brjmhome6

Start To Finish Winning Against Midland Funding Aka Jdb!

229 posts in this topic

you should post this jayinaz in your own thread, you will get better help.  But you could put "After a reasonable inquiry, defendant has not documents, but will supplement if any become available."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

USE ONLY IF YOU ARE IN FEDERAL COURT ... OTHERWISE USE YOUR STATE JURISDICTION IDENTIFICATION 1. In response to Paragraph 1 of the Complaint, DEFENDANT admits that Plaintiff has claimed federal jurisdiction pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 1681(p) and under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. As to the remaining allegations in Paragraph 1, DEFENDANT denies each and every allegation contained therein.

2. In response to Paragraph 2 of the Complaint, DEFENDANT admits that Plaintiff has properly claimed that venue lies in the xxx Division. DEFENDANT

also admits it is qualified to do business in the . DEFENDANT states that

these are a legal conclusions, not subject to denial or admission.

JURY DEMAND

3. Defendant has demanded a jury trial and paid a jury fee.

PARTIES

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

6. In response to Paragraph 6 of the Complaint, DEFENDANT does not have knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of these allegations and, on that basis, denies each and every allegation contained therein. REPEAT

STATEMENT OF CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT

16. In response to Paragraph 16 of the Complaint, DEFENDANT denies each and every allegation contained therein.

17. In response to Paragraph 17 of the Complaint, denies each and every allegation contained therein.

18. In response to Paragraph 18 of the Complaint, denies each and every allegation contained therein.

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Failure to State a Cause of Action)

Neither Plaintiff’s Complaint nor any purported cause of action asserted therein states facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against DEFENDANT , and further fails to allege facts sufficient to entitle Plaintiff to the relief sought, or to any relief whatsoever, from DEFENDANT .

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Truth/Accuracy of Information)

DEFENDANT is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff’s claims against DEFENDANT are barred, in whole or in part, because all information DEFENDANT communicated to any third person regarding Plaintiff was true.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Indemnification)

DEFENDANT is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that any purported damages allegedly suffered by Plaintiff is the result of the acts or omissions of third persons over whom DEFENDANT had neither control nor responsibility.

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Failure to Mitigate Damages)

Plaintiff has failed to mitigate his alleged damages and/or injury, if any.

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Contributory/Comparative Fault)

DEFENDANT is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that any alleged damages sustained by Plaintiff was, at least in part, caused by actions of Plaintiff and/or third parties, and resulted from Plaintiff’s or third parties’ own negligence, which equaled or exceeded any alleged negligence or wrongdoing by DEFENDANT .

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Laches)

Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of laches.

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Estoppel)

Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of equitable estoppel.

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Waiver)

Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrine of waiver.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Independent Intervening Cause)

DEFENDANT alleges upon information and belief that if Plaintiff sustained any of the injuries alleged in the Complaint, there was an intervening, superseding cause and/or causes leading to such alleged injuries and, as such, any action on the part of DEFENDANT was not a proximate cause of the alleged injuries.

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Other Defenses Incorporated by Reference)

DEFENDANT hereby adopts and incorporates by this reference any and all other affirmative defenses asserted or to be asserted by any other Defendants in this proceeding.

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Improper Request for Punitive Damages)

Plaintiff’s Complaint does not allege facts sufficient to rise to the level of conduct required to recover punitive damages, and thus all requests for punitive damages are improper.

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Statute of Limitations)

Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, by the applicable statutes of limitation.

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

(Right to Assert Additional Defenses)

DEFENDANT hereby gives notice that it intends to rely on any additional affirmative defenses that become available or apparent through discovery and/or the factual development in this case or otherwise, and thus reserves the right to amend its answer to assert such additional defenses.

WHEREFORE, DEFENDANT prays for the entry of judgment in its favor and against Plaintiff as follows:

1. That this action be dismissed in its entirety and with prejudice;

2. That Plaintiff takes nothing by way of the Complaint;

3. For such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.

 

Does anyone know what the change was the @donim74 is referring to here >> ??

 

He mentoned a change in the way Rules have changed in Texas - sound like about.   I dont know that anyone is sure what this new change was.   The judge told him that a month before  his trial he would have been correct in the way he presented his objections.  However all of his objections were overruled and in effect he lost.   I think it could be beneficial to anyone reading the Texas threads..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Came across this forum last night and saw this topic about Midland. Hopefully someone can give me some insight what I should do. It seems a case was filed on 12/13/2015 against me by Midland through their attorney HUNT & HENRIQUES - JANALIE HENRIQUES.  And an OSC HEARING IS SET FOR 11/28/18. That's almost three years from the filing date. The hearing is to show why sanctions should not be imposed for failure to file proof of service and failure to file default judgment.  I never received the summons and it shows on 12/31/2015 that it was returned not found/no service.  What can I do? I never received the summons. And I live in a different county.  I only knew about this when I went to visit my mom and she gave me this yellow document from a company offering to settle this case. I looked up the case and found this. Any help would be appreciated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now