Confused about the requirements

[armyguy11b]

I am being sued by Discover. SOL is 7 months away. No luck for me! I obviously don't know the legal process because I was anxiously waiting to fight them in the first court date and, I guess the court simply wanted to know if I was going to dispute it. The judge set a court date to set a court date for the trial. Yes, I typed that sentence right. I filed my replies to the courthouse and soon after that initial court date, I received a longer set of claims by discover. Do I need to file answers to them too? Or is this some kind of attempt to get me to admit guilt through these more detailed questions? The date to set a date is Nov 24th.

Thank you

[debtorshusband]

From what you've posted it's hard for me to be sure exactly what's been going on. Maybe part of the problem is you're trying to express things in layman's terms, instead of the legal terms we're familiar with. Plus, different states do things differently.

So, let me just lay out the basics of the legal process as I'm familiar with it here in California, and hopefully it will be of some help to you.

The lawsuit starts with the plaintiff filling out the Complaint. This is where he says "so-and-so owes me money." He files it with the court and a paper called the Summons is added, and the case is assigned a number. The Summons basically says "you are being sued, here's what you need to do." The Summons and Complaint must then be served to you, the defendant.

As the defendant, you then fill out a response called an Answer, wherein you dispute the plaintiff's claims, and assert any Affirmative Defenses you have. This Answer is filed with the court, and a copy is mailed to the plaintiff's attorney.

In California, the courts will then begin scheduling a series of Case Management Conferences, to monitor the progress of the case. The first one will usually determine either:

a) there's been no Answer filed, so the court will direct the plaintiff to file a default judgment, or

there's been an Answer filed, so the court will direct both sides to complete Discovery

The second conference will determine if both sides are ready for trial, and set a trial date.

This is just an example; many things could happen to change the course of events.

Now let's talk about Discovery. This a process where each side finds out what evidence the other side has. This is your opportunity to demand proof from the plaintiff. This is a detailed process, so let's just leave it at that for now.

Meanwhile, the plaintiff usually engages in Discovery by sending the defendant a Request for Admissions, a set of Interrogatories, and maybe a Request for Production of Documents. The defendant must respond to Discovery, in California it's within 30 days. Responses to Discovery requests are sent to the other party, and are not filed with the court.

A Request for Admissions is intended to be the vehicle by which the two parties agree to facts of the case that are not disputed. Collection attorneys have perverted this process by trying to get the defendant to admit to the things they've claimed. If the defendant admits to them, the plaintiff never has to provide proof of their claims.

I hope this is helpful. Perhaps it will clear things up enough for you to figure out what questions to ask next.

Good luck.

DH

[armyguy11b]

So, I don't HAVE to reply to their request for admissions that was sent after we entered discovery phase?

[KentWA]

If you do not, then they are deemed admitted to. There are lots of post here that relate to how to answer admissions. After you have read those you can ask any specific questions you may still have.

[admin]

Responding to admissions and discovery is less complex/scary than it sounds. Much of what they will ask is irrelevant or you can object to it. There are lots of examples here.

[armyguy11b]

I apologize. I forgot to state that I am in Missouri. Just had court yesterday. The attorney standing in for Palmer law offices said they told him to tell the judge that they were waiting for the response to admissions. I love this site and used it to draw up my answers to the petition. (I'll post them later.) I was asking about the request for admissions because the first 5 or 6 were the same as the petition and then there were about 12 others added that were also more specific in their accusations. I didn't know if it was a lawyer's ploy or a legal requirement. Obviously, I'm gonna reply to them now. Apparently, we are still in discovery. I didn't know this was gonna be a multiple court date thing. Like I said before, I was ready to argue my case and receive a verdict on the first court date back in October. Thank you to the 3 of you for your responses. If you want more info on my situation click on my name. The thread titled No SOL should clarify my current standing. Otherwise, thanks to all.