to my guns regarding my desire to arbitrate. On another note, is there any benefit strategically to filing the arbitration case prior to the mediation?
×
×
  • 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.