Jump to content

Yet another question, Graduated Denial

Recommended Posts

Would it be totally improper to include a graduated denial with

my answers to their discovery, and My discovery to them.

With my cover letter that says simply enclosed are the replies you requested

from me, as well as my Interrogatories, Requests for Admissions and Requests for Production of Documents to you.

As required by State Rules of Civil Procedure, I have enclosed 3 copies of my Discovery to you.

I thought I might attach a single copy of a graduated denial to this.

These will not be filed in my court, as Discovery is not required to be.

Just looking for opinions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you also use the graduated denial in your answer to the summons? If that is the case, I can't see why you would not be able to use in the Discovery process as you are maintaining this is not your account.

No I did not use it then.

My initial answers and affirmative defenses are weak in my own view...

I did not do them.... (too long and complicated for here.)

So, now that I am handling myself, with all the wonderful help

from all of you I do not want to miss any opportunity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't see it hurting, but again I am not sure. For me, when I first received my colelction notice I sent a VOD as well as my notarized graduated denial letter. Then when I was sued by Citi, I included that in my defenses as well as an attachment that was sent to Citi/lawyer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did it and it is in the mail today.

I attached the following to my coverletter to them.

Since I did not do this with my DV I did not want to wait.

This is a combined denial from 2 different sources.



Comes now the defendant,__________________, and for plea denies that he/she is liable to the plaintiff in this case for the amount sued for on the sworn account herein, and demands strict proof thereof.

Defendant states in this sworn affidavit; that the affiant denies that the alleged debt is the affiant's debt and that if it is the affiant's debt that it is still a valid debt and if it is a valid debt denies the amount sued for is the correct amount.



And the rest was the notary stuff.


So, if I am wrong.... at least it is out there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.