Bob Fletcher

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Bob Fletcher

  1. Thanks KentWA!!! Sorry just to be sure 37 b right, it came up as a smiley face
  2. OK, finished my opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for sanctions and have been staring at the computer and Rule 37 and am trying to wrap my brain around how to proceed with my Motion for Sanctions as per KentWA and Flyerfan, Not sure if it is Monday or what but I am having trouble seeing what to use in the Rule to support my Motion. Is it another Rule I should be looking at, since 37 seems to deal with a person not attending a deposition? Or am I making this too complicated? It seems like I should be incorporating: (a)(3) The moving party must attach a copy of the request for discovery, the
  3. Got it Thanks! so will file my Motion for sanctions when I file my Opposition, correct?
  4. Here is a copy of the Rule being cited: Rule 37. Discovery and disclosure motions; Sanctions. (a) Motion for order compelling disclosure or discovery. (a)(1) A party may move to compel disclosure or discovery and for appropriate sanctions if another party: (a)(1)(A) fails to disclose, fails to respond to a discovery request, or makes an evasive or incomplete disclosure or response to a request for discovery; (a)(1)( fails to disclose, fails to respond to a discovery request, fails to supplement a disclosure or response or makes a supplemental disclosure or response without an adequate explan
  5. One of my questions is the notice of deposition considered an order, which concerns Rule 37?
  6. UPDATE, NEED HELP!! This will be a bit of a long post, but will try to keep things as coherent as possible. Basically the attorneys are going for sanctions, including a default judgment because I did not show for their deposition. Here are the details: I received notice of a deposition in May for a deposition at the JM law offices on July 17. The caption of the brief was Notice of Deposition. I struggled with this since it was in a different county and I was not subpoenaed for the deposition. In the end I sent them a letter which they signed for the day before the deposition. It reads as
  7. Please post answers to the following questions. Not sure about Kansas, but you are on a timeline to respond to the MSJ, so will need to get up to speed quickly.
  8. According to Wikipedia: Substantive law is the statutory or written law that defines rights and duties, such as crimes and punishments (in the criminal law), civil rights and responsibilities in civil law. It is codified in legislated statutes or can be enacted through the initiative process. Substantive law stands in contrast to procedural law, which is the "machinery" for enforcing those rights and duties. Procedural law comprises the rules by which a court hears and determines what happens in civil or criminal proceedings, as well as the method and means by which substantive law is made and
  9. Regarding using the Delaware SOL, it is worth pursuing. Mantis Knight quoted the correct Statutes. It is my feeling after attempting this as a MTD and failed the key words in the Utah statute are "cause of action". The judge in my case ruled that the cause of action did not arise exclusively in Delaware. I had argued the cause of action arose in Delaware when Delaware failed to receive a payment. It was not strong enough. The second reason the Judge gave for denying the MTD, was that the choice of law provision in the contract means "substantive law applies, but not procedural law such as st
  10. From what you posted. it looks like you may be just past the SOL. You will need to plead that in your affirmative defenses and then confirm if it is or not,.
  11. Here is a draft of my original Motion for Security Deposit with the case law and rules: Comes, Now Defendant, XXXXX YYYYY, Pro Se, pursuant to Rule 7( (1) of the U.R.C.P. hereby moves the court to require Non-Resident Plaintiff, Midland Funding LLC to furnish a security deposit of $300.00 for Costs. STATEMENT OF FACTS On or around June 1, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Complaint and Summons on the Defendant. On June 19, 2012, Defendant answered the Complaint and filed a Notice of Appearance. Plaintiff claims Defendant entered into an Alleged Contract with Chase Bank USA N.A, which alleged Contr
  12. UPDATE: So I filed my 2nd Motion for a security bond and just received the Plaintiff's opposition which I will post below. I was told by the Court on my first Motion I could re-file the Motion if I could show a need for the bond. In my 2nd Motion, I mentioned the following: Application for a Utah Xchange account, which entails a cost of $25.00 for set up and a monthly fee of $30.00 Plaintiff had requested my appearance at a deposition. The IRS allows $0.555/mile, which would have incurred an expense of between $44.40 and $49.95 to me I have attended a hearing requested by the Plaintiff which w
  13. It is my opinion that the cost bond does not have anything to do with your agreement. It is in the Utah rules and it is for protection (for the Defendant) when a foreign (business whose home state is out side of Utah) entity files a complaint against a Utah resident. I think it is to provide some protection for the Defendant if the Defendant prevails and wants to recover costs. Not a lot of costs are allowed, but it would be a pain in the tush to try to track down an AA or MF down. We need to keep trying for this so we can come up with a plan so that every Utah Defendant in a JDB lawsuit can
  14. JM claiming something like not receiving something is par for the course for these guys. They will lie and say all kinds of things in discovery since none of discovery in Utah is filed with the court. It sounds like you have proof of sending answers so don't worry about that. You have to be aggressive with these guys and not wait for their next move. Their next move will be a MSJ! Recommend posting the "Bill of Sale" for comments. I would guess the BOS is an incomplete document and needs to be challenged. Send a meet and confer letter requesting information on their star witness. I know it
  15. I didn't get it as the judge said I did not demonstrate need, but could resubmit if I could prove need. Just resubmitted.
  16. These guys (Johnson Mark)are notorious for saying they they send things when they do not. Have seen it my case a couple of times. I went through the same thing with them regarding bank statements. They want them to see if you made payments to the OC. We went before the judge for Discovery Issues and I told the judge I had tried really hard but was not in possession of what they were looking for. He told JM they had ways of finding the info through subpoena, so they sent subpoenas to a couple of banks. It's a smoke screen and a tool for MSJ. Remember they have to prove standing, so keep poundin
  17. Below is a draft of my Meet and Confer letter to the Plaintiff regarding the latest affidavit of sale which is posted on post 164 I would appreciated any input!!! Re: Affidavit of Dustin Smurdon Let this letter serve as a meet and confer regarding the Affidavit of Sale by Dustin Smurdon, provided by Plaintiff, Midland Funding LLC. It should be pointed out that this Affidavit of Sale is an incomplete document. It refers to a “review of Chase’s records”. Without the “records” the Affidavit is referring to it is an incomplete document. The affiant claims he reviewed “Chase's records”. Wh