:shock: pltf atty objects to all of my admissions and interrogatories!!

[BOASUX]

I received basically an objection to all of my request for admission and interrogatories. Even the original contract. There is a paragraph basically the same for each: in short irrelevant, and unduly burdensome given the needs of the case blah blah blah.

It was 50 questions. NOT EVEN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT!! My responses are do tomorrow.

If anyone has any advice please advise!! I am in NC.

Thanks in advance!

[admin]

You need to read your courts rles of civil procedure, but I would guess you can file an objection to their objections somehow. It could be too late to do so.

Also, the judge may not agree with their objections. Be ready (like have something in writing) to go over each point.

[debtorshusband]

First, let's review some of the basics.

The purpose of Discovery is for each side to show their cards to the other. It is the hope of the court that one side or the other will throw in the towel, and the judge will never have to spend time on the case. But regardless, each side is entitled to see what evidence the other side will produce in court.

Now, this is just my opinon, and maybe I'm missing something, but it seems to me that the plaintiff's attorney has shot themselves in the foot by objecting to all your Discovery requests. I'm not sure you want to object to their objections or compel production of documents. It seems like they have done you a favor. Assuming you asked for basic things like a copy of the signed contract, proof they own the debt (if it's a Junk Debt Buyer), and a complete accounting of how the amount claimed was determined, what are they going to present in court? I would think that any documentation they try to produce in court now, you object and ask to have it thrown out because they didn't provide it to you during Discovery.

As for your responses to their Discovery requests, play the game the same way they have. Whatever you do, don't admit to their claims, thus making their case for them. But remember, any documents you plan to introduce in court as evidence, you need to supply to them. Don't make the same mistake they made.

Good luck.

DH

[gator944]

I would think that any documentation they try to produce in court now, you object and ask to have it thrown out because they didn't provide it to you during Discovery.

DH, once again you are spot on target. Nice job.

[cracrap]

I received basically an objection to all of my request for admission and interrogatories. Even the original contract. There is a paragraph basically the same for each: in short irrelevant, and unduly burdensome given the needs of the case blah blah blah.

It was 50 questions. NOT EVEN THE ORIGINAL CONTRACT!! My responses are do tomorrow.

If anyone has any advice please advise!! I am in NC.

Thanks in advance!

you'll need to file a motion to compel and set a hearing date

[Flyingifr]

In your Motion to Compel you would point out that what you are requesting goes to their Burden of Proof. If their BOP is "burdensome" they why are they suing, and I am sure the Judge will not find their BOP to be "irrelevant".

[BOASUX]

They did provide a copy of statements not actual itemizations of the credit card in question. That's all. BOA still owns the debt I am dealing with a local attorney.

I really appreciate the responses. I couldn't sleep last night!

[nascar]

What kind of argument are you offering that shows you don't owe the debt?

Don't forget here, the plaintiff does not need to prove you owe the debt; BOA must simply establish that you more than likely owe it, and that you more than likely owe it to them. If you just sit back and say "prove it," you don't have a very good chance of winning.

You have to have something in your favor that tends to show you don't owe them anything.

[henry1018]

wouldn't filing a motion to dismiss at this point be reasonable? If they object to all of the interogatories, I would think a judge, when considering a motion to dismiss, would view their inability/unwillingness to produce basic documents as grounds for dismissal.

[Methuss]

As with a motion for summary judgment, a motion to dismiss must be granted if there is no relavent question of law.

In this case there is. A judge would still have to reach a conclusion about who owes who money. A motion to dismiss would not survive that basic principle right now.

I agree a motion to compel production is the best next step; along with a motion for continuance to give opposing counsel time to comply. If they still do not produce the documents to support their burden of proof, any documents that are produced later you may quash with an estoppel objection. A complete ignoring of the compel order would result in sufficient cause to dismiss entirely.

[BOASUX]

As with a motion for summary judgment, a motion to dismiss must be granted if there is no relavent question of law.

In this case there is. A judge would still have to reach a conclusion about who owes who money. A motion to dismiss would not survive that basic principle right now.

I agree a motion to compel production is the best next step; along with a motion for continuance to give opposing counsel time to comply. If they still do not produce the documents to support their burden of proof, any documents that are produced later you may quash with an estoppel objection. A complete ignoring of the compel order would result in sufficient cause to dismiss entirely.

Thanks!