Jump to content

Must bring all claims or waive them


Recommended Posts

Which theory of law supports the fact that you must bring all claims you have knowledge of to the table or else lose or waive the right to make the claim?

If an OC or JDB owns 2 different accounts and files suit on one of the accounts, at what point in time does the OC or JDB waive their right to bring suit on the other account?

Edited by bad98roadster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which theory of law supports the fact that you must bring all claims you have knowledge of to the table or else lose or waive the right to make the claim?

If an OC or JDB owns 2 different accounts and files suit on one of the accounts, at what point in time does the OC or JDB waive their right to bring suit on the other account?

When the claim is barred by the SOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My only thought (that's all I'm allowed this week) is this: If the two cases involve the same creditor, and they have knowledge of both accounts and sue you consecutively rather than concurrently, (a little criminal lingo) you MAY have an argument connected to abuse of process. If there are two different creditors, my theory goes out the window. Legally, I believe they can still sue you one at a time, but it is very unfair to do this to a consumer when they had prior knowledge that the two cases were related and could have been brought at the same time, thus depriving you of your right to consolidate cases based upon facts arising from the same set of circumstances. Coltfan, did I get it right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the same OC, and 2 different alleged accounts.

The OC files suit on the alleged account ending in 1234 and not on the alleged account ending in 6789.

What is the legal theory that supports the fact that the OC has to bring all the claims into the action?

Does the OC waive the right to pursue the claims regarding the alleged account 6789?

Edited by bad98roadster
Link to comment
Share on other sites

RES JUDICATA

Latin, A thing adjudged.] A rule that a final judgment on the merits by a court having jurisdiction is conclusive between the parties to a suit as to all matters that were litigated or that could have been litigated in that suit.

The fact that they knew of both cases and they could have litigated them in the same suit.

Its a stretch but you may get the judge to agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's called consolidation. You hire three contractors to do work on your house, they all do a bad job. You sue all three of them. The cases should be made into one case (consolidated) because they all involve the same plaintiff and arise from the same set of circumstances. (bad work) It is much more efficient for the court to ajudicate this as one case and apportion damages accordingly. Three separate lawsuits makes no sense and clogs up the docket. An OC filing consecutive lawsuits when they could have filed one is also prejudicial to the defendant and smacks of harrassment. If these are indeed filed, move for consolidation. If they have not filed both, you have no grounds for consolidation. I guess legally they can torture you forever one account at a time, although there should be a way around this connected to some sort of vexatious litigation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • 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.