Trial anyone?

[rippedoff]

Has anyone been all the way to trial without settling or getting summary judgement?

[dimon]

my set in a month and I am trying to get arbitration now...not sure what way I should go now

[Linda7]

Has anyone been all the way to trial without settling or getting summary judgement?

A lot of people have. I made it to the door of the courthouse, but then the attorney caught me and after a 3 minute discussion . . . he went inside and dismissed the case with the clerk.

If you read through the threads though, you'll see others who have made it all the way and been seen before a judge and often times, they win!

[Chapel Hill]

Plaintiff always has the burden of proof. It's better to go to trial because nine times out of 10 the plaintiff can not meet their burden. That said you as the defendant have to lay the proper foundation that the jurist hearing your matter knows for a fact you will appeal his/her decision if they step one inch over the line to help the plaintiff. You do this by your actions. You file multiple motions. You win multiple motions. You appear each and every time your case is called. You show up at each hearing ready for a fight. You look the damn judge straight in the eye and argue based on the facts and the law. Do this and you'll be ok in a bench trial. Jury trials work when they work. I have never prosecuted an action before a jury in United States District Court or in Cali Muni when we had municipal courts or in todays limited or unlimited environment.

[Linda7]

I would have preferred to go to trial as well since I knew that the plaintiff didn't have the proof, but with no counterclaims - I couldn't make them go on into the courtroom. They just dismissed "without" prejudice before seeing the judge as they knew it would be dismissed "with" prejudice if I ever got into the courtroom!

[Guest usctrojanalum]

Plaintiff always has the burden of proof. It's better to go to trial because nine times out of 10 the plaintiff can not meet their burden.

lol, you need to go to court on a day they have a trial calendar and see how wrong this statement is.

I been to trial once over a medical debt and lost, I thought I had a decent case since it had to do with assignment of benefits but didn't work out.

Edited August 18, 2010 by usctrojanalum

[WhoCares1000]

But usc, medical is a different beast than credit cards. Most medical bills are account stated because it would be hard to get a heart attack victim to sign a contract and all they have to prove is that you received the services, you were billed for said services, and you did not pay the bill. You are ultimately responsible whether you have insurance or not and if the insurance company refuses to pay, you have to take it up with the insurance company, not the medical provider.

Also, many of these cases are not with the OC but with JDBs and most of them do not have the proper assignment paperwork which means they cannot prove they even have standing to be in court let alone have a case to prove.

[rippedoff]

Well I haven't been winning motions. Judge is bent of arguing the case for the plaintiff and not permitting discovery nor allowing defenses. Now it comes down to whether OC has any original documents. Errors all over the place but I'm not crazy about going through an appeal.

[chuckygee]

Well I haven't been winning motions. Judge is bent of arguing the case for the plaintiff and not permitting discovery nor allowing defenses. Now it comes down to whether OC has any original documents. Errors all over the place but I'm not crazy about going through an appeal.

If this does make it to trial, make sure there is a court reporter, even if you have to pay for the service. That makes a transcript available and put the judge on notice, he is on record. This may reign in the court to follow the rules before the need for an appeal. Also study up on your procedures and laws so you can object when appropriate if during the trial anything inappropriate is said or done.

[admin]

Very few cases actually make it to trial. Most judges don't want to go this way either. If you can convince them *or the plaintiff* there is no case, this is your best chance of winning.

[Guest usctrojanalum]

Also, many of these cases are not with the OC but with JDBs and most of them do not have the proper assignment paperwork which means they cannot prove they even have standing to be in court let alone have a case to prove.

Plaintiff's that are willing to go to as far as trial, typically are not lacking the necessary evidence to prevail at trial. So saying that 90% of plaintiff's do not have the proof necessary to win is naive. Yes the burden is on the plaintiff but in civil court you only need to win by a preponderence of the evidence it's not like criminal court where it needs to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

[Chapel Hill]

Plaintiff's that are willing to go to as far as trial, typically are not lacking the necessary evidence to prevail at trial. So saying that 90% of plaintiff's do not have the proof necessary to win is naive. Yes the burden is on the plaintiff but in civil court you only need to win by a preponderence of the evidence it's not like criminal court where it needs to be beyond a reasonable doubt.

=========================================

There are 58 counties in California. I've reviewed Limited and Unlimited Jurisdiction cases prosecuted by law firms who file 150 plus cases every 6 months. No case I've ever come across has gone to trial. So maybe in your part of the world and in your experience 90% of the collection cases aren't adjudicated to verdict so be it. I have pled enough cases successfully to stand by my statement. To be clear, no superior court of california limited or unlimited jurisdiction in Santa Barbara, San Diego, Santa Clara, Sacramento, Ventura, Yolo, Napa nor any other county where I'll read cases did any Plaintiff take their case to verdict. At $325 or more to file only a moron files dozens of cases they aren't prepared to argue a bench or jury trial.

SC, my bud if you got links to cases that prove I'm wrong post your links.

[Chapel Hill]

lol, you need to go to court on a day they have a trial calendar and see how wrong this statement is.

I been to trial once over a medical debt and lost, I thought I had a decent case since it had to do with assignment of benefits but didn't work out.

===================================

You lost at trial. I got beat in a residential real estate matter. I fought to a tie in a commercial real estate issue. I've probably won 8 plus cases in different jurisdictions. I'm not seeing the what you say is wrong in my previous posting. In collection cases in the state of California I've never ever read in a file that the case went to verdict. There was never a finding of fact in all my research. Name a county and I've done a query based on who the players are in California. Records in San Bernadino, Marin, Fresno and Butte bear out my Plaintiff don't prove their cases statement.

SC send over a link with cases that Plaintiff won at trial in contested matters.

[Guest usctrojanalum]

You are aware there is a difference between a case not progressing as far as trial, and plaintiff's losing at trial 90% of the time right?

[Chapel Hill]

What I am aware of is no case in any of the 58 counties in the state of California wherein a collection case was won by an original creditor or jdb straight up or down, bench or jury.

SC you got links to something different I can get my glasses. Again, I've looked in San Bernandino, Napa, Los Angeles, San Diego, Orange, Santa Barbara, Santa Clara, drivin to Sacramento, Contra Costa, driven to Fresno, Yolo(don't ask me what I was doing in Yolo county) but I've never seen one collection case taken to trial or won on the merits when defended.

Paul Smith, Esq. flys all over the state of California just kicking the shyt out of the debt collection bastards. There is a guy in Sac who's pricey but he does good work. A jerk in Marin will take your cash and do a half a$$ job of defending.

In California we as consumers also have the Roth defense so SC show me what you're talking about with links. Anyone here can google a great many of the California courts, do a query on Cap1, BofA, FIA or any other major player and get that no, NONE, NOT a 1 case was won by a debt collector straight up at trial when contested. These bastards fold because they can't meet their burden if you hold them to task. We have very specific laws here in California and it just doesn't cut it to produce a bunch of so called statements and you get to lien my home or one of my buildings, hell no. Not the way it works here. SC show me something. Pick a county my friend. I will find my glasses. If you're thinking santa barbara, I'd say good pick. But no cigar.

[Massive]

Agreed!! They get exposed at Bench trials if defended properly and no way can they win a jury trial on a debt collection suit. What is the Roth defense??

[rikkivs]

There are quite a few cases where the debt collection suit goes to trial for some JDB or debt collection mill like Hunt and Henriques AND the pro se litigant is unprepared to mount an adequate defense. There are many cases that I've seen where A. Atkins is the rental attorney for a JDB or OC and smokes the pro se litigant on the day of trial. And sometimes the case gets as far as trial but on the day of trial, the pro se litigant is a no show and then they win by default! Other times, a judge might intervene on behalf of a pro se litigant and cast their arguments in legal language in such a way that they can win.

A good example was a case with an ethnic East Indian person as the Defendant in a debt collection lawsuit with Capital 1. I mention the ethnicity of the Defendant because their name is very unique and I don't feel comfortable citing the case for that reason, but in their answer to the suit, they said "Those collection agencies and their dirty tricks!!! They buy these debts for pennies on the dollar ...". (It appeared as though Cap 1 might have bought the debt or absorbed it from another institution). The other boxes on the Contract Answer sheet were checked where the Defendant said he had no knowledge of the account and thus denied. You might question his answers wording, but come trial time, the judge intervened and said that his defense was legally called UNJUST ENRICHMENT. The Defendant won!

However, in Alameda County Superior Court cases, this seems to be more of an exception than a rule. Just goes to show that we all see different things when we research these cases. Ultimately CP is right to the extent that most of these cases are won via summary judgment motions and not in trial.

Edited August 20, 2010 by rikkivs

[Guest usctrojanalum]

There are quite a few cases where the debt collection suit goes to trial for some JDB or debt collection mill like Hunt and Henriques AND the pro se litigant is unprepared to mount an adequate defense. There are many cases that I've seen where A. Atkins is the rental attorney for a JDB or OC and smokes the pro se litigant on the day of trial.

Ty rikki.

[nobk4me]

Around here, it's more likely that the judge will go to bat for the plaintiff creditor represented by legal counsel.

[Chapel Hill]

Around here, it's more likely that the judge will go to bat for the plaintiff creditor represented by legal counsel.

Mosiac case landed before the presiding judge in Martinez. The judge just didn't follow the law. I think ultimately Mosiac settled the case. No money should have ever changed hands because the plaintiff couldnt prove their case the judge just acted as though anyone who was sued owed the money regardless of the lack of admissible evidence presented by Mikey Hunt via some rent a suit.

[Chapel Hill]

There are quite a few cases where the debt collection suit goes to trial for some JDB or debt collection mill like Hunt and Henriques AND the pro se litigant is unprepared to mount an adequate defense. There are many cases that I've seen where A. Atkins is the rental attorney for a JDB or OC and smokes the pro se litigant on the day of trial.

=================================================

http://apps.alameda.courts.ca.gov/domainweb/html/index.html

This is the link to domain web. Please pass on some of those case numbers because I don't see it. Berkeley, Pleasanton, Hayward and Oakland both limited and unlimited jurisdictions I don't see these cases going to trial. I see defaults. I don't recall reading a great many Law & Motion actions on collection cases. So please just pass the cases and we can all use the domain web link in this posting to read the cases adjudicated via a bench trial.

[jackson212]

Has anyone been all the way to trial without settling or getting summary judgement?

i thought about doing this but i couldnt resist a partial summary judgment motion. so i filed one and it was granted.

summary judgment can be a powerful tool to use, especially if you are a defendant and they have no proof. and especially if they are jdb with no proof.

whats the story behind this question, OP?

[rikkivs]

There are quite a few cases where the debt collection suit goes to trial for some JDB or debt collection mill like Hunt and Henriques AND the pro se litigant is unprepared to mount an adequate defense. There are many cases that I've seen where A. Atkins is the rental attorney for a JDB or OC and smokes the pro se litigant on the day of trial.

=================================================

http://apps.alameda.courts.ca.gov/domainweb/html/index.html

This is the link to domain web. Please pass on some of those case numbers because I don't see it. Berkeley, Pleasanton, Hayward and Oakland both limited and unlimited jurisdictions I don't see these cases going to trial. I see defaults. I don't recall reading a great many Law & Motion actions on collection cases. So please just pass the cases and we can all use the domain web link in this posting to read the cases adjudicated via a bench trial.

And I can't recall specific case numbers since this research has occurred over the past two and a half years. However, I recall enough to remember the name of the rental attorney, which I clearly stated and have seen quite a few cases where A. Atkins won at trial. A. Atkins represents debt collection firms as a rental attorney all throughout Northern California, particularly the Bay Area.

I am quite certain that if you search Judges that do case management and look under register of actions for each case, you will see lots of debt collection suits and of those a non trivial percentage do actually go to trial. The number of suits seemed to peak from 2008-2009 from what I've gathered, but I haven't been to Domainweb in a few weeks.

[Chapel Hill]

I am quite certain that if you search Judges that do case management and look under register of actions for each case, you will see lots of debt collection suits and of those a non trivial percentage do actually go to trial. The number of suits seemed to peak from 2008-2009 from what I've gathered, but I haven't been to Domainweb in a few weeks.

==================================================

You do know that every action in both limited and unlimited jurisdictions have CMCs after the case is assigned a trial department and jurist.

While I agree with you 100% that in Fremont, Alameda, Pleasanton, Hayward, Oakland and Berkeley a great many collection cases are filled every single month. There are 4 firms that average 75 plus cases a month since April 2009. We all know these plays, Erica B of socal, Mikey Hunt & his property J, my good friends H&Z of LA county and of course that in-house counsel guy on Spring in beautiful downtown LA for JPMorgan Chase bank. These same players file dozens of cases not just in Alameda County but in the other 8 counties which comprise the SF Bay Area.

Ive reviewed cases since April 2010 in person at 2 courthouses in Alameda County. I'm on domainweb twice a week. I've never once seen a collection case go to trial in any case I've reviewed, ever.

These guys take defaults. They don't try cases. The rental guys I've seen in action couldn't competently argue a case. In my direct personal experience the named partner I've gone against 3 times this year never beat me in open court.

If these were the same kind of lawyers representing Cap1 in federal court from firms like Morrison & Foerster then my research would have yielded facts consistent with your representations. However the undisputed fact is, folks with MOFO skills don't do this kind of work. Normal people with good skills don't go around picking on people who have had a divorce, a major illness or a job loss. It's just not the fight that most gear up for.

This A Atkins is not a party to any limited or unlimited jurisdiction action. Do you remember which law firm he represented in the status conference or motion hearing you attended?

The reason these cases don't get tried in Alameda County is just like the other 57 California counties you need admissible evidence. If you read the complaints signed by attorneys it is rock solid clear that most of these cases have an evidence problem. The evidence will stand at the MSJ margin but isn't admissible at trial which leaves the cross-defendant with no case and NO right to appeal.

Paul Smith, Esq from socal has in my research never ever been beaten at trial by one of these original creditors. Of course anyone with a link to a case or 3 where Smith has been beaten please share. I could surely use a bargaining chip to negotiate his fee for appeal work. I'm not above trying to get a lower rate if someone can provide a case or 4 where he's gotten whipped.

[rikkivs]

Just because you haven't seen the cases to which I am referring doesn't mean they don't exist. You are trying to be devils advocate but it is serving no purpose. On this board, we speak from our experiences personally and what we've read. With the myriad of collections cases filed in Alameda County Superior Court, it would be impossible to peruse all that have been filed over the past few months even. I already told you that the cases that I examined were generally from 2008-2009 and A. Atkins is a RENTAL attorney who has represented LOTS of the very firms you named.

I don't come on this board to get into contests with other posters; only to share and learn. You would do well to keep that in mind before you try to contradict everything I say. After all, most posters from CA who are regulars here know that I speak only what I know and freely admit when I am incorrect.

You would do well to learn these lessons and get over your ego, because this forum isn't about you.