Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'mtd'.
Found 3 results
I have received a summons on Dec 9th from Midland stating count 1 Breach of Contract and count 2 Unjust Enrichment. They attached an affidavit from their legal specialist that included a bill of sale, assignment and billing statement from Citibank, (Best Buy) I did not submit an answer instead a MTD or in alternate Compel Private Arbitration with Jams also included exhibit of contract (Citibank) attachment, on the same day (Dec 24th) I sent a letter to attorneys for litigation waiver and election to arbitrate. I also sent a letter to JAMS electing arbitration with the Return Receipt from my letter to attorney. I received an answer Jan 6th stating that the attached cardholder agreement is Not relevant to subject debt or applicable to subject debt, that it is a random document.. Also defendant has not attempted to show how alleged agreement is admissable under AZ rules of Evidence. Exhibit cannot be authenticated for admissable, without exhibit defendant has nothing to establish debt was governed by arbitration provisions. They ask the court to strike my MTD and file an answer by a date certain at the discretion of the court. My question is if I have 5 days to answer their response.. If so I believe it is by this Wednesday, Jan 13th. What can I do to make my exhibit work to compel an arbitration. Do I need to file an "answer" to this going back to their first complaint filed. I am uploading the case filings. I have followed this forum for suggestions on court proceedings but at this time I need some help on what to do next? Any suggestions are appreciated. 4- Midland Resp to MTD.pdf 3- letter to execute arbitration.pdf 1-complaint.pdf 2- MTD Midland.pdf
So, a JDB filed a Complaint against me about 5 months ago without ever serving me. I found out about it through other means and filed an Answer quickly, then served them with it. They still haven't served me anything, though they seem to be trying to convince the Court that they've made two attempts (which I'm sure they haven't). The first entry on my Case Summary indicates, ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING SIGNED AND FILED BY xxxx xxxxx TO SHOW WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR FAILURE TO FILE REQUEST FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT. MATTER CONTINUED FOR HEARING ON xx/xx/14. CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FILED, GIVEN TO RESPECTIVE PARTIES/ COUNSEL. Does the above mean that the opposition has asked for a Default Judgment and been denied until Trial or does it mean something else? Also, I'm just starting to read about filing MTDs and am wondering if this would be at all beneficial to me at this point since I've already filed an Answer? Finally, at what point should I file for Discovery? My suspicion is that the JDB does not have the documents necessary to proving legal standing, but is there an advantage to waiting a while so that they have less time to prepare their case? Thanks for any help!