Jump to content

Choice of Law provision


Recommended Posts

I asked this question in a couple of other threads, but no real clear answer--at least to me(I admit to being a bit slow with this stuff), so I'll ask again here.

Wolpoff & Abramson claim against me in NAF for old MBNA debt of $1620. According to my CR, last paymentwas 10/2001, charged off 6/2002.

In the points listed on their claim, one of them says:

"The attached Agreement(what they sent me was a photocopy of an apparent MBNA agreement, with no date, no names, no signature) contains a Delaware choice of law provision and a provision for "reasonable" attorney fees.

Delaware law specifically provides that an attorney fee may be awarded on an unpaid account if allowed by the credit agreement. See 5 Del.Code 951. Delaware law also recognizes that an attorney's fee in an amount up to twenty percent (20%) of the principal outstanding balance is reasonable. see 10 Del.Code 3912,"

Okay, I get that. But, if they invoke this provision to use Delaware law for this, don't they also have to use Delaware law throughout the arbitration, and what may follow; namely, the 3 year SOL in Delaware?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I guess the root of my question is, do they have to use the SOL where I live in WA, or in DE,where MBNA was headquartered, or NC, where I lived when I opened the account and 90% of the usage occured? Are they legally bound to one or another, or can they pick and choose?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The choice of DE law provision is stated on the NAF claim by Woploff, and I think I saw it somewhere in that "agreement" they photocpied and sent me(the one that has no names or signatures on it.)

In the court case linked, the WA court allowed that provision, rather than use WA law, since DE had a bigger interest in the case..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where you live, or have lived. That gets into conflict of laws, so it's not easy. They are bound and do not get to choose.

Sorry for butting in....are you saying that the statute of limitations in the state where you live (supposing that you have lived in the same state all of your life) is the SOL that the courts recognize as far as how long you can be held responsible for a debt (as per the DOFD)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ran this by a lawyer friend of mine, and she gave me a funny look. Is there a reference for this?

Honestly, I don't recall one, but I do remember this coming up in my civil procedures classs.

So, for example, let's say the case is being heard in California, which permits demurrer as a pleading, and let's say that the other state's law does not.

Does the case permit a demurrer as a pleading or not?

(answer, yes.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • 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.