Jump to content

I can't believe this!


Recommended Posts

This law firm is unbelievable! I won my case three separate times, first the MSJ was denied in Dec of2011, the attorney then illegally showed up with an Order for Summary Judgement on January 27, 2012 the judge erroneously signed. This caused me to file a Motion to Vacate and dismiss with prejudice, it was granted and the Order signed April 25, 2012 and filed. The plaintiffs had a Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment set the same day the judge DENIED it out right!

I found out today that the attorney went to the bailiff and told her that the judge did not hear the entire Motion -- which is clearly a lie...as the judge addressed both my Motion and the Plaintiff's Motion separately! He is now filing a Motion of Entry! :evil:

This is just B.S. They lost! I think it is time to sue them!!!

Anyone else had this happen to them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys, the support on here is awesome!

Yes, I think malicious prosecution is justified also, I have surgery on Tuesday for seizures and I have to worry about this crap! Now I am very emotionally distressed...

This is a definite abuse of the legal system dang I should not have to worry about this.

Well, this weekend is study up time!!!

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you guys think that I should try to sue on my own or go through an attorney?

One thing that an attorney will bring to the table is resources. Resources to depose witnesses. Resources to put everything together.

But, if you want to make a blood sport out of it and go for maximum humiliation as part of the relief that you're requesting...

::BigGun::

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope you tell us about the continuation of your problem and the results so we can take this valuable lesson. Thank you

I definitely will do that.

I just do not understand how they think they will win after being shut down 3 times!!:confused:

No matter if we go before the judge or a jury trial???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just do not understand how they think they will win after being shut down 3 times!!:

Can't fix stupid, but you can make it expensive for them acting with complete stupidity.

Also, while they are obviously not responsible for your issue with seizures before they ever contacted you, they are responsible for aggravating that issue or making it worse than it already was.

They can't claim you already had a medical condition and their conduct did not rise to the level to cause you medical issues.

They have to take the victim (you) as they find them. It's like having a bad back and then getting rear ended. The person hitting you can't argue that you already had a bad back so they are not responsible for the pain in your back.

It's called "egg shell doctrine" I've used it in FDCPA cases to argue the collection agency re-aggravated my anxiety attacks. Their argument was one collection letter would not cause an anxiety attack. My response was true, for a person that did not have anxiety attack issues prior, but I have a medical condition and you caused it to be worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am posting a very rough draft of what I have come up with so far:

Input is appreciated it is a work in progress.:roll:

Violations by Plaintiff and their attorney’s:

Malicious prosecution: Elements of Proof-

(1) That the original case was terminated in favor of the plaintiff. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment was denied on Dec 9, 2011 (See Exhibit A)

(2) That the defendant played an active role in the original case, Defendant in this case was the Plaintiff in the prior case and knew that the documentation submitted in the original case had no supportive evidence and was hoping for a default judgment. Counsel stated on two separate occasions that he understood why the Motion for Summary Judgment had to be denied and he was aware of the discrepancies. (Exhibit B)

(3) That the defendant did not have probable cause or reasonable grounds to support the original case, the case was denied due to lack of proof (Exhibit C)

(4) That the defendant initiated or continued the initial case with an improper purpose. In the Plaintiff’s attempt to obtain a judgment at any cost they along with their counsel illegally submitted documents to the court on Jan. 27, 2012, April 9, 2012 and on April 27, 2012 reported false information to the court bailiff and intention to file Motion of Entry (Exhibit D)

Vexatious litigation:

Vexation litigation is typically classified as vexatious when an attorney or a pro se litigant repeatedly files groundless lawsuits and repeatedly loses.

(1.) The Plaintiff has lost on three separate occasions but continued to provide the courts with the same evidence contained in the initial complaint. (Exhibit E)

Such litigation is regarded as frivolous. . A person who has been subjected to vexatious litigation may sue the plaintiff for Malicious Prosecution, seeking damages for any costs and injuries associated with the original lawsuit. Attorneys who encourage vexatious litigation are subject to discipline for violating rules of professional conduct and may be suspended from the Practice of Law or disbarred. A plaintiff may also recover damages for mental suffering of a kind that would normally be expected to follow from the original action.

Fraud upon the court:

Fraud on the court occurs when the judicial machinery itself has been tainted, such as when an attorney, who is an officer of the court, is involved in the perpetration of a fraud or makes material misrepresentations to the court, the end result being where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.

(1) Plaintiff has continually engaged in a pattern of activity that evidences a knowing and willful attempt to use unscrupulous tactics to defeat meritorious claims of Defendant in this case The counsel for the Plaintiff, with full knowledge, submitted an Order for Summary Judgment on Jan 27, 2012 which was dated October of 2011 and which they were not entitled to by a matter of law.

(2) In their renewed Motion for Summary Judgment they attempted to say that averments that had not been answered in August of 2010 should be deemed admissible even though they were sent to an address were they Defendant was no longer living and they were withdrawn from the record by counsel in March of 2011. (Exhibits F)

(3) Again on April 25, 2012 when they claimed that the Judge had not heard the full Motion when in fact the Judge ruled on both Motions that day.

Conspiracy: Main Elements to prove conspiracy

The essence of conspiracy is the agreement, general intent or preconceived plan, to do an unlawful act between two or more persons in this case, Plaintiff and their counsels

An attempt to commit a crime is an offense when an accused makes a substantial but unsuccessful effort to commit a crime in this case:

(1.) Appearing with an Order for Summary Judgment after a clear and direct denial of the Motion for Summary Judgment on Dec 9, 2011. The Plaintiff and its counsel decided they were going to keep quiet regarding this information and let the Defendant think the denial was still in place until such a time they could enforce the Order. The Order for Summary Judgment was accidently discovered by the Defendant in March of 2012. Almost two months later. (Exhibit G)

(2.) The inclusion of legal documents in their Motion for Renewed Summary Judgment which was not legally admissible (Exhibit H)

(3.) The act of counsel, on April 25, 2012, with the court bailiff in stating that the Judge had not heard the whole Motion to Vacate and his intention to file a Motion for Entry. This after counsel stood directly before the judge and asked about his ruling on the Motion for Renewed Summary Judgment .The Judge stated,” I am making this very clear to myself and you there will be no judgment for Summary Motion.” (Exhibit I)

The elements of attempt include intent to commit a crime

(1.) Full knowledge the Plaintiff was not granted a Motion for Summary Judgment, along with the fact that they were completely aware that both motions were heard and addressed on April 25,2012 and the Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment denied again however, stated the motion was only partially heard

An apparent ability to complete the crime

(2.) knowledge of court procedure as professionals in the industry that the Pro Se litigant did not have which allowed them to manipulate the system successfully for their gain

Lastly an overt act

(1.) Appearing with an Order for Summary Judgment after a clear and direct denial of the Motion for Summary Judgment on Dec 9, 2011. (Exhibit A)

(2.) The inclusion of “legal” documents in their Motion for Renewed Summary Judgment which was not admissible (Exhibit H)

(3.) The act of counsel with the court bailiff in stating that the Judge had not heard the whole Motion to Vacate and his intention to file a Motion for Entry. (Exhibit I)

An overt act is an act that is performed to execute the criminal intention and will naturally achieve that result unless prevented by some external cause. Both members of counsel intentionally lied on behalf of their client and submitted illegal documents on separate occasions as referenced above which is considered an overt act. The counsel in this litigation case has acted outside the rules of law and apparently feels that ethical exclusion in order to zealously represent their client justifies their behavior.

Violations of the FDCPA:

FDCPA: § 807. False or misleading representations (10): The following conduct is a violation of this section: The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer. Obviously as seen in the above paragraphs and accompanying exhibits, the Plaintiff’s and their attorney’s engaged in false and misleading representation in order to obtain their goal.

§ 808. Unfair practices: A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. The Plaintiff and their attorneys engaged in Malicious Prosecution, Vexatious Litigation, and Fraud upon the Court and Conspiracy. These practices are not only unfair but unconscionable as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think fraud upon the court will fly as a cause of action. This is something for the court to enforce, not you. You can include the facts as background in the complaint. We'll show you how to write one when you're ready. Don't forget negligent infliction of emotional distress. (Intentional is harder to prove) Get a letter from your doctor to support this. You need to cite specific state statutes in each Count. You do not have to define the terms to the court as you are doing here.

Also, you want Civil conspiracy, not criminal conspiracy. Again, you cannot sue under a criminal statute. There is a slight difference, look it up. Some states don't recognize it though. Accusing people of criminal activity in a civil complaint is a bad idea and will lead to a motion to strike. Citing some state statute they violated in pursuit of the scheme will do, you don't need to say they committed a crime, leave that up to the court to decide. You're a pro se litigant, not the Attorney General.

Don't forget to sue them jointly and severally. That means any one of the defendants has to pay the whole bill if the other guy can't. Request their liability policy in discovery. Often they must have a surety bond as well.

I would absolutely file a complaint with the bar association for this. You can't threaten them with this to gain an advantage in a law suit, so don't do that. Just file it and let them deal with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think fraud upon the court will fly as a cause of action. This is something for the court to enforce, not you. You can include the facts as background in the complaint. We'll show you how to write one when you're ready. Don't forget negligent infliction of emotional distress. (Intentional is harder to prove) Get a letter from your doctor to support this. You need to cite specific state statutes in each Count. You do not have to define the terms to the court as you are doing here.

Also, you want Civil conspiracy, not criminal conspiracy. Again, you cannot sue under a criminal statute. There is a slight difference, look it up. Some states don't recognize it though. Accusing people of criminal activity in a civil complaint is a bad idea and will lead to a motion to strike. Citing some state statute they violated in pursuit of the scheme will do, you don't need to say they committed a crime, leave that up to the court to decide. You're a pro se litigant, not the Attorney General.

Don't forget to sue them jointly and severally. That means any one of the defendants has to pay the whole bill if the other guy can't. Request their liability policy in discovery. Often they must have a surety bond as well.

I would absolutely file a complaint with the bar association for this. You can't threaten them with this to gain an advantage in a law suit, so don't do that. Just file it and let them deal with it.

Okay, so I will take out the fraud, I know about the civil conspiracy. The definitions were a guideline for me, I used them as check list but they will not be in the court doc. I would appreciate very much help writing this. Thank you. Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress I am having some problems articulating. I do not know how to start that one.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Negligence simply means that they had a duty (statutory, etc) that they violated. You don't have to prove intent, just that they had an obligation not to injure, but they did it anyway. A duty that a reasonable person acting under similar circumstances would not have violated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You would file a counterclaim if the rules allow it at this time. MSJ is a completely different animal. Read up.

The reason I asked is because I did consult an attorney who stated I would file a MSJ at this time-this did not make sense to me.

Thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am posting a very rough draft of what I have come up with so far:

Input is appreciated it is a work in progress.:roll:

Violations by Plaintiff and their attorney’s:

Malicious prosecution: Elements of Proof-

(1) That the original case was terminated in favor of the plaintiff. Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment was denied on Dec 9, 2011 (See Exhibit A).

Please reread what you have. You use plaintiff for who's summary judgment was denied. Do you mean defendant in this case as they were formerly the plaintiff? Couple of other places I was confused for same reasons.

(2) That the defendant played an active role in the original case, Defendant in this case was the Plaintiff in the prior case and knew that the documentation submitted in the original case had no supportive evidence and was hoping for a default judgment. Counsel stated on two separate occasions that he understood why the Motion for Summary Judgment had to be denied and he was aware of the discrepancies. (Exhibit B)

(3) That the defendant did not have probable cause or reasonable grounds to support the original case, the case was denied due to lack of proof (Exhibit C)

(4) That the defendant initiated or continued the initial case with an improper purpose. In the Plaintiff’s attempt to obtain a judgment at any cost they along with their counsel illegally submitted documents to the court on Jan. 27, 2012, April 9, 2012 and on April 27, 2012 reported false information to the court bailiff and intention to file Motion of Entry (Exhibit D)

Vexatious litigation:

Vexation litigation is typically classified as vexatious when an attorney or a pro se litigant repeatedly files groundless lawsuits and repeatedly loses.

(1.) The Plaintiff has lost on three separate occasions but continued to provide the courts with the same evidence contained in the initial complaint. (Exhibit E)

Such litigation is regarded as frivolous. . A person who has been subjected to vexatious litigation may sue the plaintiff for Malicious Prosecution, seeking damages for any costs and injuries associated with the original lawsuit. Attorneys who encourage vexatious litigation are subject to discipline for violating rules of professional conduct and may be suspended from the Practice of Law or disbarred. A plaintiff may also recover damages for mental suffering of a kind that would normally be expected to follow from the original action.

Fraud upon the court:

Fraud on the court occurs when the judicial machinery itself has been tainted, such as when an attorney, who is an officer of the court, is involved in the perpetration of a fraud or makes material misrepresentations to the court, the end result being where the impartial functions of the court have been directly corrupted.

(1) Plaintiff has continually engaged in a pattern of activity that evidences a knowing and willful attempt to use unscrupulous tactics to defeat meritorious claims of Defendant in this case The counsel for the Plaintiff, with full knowledge, submitted an Order for Summary Judgment on Jan 27, 2012 which was dated October of 2011 and which they were not entitled to by a matter of law.

(2) In their renewed Motion for Summary Judgment they attempted to say that averments that had not been answered in August of 2010 should be deemed admissible even though they were sent to an address were they Defendant was no longer living and they were withdrawn from the record by counsel in March of 2011. (Exhibits F)

(3) Again on April 25, 2012 when they claimed that the Judge had not heard the full Motion when in fact the Judge ruled on both Motions that day.

Conspiracy: Main Elements to prove conspiracy

The essence of conspiracy is the agreement, general intent or preconceived plan, to do an unlawful act between two or more persons in this case, Plaintiff and their counsels

An attempt to commit a crime is an offense when an accused makes a substantial but unsuccessful effort to commit a crime in this case:

(1.) Appearing with an Order for Summary Judgment after a clear and direct denial of the Motion for Summary Judgment on Dec 9, 2011. The Plaintiff and its counsel decided they were going to keep quiet regarding this information and let the Defendant think the denial was still in place until such a time they could enforce the Order. The Order for Summary Judgment was accidently discovered by the Defendant in March of 2012. Almost two months later. (Exhibit G)

(2.) The inclusion of legal documents in their Motion for Renewed Summary Judgment which was not legally admissible (Exhibit H)

(3.) The act of counsel, on April 25, 2012, with the court bailiff in stating that the Judge had not heard the whole Motion to Vacate and his intention to file a Motion for Entry. This after counsel stood directly before the judge and asked about his ruling on the Motion for Renewed Summary Judgment .The Judge stated,” I am making this very clear to myself and you there will be no judgment for Summary Motion.” (Exhibit I)

The elements of attempt include intent to commit a crime

(1.) Full knowledge the Plaintiff was not granted a Motion for Summary Judgment, along with the fact that they were completely aware that both motions were heard and addressed on April 25,2012 and the Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment denied again however, stated the motion was only partially heard

An apparent ability to complete the crime

(2.) knowledge of court procedure as professionals in the industry that the Pro Se litigant did not have which allowed them to manipulate the system successfully for their gain

Lastly an overt act

(1.) Appearing with an Order for Summary Judgment after a clear and direct denial of the Motion for Summary Judgment on Dec 9, 2011. (Exhibit A)

(2.) The inclusion of “legal” documents in their Motion for Renewed Summary Judgment which was not admissible (Exhibit H)

(3.) The act of counsel with the court bailiff in stating that the Judge had not heard the whole Motion to Vacate and his intention to file a Motion for Entry. (Exhibit I)

An overt act is an act that is performed to execute the criminal intention and will naturally achieve that result unless prevented by some external cause. Both members of counsel intentionally lied on behalf of their client and submitted illegal documents on separate occasions as referenced above which is considered an overt act. The counsel in this litigation case has acted outside the rules of law and apparently feels that ethical exclusion in order to zealously represent their client justifies their behavior.

Violations of the FDCPA:

FDCPA: § 807. False or misleading representations (10): The following conduct is a violation of this section: The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer. Obviously as seen in the above paragraphs and accompanying exhibits, the Plaintiff’s and their attorney’s engaged in false and misleading representation in order to obtain their goal.

§ 808. Unfair practices: A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. The Plaintiff and their attorneys engaged in Malicious Prosecution, Vexatious Litigation, and Fraud upon the Court and Conspiracy. These practices are not only unfair but unconscionable as well.

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.