Jump to content

Answer to Interrogatories, Discovery and Request for Admissions


Recommended Posts

1st off, your affirmative defenses do not apply, they are not affirmative defenses, or you have to prove the defense (SOL.) Statute of frauds does not apply. Standing is for the plaintiff to prove. The balance etc... is for the plaintiff to prove. Unjust enrichment is likely irrelevant unless they came at you with quantum meruit or something, and even then, I'm not sure how that'd play out.

Now then, with that first interrogatory, I'd set a fun little trap for them. I would object to handing them my SSN on the grounds that it is private and sensitive information. I would then tell them that I would make myself available to confirm or deny whether or not the SSN they have in their files matches mine if they are asking for the SSN for purposes of ensuring that they are suing the correct person. Then I'd give my name and address.

It's just a small chink in their armor, but them taking you up on the offer could be construed as an admission that they didn't do their homework and do proper skip tracing before suing you. That's all assuming that they have it in the first place. If they don't, or they pulled it off of an accruent report or something similar, I'd be after them with a vengeance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Also I am sending a discovery of my own. Would this help my affirmatives?"

No it helps your case and they are great requests, but as USAGI correctly advised you, dump the affirmative defenses.

Response to Interrogatory 14:

Defendant disputes alleged “account” and all responses to request for admissions reflected the defendants denial of the connection of the account to the defendant. The defendant has no records to provide in regards to alleged “account.”

"This one should be objected to, but I'll have to think about the grounds."

Overly broad, compound question, seeks information not relevant as the Defendant stands on her objections as proper and case law is not required when objecting to improper discovery requests (unless it is, which I've never heard). Furthermore, objection as request seeks specific trial strategy of the Defendant.

The Defendant will properly comply with the rules of procedure and turn over all documents that the Defendant plans to use at trial and will provide the Plaintiff a witness list. Defendant is not required to supply the Plaintiff with how each and every witness will testify as to certain matters of law. Plaintiff has the right to depose any witness for the Defendant and if Defendant wants the specific information as requested in this interrogatory, that is the proper remedy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Overly broad, compound question, seeks information not relevant as the Defendant stands on her objections as proper and case law is not required when objecting to improper discovery requests (unless it is, which I've never heard). Furthermore, objection as request seeks specific trial strategy of the Defendant.

I don't believe the Plaintiff was asking for case law to support the Defendant's position. The interrogatory states "specific facts or laws". I believe they were referring to state statutes. If the Defendant had denied based upon the statute of limitations, she would have cited her state's law for the SOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the Defendant had denied based upon the statute of limitations, she would have cited her state's law for the SOL.

While I don't think she would have to state the law or statute, that would be part of a motion to dismiss, I would agree if this was about the statute of limitations she should include the statute(s), even if not required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dump the defenses? meaning do not put ALL of them in my responses? I have filed them with my original answers to my claim. Should I update my filed answer to the original claim if I am to remove them all from the answer to interrogatories? I plan for the worst possible scenario in representing myself in this case but I figure it can't hurt to try to fight it. I am by no means nearly as smart as the lawyers who are suing me. Would the above users delete my quoted materials above by editing them please?

Affirmative defenses are yours to prove. Proving them implies that you understand them, how they apply to your case and what evidence is needed to prove them. The only one that really has a chance is the SOL. Because you don't have the records, you would have to prove that by getting the information from them in discovery. Now that's something that they wouldn't want to cough up because it would open them up to a nice little FDCPA lawsuit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I don't think she would have to state the law or statute, that would be part of a motion to dismiss, I would agree if this was about the statute of limitations she should include the statute(s), even if not required.

Oh, I didn't mean she HAD to cite the law or that this is about the SOL. I was just giving an example of the type of "law" to which I think the Plaintiff was referring because I don't think they were referring to case law. Sorry I wasn't more clear. :oops:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am by no means nearly as smart as the lawyers who are suing me.

Yes you are. I've faced these people in court, they are the legal equivalent of Beefaroni girl on the prison serving chow line. (Vinny will love this) My dog could outsmart the average collections lawyer. Just for fun, throw below this at them and let them try to figure out how to get around it. The only place your SSAN would appear MAY be on the original application. Did they produce it? If not, too bad.

Social Security: The Privacy Act and the Freedom of Information Act

Interrogatories # 7

State the name, address, and telephone number of any witness who has information regarding the claims or defenses raised in this Action. For each witness identified, provide a reasonably detailed statement of their involvement in or knowledge of matters relevant to this action.

Defendant has no witnesses planned at this time. Defendant will properly inform the plaintiff in accordance with the rules of procedure if any such witnesses are planned.

Interrogatories #8

State the name, address, and telephone number of any witness (including experts) whom you intend to call at a trial of this Action. For each witness identified, provide a reasonably detailed statement of their anticipated testimony relevant to this Action.

Does not apply. See response to ROG 7.

Like DUH, and they accuse US of copying and pasting.

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.