Jump to content

Lawyer responded to interrogatories


elopez
 Share

Recommended Posts

I recently sent my own interrogatories (after receiving interrogatories from plaintiff) to the plaintiff and lawyer responded. Admit to some and deny others.

What is the typical next step in this situation. I tried to search for similar topics on this forum but I was unsuccessful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently sent my own interrogatories (after receiving interrogatories from plaintiff) to the plaintiff and lawyer responded. Admit to some and deny others.

What is the typical next step in this situation. I tried to search for similar topics on this forum but I was unsuccessful.

What kind of case is it? FDCPA? FCRA? Debt defense?

We need more information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear (debt collector lawyer);

Thank you for your speedy non-answers dated 12/28/07.

The demand for discovery and production of documents was for the “Plaintiff”, (Plaintiff Bank), not the “plaintiff’s attorney”, the (Law Firm suing you). The discovery request was directed toward a fact-based witness or witnesses at (Plaintiff Bank) with firsthand knowledge of the material and information requested. Even if you had firsthand knowledge of all the information, you cannot be a fact-based witness for the plaintiff and legal counsel at the same time. Your attempt at hearsay and portrayal of firsthand knowledge of the facts is slightly entertaining, but does not satisfy the Defendant’s request. Irregardless of the legal issues your non-response engenders, it is very clear on several fronts, you do not have firsthand knowledge of many of the items.

Please forward the discovery request to your “client” as your legal representative duty requires, preferably an officer or officers of (Plaintiff Bank) that has firsthand knowledge of the information required and can be eventually cross-examined on the admissions and documents. .

Failure to respond properly to Discovery Admissions and Request for Production of Documents will force the Defendant to file a “Motion to Compel”. I trust we can keep from wasting the court’s time by your simple cooperation.

Thank you and Happy New Year,

Sincerely,

Gentle, non aggressive, defendant

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear (debt collector lawyer);

Thank you for your speedy non-answers dated 12/28/07.

The demand for discovery and production of documents was for the “Plaintiff”, (Plaintiff Bank), not the “plaintiff’s attorney”, the (Law Firm suing you). The discovery request was directed toward a fact-based witness or witnesses at (Plaintiff Bank) with firsthand knowledge of the material and information requested. Even if you had firsthand knowledge of all the information, you cannot be a fact-based witness for the plaintiff and legal counsel at the same time. Your attempt at hearsay and portrayal of firsthand knowledge of the facts is slightly entertaining, but does not satisfy the Defendant’s request. Irregardless of the legal issues your non-response engenders, it is very clear on several fronts, you do not have firsthand knowledge of many of the items.

Please forward the discovery request to your “client” as your legal representative duty requires, preferably an officer or officers of (Plaintiff Bank) that has firsthand knowledge of the information required and can be eventually cross-examined on the admissions and documents. .

Failure to respond properly to Discovery Admissions and Request for Production of Documents will force the Defendant to file a “Motion to Compel”. I trust we can keep from wasting the court’s time by your simple cooperation.

Thank you and Happy New Year,

Sincerely,

Gentle, non aggressive, defendant

Thanks Trueq....I answered the interrogatories I received from the lawyer suing me for Cap One. I sent the lawyer interrogatories Nov. 26 and I haven't received anything back. But, they filed a rule notice 1305 at the court house which I don't know what it could be. (I guess evidence) Is the letter you posted appropriate for me to send to them??? Or do you have another sample which would be more appropriate since they NEVER answered????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they have not responded to your discovery and production of documents in over 30 days, in WI, I would file a "motion to compel".

I don't know if the civil procedure is similar in your state.

My original post and letter on this thread was geared to arrogant debt lawyers who think its appropriate to give firsthand knowledge on the discovery, sign it, and send it back as satisfying the discovery request when it was intended for the "plaintiff", not the "plaintiff's attorney".

Lawyers cannot be fact witness and legal counsel at the same time!

The reason my letter is so powerful is because the plaintiff bank is NOT AWARE of the underlying legal action. That's a felony.

How can they send discovery to a plaintiff that is not aware its party to the suit? Very carefully is the answer. I look forward to the "real" discovery response.

Irregardless, I got the lawyer to admit in the first round "if it (the contract) exists, it is not readily obtainable."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the response. You really cleared things up. If I don't file a "Motion to Compel", what will happen next? Here is a little history of this case.....March 5th I was sued - I answered the complaint March 22 - May 25 they asked for Admissions - June 8th I answered, filed New Matter, and filed a Sworn Denial - Then 5 months later, Nov. 6th, I received Interrogatories. I replied to the Interrogatories Nov. 26th and also sent a set of my own Interrogatories to them. ( I received the green card back that they received them) In the meantime, they filed a Rule 1305 at the courthouse which I am assuming is evidence. I was hoping they would drop this suit but no such luck. I am just curious what will happen next if I don't file a "Motion to Compel?" Thanks, you are the best!!! :)%

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please help me, I am being sued by Asset Acceptance for 608.00 from 4 1/2 years ago. I asked for proof of original copies of the paperwork, and detalied accounting-principal, interest, late fees, etc. There reply to me was that plaintiff is not the original holder of the account and presently does not possess a copy of the writting agreement between Defenant and the original creditor. I am lost what should I do next?

Thank you for you much needed help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello George

You would be much better served to make your own thread and read the stickies above and answer the questions. This is so the answers you receive are for your situation, instead of combining several subject into one forum. The standard list of question gives us the standard information so we can answer your questions.

Good to see you and hopefully we can help.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for the delay and lack of info. I am being sued from a Citibank and the plaintiff's lawyer answered interrogatories. The attorney answered after I served my responses and interrogatories.

Is there a possibility of a motion to compel?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is a brief history of events that have transpired for credit debt that i am being sued for...

12/21/2007 Interrogs rcvd from attorney and admit to most and denied one.

11/15/2007 PROOF OF SERVICE RE: FORM INTERROGATORIES; REQUEST FOR

ADMISSION; ADMISSION RESPONSE FILED. SERVED AS TO

09/20/2007 CASE FILE RETURNED TO CIVIL DEPARTMENT FROM COURTROOM.

09/20/2007 APPLICATION(S) FOR WAIVER OF COURT FEES AND COSTS FILED BY IS GRANTED. APPLICANT(S) MAY PROCEED IN THIS ACTION WITHOUT PAYMENT OF ANY COURT FEES OR COSTS LISTED IN RULE 985(I), CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT.

09/19/2007 ANSWER FILED OF RECEIPT # FEE

WAIVER .

09/19/2007 APPLICATION AND ORDER FOR WAIVER OF COURT FEES AND COSTS AS TO RECEIVED AND FORWARDED TO DIV.

002 FOR CONSIDERATION.

09/19/2007 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING IS VACATED, RESPONSIVE

PLEADING HAVING BEEN FILED, CASE REMAINS ON CALENDAR FOR

A NON-APPERANCE CASE MANAGEMENT REVIEW ON 02/25/08 AT

01:30P M, IN DEPT. 2CM

09/17/2007 PROOF OF SERVICE RE: SUMMONS AND COMPLAINT; CIVIL COVER

SHEET/ADDENDUM; ADR PACKAGE FILED.

09/10/2007 ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE HEARING/CASE MANAGEMENT REVIEW SIGNED AND FILED by JUDGE PRO TEMPORE TO SHOW WHY SANCTIONS SHOULD NOT BE IMPOSED FOR FAILURE TO FILE PROOF OF SERVICE PURSUANT TO CRC 3.740(E). MATTER SET FOR HEARING ON 02/25/08 AT 01:30P M., IN DEPT. 002 .

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING FILED.

08/24/2007 COMPLAINT FILED.

08/24/2007 SUMMONS ISSUED.

08/24/2007 SUMMONS FILED.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...