texasrocker

No I did not read the book. There was no need to after reading the summary page that you posted because I could tell that I already know everything that is covered in the book. It sure is peculiar that the only mention of affirmative defenses was SOL which I did bring up in my reply to the OP. The pdf file lists defenses which are irrelevant to modern-day JDB collection cases and the blog link you posted even more so. Using these will only show the plaintiff and the court that you copied and pasted them off of the internet and you are an easy target. There are too many t

For the third time now you are referring to California procedure and your own conjecture and assumptions. There is no need to file an amended answer to add affirmative defenses in Texas or any fee to file an amended answer for any reason.

No but Im are you seriously suggesting that you scroll up and review what I said about your inability to comprehend what you read and your blatant unawareness of Texas procedure.

Again you are referring to California documents. If you were knowledgeable of even the very basics of defending a lawsuit then you would know that only material from the state in which it was filed is valid, relevant, and admissible.

If you were able to comprehend the OP's post you would have noticed they said, "I need to know how to answer a general denial for a Discover credit card case in Texas." Your trolling lunacy is seriously getting out of control. You obviously have no clue regarding Texas procedure so stop leading people astray with conjecture and assumptions.

For your answer use the same format as the Plaintiff's Original Petition that you were served with the court and case information on top of the page. You don't need to concern yourself with with any defenses at this time unless it is out of SOL. DEFENDANT'S ORIGINAL ANSWER Comes now, <your name>, the Defendant in the above styled and numbered cause and files this Original Answer in this action and would respectfully show the following: I. GENERAL DENIAL Defendant generally denies each and every, all and singular, of the allegations set forth in the Plaintiff's Origi

Ignore this troll. He is blatantly misleading any poor unknowing soul who is searching for information and happens across this malarkey. He doesn't even know how to properly word the adage that he used for the title. It is, "Have you stopped beating your wife?" not, "When did you stop beating your wife?" If someone used any of this ideology as a defense they would promptly lose their case and be laughing stock of the court.

Whenever someone asks me about arbitration I refer them to @fisthardcheese's material which contains everything they need to know:

What has not changed is you mimicking your mentor, this time by putting words in my mouth. Not once did I say the plaintiff would dismiss the case. My exact words were, "There is a fairly good chance that she will never be heard from again after seeing the general denial has been filed" meaning their well known typical antics of just not showing up to any hearings or answering anything received from the defendant or the court.

Sigh... the hibernating gnat that used to constantly buzz around in front of my face has awakened. http://www.arizonensis.org/sonoran/fieldguide/arthropoda/hippelates.html On what, pray tell, do you base your comment "Since that didn't happen, in this case I wouldn't hold out much hope."? There is absolutely nothing to indicate this plaintiff has moved one iota since filing this lawsuit. If they failed to jump on the chance of providing an ignorant pro se's request for something so damnable do you actually believe they will do anything else especially in a $1,100 case that has already c

What do you mean by "purchase agreements from sales"? That is not a good thing to ask for because if they send you a stack of monthly statements that show purchases and/or payments made on the account then you are doomed. Is this in a JP court? If so did you ask for the court's approval to begin discovery?

This is apparently the latest scammer trend. I actually received two similar voicemails Friday from unknown numbers that I did not answer. These seemed to know my name and nothing else, said if I didn't return their call that day they would be "serving you at your address with a citation for an offense" in a county I had never heard of, much less ever lived in. I googled the phone number they instructed me to call and it came up as Newport Beach, California. Not only do they not threaten lawsuits over the phone, a process server will never call before they show up to serve papers.

So the court indeed began the process of dismissal for want of prosecution twice and both times gave them another chance to prolong it. It's hard to believe that this law firm got up off of their lazy butts and did anything at all after receiving your general denial, much less showed up for a hearing. In the vast majority of cases filed by them they are never heard of again after receiving notice that the defendant is actually not going to give in to their expectations of a default judgment. I don't see any reason that you cannot rest assured that this is now in the history books. I

I have never heard of that happening. The only thing that even comes close that I am aware of is Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code 16.064 which states that if the case was dismissed for having been filed in the wrong jurisdiction it can within 60 days be refiled in the proper one. It seems to me that after 3-1/2 years it should have been dismissed for want of prosecution anyway. To the OP- what do you mean by "judgement case"? What law firm is it and what is the history of the case, i.e. hearings, motions filed, rulings etc?