Jump to content

Here we go, 3 cases at the same hearing


Recommended Posts

After reading up on a lot of these threads I took the advise to start checking the docket often when in the middle of a case because things are decided and entered without notification or while its in process. Well low and behold I have 3 cases being heard at the same time.

 

It started with a summons from Fred Hanna for Cap1 in Oct. 2 weeks later I got a default judgment in the mail on a Cap1 case and thought this was decided(I was admittedly a little uninformed at that point) so I waited for some communication like a demand or something. Next I get a notice of hearing for a default judgment and thats when I noticed the 2 cases had different case #s and now I'm late to answer case #2. After research I found the 1st case was improper because they served notice on my 13 yr old son. So I went to the default hearing for case 2 after studying up on this board and entered a late answer(with affirmative defenses) due to circumstances with 1st case and got it admitted into evidence along with a continuance to prepare. I filed motion to set aside 1st judgment for failure to provide acceptable due process along with denial of charges and affirmative defenses. I then answered a 3rd Cap1 case from Hanna 3 days later with denial and affirmative defenses.

 

I checked this morning and all 3 will be heard at the same time. OH $#!^

 

This is being heard in Georgia Magistrate Court where discovery is not required so I don't know what they have. They are not required to provide production of docs, admissions or answers to interrogatories and either am I. When I went to my default hearing, I did get a chance to witness Hanna take 40 cases on behalf of the OC or Midland funding and get defaults and consents for 95% of them without even a whimper. They had no witnesses and no evidence and won them all because no one challenged them. I also saw them dismiss anyone who answered so I think they will just dismiss w/o prejudice but cant be sure. One member suggested filing a motion to join them together them but that would make it easier on them and it becomes all or nothing(risk/reward decision). It also would make it more tempting for them to get a witness(if its even possible) with the higher $$ on the line. Combined it is 13k which is still under the 15k Magistrate Court limit so it wont automatically bump it up to a higher court if they are combined.

 

If they dismiss the cases w/o prejudice, I will probably be hearing from them in State court next as in Midland vs Jill Sheridan.

 

I would like to get a judgment(s) and bypass the next step but don't quite know what to do, I didn't file any counter claims to keep the ball in play and don't know if I can plead any since I don't have any of their evidence.

 

Ideas?

 

Sweetwaterfan

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say discovery is not required are you saying you don't have to file for discovery or you don't have to answer it?

 

I interpret that as you can file for discovery but you don't have to. Read your rules of procedure. You should be able to at least request documents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you say discovery is not required are you saying you don't have to file for discovery or you don't have to answer it?

 

I interpret that as you can file for discovery but you don't have to. Read your rules of procedure. You should be able to at least request documents.

 

I agree, it may not be required but it should be allowed, and if there is time before trial you should send discovery request. Also you may be able to send a request for a Bill Of Particulars, they are allowed in Georgia but it depends on what the cause of action or common counts are in the complaint. (BOP does not work on account stated but if they added a different cause of action it may).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.eighthdistrict.org/pro_se.htm

http://www.martindale.com/professional-services/article_Drew-Eckl-Farnham-LLP_921368.htm

http://www.thekentlawgroup.com/magistratecourt.html they handle small claims for $500.00 call them,I dont think pro se's stand a chance in that court you will need an attorney.Your judge just needs to have a GED.Scary

As attorneys and claims professionals we are all familiar with the day to day workings of Georgia’s State and Superior Courts: the system of complaints, answers, motions practice, written discovery, depositions, jury trials and a “final resolution” on the merits. The expense and procedure involved with pursuing claims in these Courts often make it impractical to resolve smaller cases and in most cases a pro se litigant is at a significant disadvantage. As a result, many smaller claims are filed in Magistrate Court, Georgia’s answer to the “small claims” courts established in other states. The question becomes, once this Magistrate Court file lands on my desk, what should I expect?

The Court and the Players

Magistrate Courts have authority over tort and contract claims to a jurisdictional limit of $15,000.00. Magistrate Courts also have jurisdiction over evictions, garnishments, abandoned vehicles, foreclosures on personal property, and a limited ranges of criminal issues including warrant applications, probable cause hearings and some bond hearings. Parties are not required to have counsel in Magistrate Court and unlike other “higher” courts in Georgia, corporations are allowed to represent themselves rather than hire counsel.

Not all Magistrate Court judges are attorneys. State law only requires that the Judge be twenty five years old and possess a high school diploma or the equivalent, although more stringent requirements may be imposed by local law. As a result of these standards, while most magistrate judges are familiar with the principles of tort and contract law, we have occasionally encountered judges who were not as familiar with the law as one would hope or who may have been more interested in administering “justice by fairness” than strictly adhering to statutes or case law.

The Magistrate Court Litigation Process

A Magistrate Court Plaintiff initiates his case by filing a “Statement of Claim” which by statute must contain “reasonable notice of the basis for each claim,” the Defendant’s name, address, and must be verified by the plaintiff under oath or affirmation. The Defendant’s Answer, to be filed within thirty days after service of process, must only “admit or deny” the plaintiff’s claim. If either the Plaintiff or Defendant asks the Court for assistance with their pleading, the Court is required to reduce the Statement of Claim to writing, which can put the Court in an awkward position: the judges and clerks are not supposed to provide legal advice to either party but are still required to help draft the pleadings. Perhaps to avoid this situation, some Magistrate Courts have implemented an “e-filing” system permitting claimants to complete their pleadings by filling out internet web pages.

The statutes governing Magistrate Court contain provisions regarding default and counterclaims which are substantially similar to those in the “higher courts.” Importantly, if the amount of a counterclaim is greater than $15,000.000 then the Magistrate Court’s jurisdictional limit applies and the case must be transferred to a court with proper jurisdiction.

Compulsory discovery in most Georgia courts is governed by the Georgia Civil Practice Act, which authorizes interrogatories, requests for production, depositions, etc. The Civil Practice Act does not apply in Magistrate Court and as a result, although it is much less expensive to litigate in Magistrate Court, trials are significantly less predictable. However, but this does not mean that the parties cannot investigate their claims or engage in informal discovery: Counsel may call witnesses and ask Plaintiff or third parties to provide documents supporting a claim for liability or damages. Often, plaintiffs will forward at least some documentation in order to facilitate settlement discussions. Care should be used not to suggest that a response is mandatory: there is no requirement that a party or non-party provide documents in the absence of a subpoena duces tecum.

The Rules -- or Lack Thereof

Trials in Magistrate Court are typically “fast tracked” and often appear on a calendar within sixty days of the filing of an Answer. There are no jury trials: judges typically hear the evidence and rule from the bench, although they occasionally take cases under advisement. Magistrate Court judges are instructed by statute to conduct the trial in “such manner as to do substantial justice between the parties according to the rules of substantive law” and to liberally construe rules and regulations that relate to pleading, practice, and procedure. Trial is not governed by the Civil Practice Act.

This does not mean, however, that there are no rules in Magistrate Court. As discussed above, magistrate court does have a procedural scheme, albeit one that is somewhat simplified from the “higher courts.”

Moreover, the rules of evidence are not contained within the Civil Practice Act and are therefore supposed to be applied by the Magistrate Judge. Counsel can and should assure that plaintiff is required to lay a foundation for particularly harmful evidence or expert “hearsay” such as medical record, but there is a balance to be considered between holding the pro se plaintiff to their standard and taking advantage of them. As a practical matter, most pro se plaintiffs will be unprepared to lay a proper foundation for even the most basic evidence. However Judges are often protective of pro se litigants and a fight to exclude evidence which would obviously be admitted if plaintiff knew the proper foundational questions will be perceived as bullying and a waste of time. Additionally, most magistrate courts provide plaintiffs with some type of resource (pamphlets, a website, etc.) that explain how to present their evidence. Defense counsel should be familiar with the materials distributed by the local court and how plaintiff could have accessed those materials if they chose, in order to rebut any argument that the plaintiff was unaware of the rules.

Bringing Order to Chaos: Can We Apply the Civil Practice Act and When?

There is case law for the proposition that a Magistrate Judge may apply the Civil Practice Act where doing so would “do substantial justice” but unsurprisingly, there is little case law elaborating on what specific rules may be applied: in the end, it is up to the judge. However we have had success persuading Magistrate Courts that some defenses which may appear procedural do, in fact, further the interest of “substantial justice.” Specifically, we have had success persuading trial courts to dismiss claims of professional negligence which are not accompanied by the expert affidavit required by O.C.G.A. § 9-11-9.1. The affidavit requirement is a provision of the Civil Practice Act which provides that certain professionals (doctors, dentists, lawyers, etc.) may not be sued for malpractice unless the Complaint is accompanied by an affidavit from another member of their profession setting forth at least one act of negligence against the Defendant. We have argued that the affidavit requirement, although procedural, does “substantial justice” because it was implemented in order to protect professionals from frivolous claims and the accompanying consequences such as increased insurance premiums, etc. (Without expert testimony at trial, the plaintiff should not be able to prevail anyway but the possible consequences of any adverse verdict could make it safer to have the case dismissed than take it to trial.)

Upon Further Review: Appeal of Magistrate Court Rulings

Any magistrate court judgment may be appealed to the State or Superior Court within thirty days, meaning that the trial court loser can take the case to State Court and litigate from “scratch.” A divided Georgia Supreme Court recently explained in Long v. Greenwood Homes 285 Ga. 460, 679 S.E.2d 712 (2009) that an “appeal” from the magistrate court essentially wipes the magistrate proceeding from the books and the appeal is to be treated as a “re-filing” of the case in State or Superior Court. Therefore, when a plaintiff appealed a magistrate court verdict and dismissed the action, it was treated not as the dismissal of an “appeal” but rather a dismissal of the litigation, permitting her to refile the entire case within six months!

In the end, Magistrate Court is simply a different “creature” than State or Superior Courts. Costs are low, dockets move fast and although there is less predictability at trial this is balanced by the availability of a de novo appeal in the event of an adverse outcome. Provided that counsel pays attention to the fast docket, the keys to success at trial remain the same: know the facts, know the law and come to trial prepared.


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if you really want to throw a monkey wrench in their plan, you can always file a motion to conduct discovery. There are a ton of reason that you could document your need to do so.There are so many suits against them right now for robo-signing, false affidavits, etc that it could lead a reasonable person to believe that all evidence needs to be carefully examined. The same goes for Cap1 as well.

 

Here is an interesting read:

http://www.civiljusticenetwork.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=97md-8krQFQ%3D&tabid=68

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what i found

 

APPENDIX B1 - UNIFORM RULES FOR THE MAGISTRATE COURTS

 

Rule 40. Pre-trial discovery.
Use of O.C.G.A. §§ 9-11-26 through 9-11-37 for purposes of pre-trial discovery in the
magistrate court is not favored; however, requests for such discovery may be
entertained when made by joint request of all parties. Requests for use of these
provisions may also be allowed for preservation of testimony, obtaining evidence from
out-of-state, minimizing expense and similar purposes in order to do substantial justice
or lessen the expense to the parties.
No party or attorney may file any discovery request pursuant to O.C.G.A. §§ 9-11-26
through 9-11-37 without permission of the court
; any such filing shall be a nullity.
Where discovery is permitted by the magistrate court, the magistrate may nevertheless
decline to rule on a motion pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-37 in which case such motion
may be renewed upon de novo appeal.

 

Although discovery may be allowed you must have a reason(substantial justice) and you must be granted permission by the court.

 

I could ask the court in a motion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.eighthdistrict.org/pro_se.htm

http://www.martindale.com/professional-services/article_Drew-Eckl-Farnham-LLP_921368.htm

http://www.thekentlawgroup.com/magistratecourt.html they handle small claims for $500.00 call them,I dont think pro se's stand a chance in that court you will need an attorney.Your judge just needs to have a GED.Scary

As attorneys and claims professionals we are all familiar with the day to day workings of Georgia’s State and Superior Courts: the system of complaints, answers, motions practice, written discovery, depositions, jury trials and a “final resolution” on the merits. The expense and procedure involved with pursuing claims in these Courts often make it impractical to resolve smaller cases and in most cases a pro se litigant is at a significant disadvantage. As a result, many smaller claims are filed in Magistrate Court, Georgia’s answer to the “small claims” courts established in other states. The question becomes, once this Magistrate Court file lands on my desk, what should I expect?

The Court and the Players

Magistrate Courts have authority over tort and contract claims to a jurisdictional limit of $15,000.00. Magistrate Courts also have jurisdiction over evictions, garnishments, abandoned vehicles, foreclosures on personal property, and a limited ranges of criminal issues including warrant applications, probable cause hearings and some bond hearings. Parties are not required to have counsel in Magistrate Court and unlike other “higher” courts in Georgia, corporations are allowed to represent themselves rather than hire counsel.

Not all Magistrate Court judges are attorneys. State law only requires that the Judge be twenty five years old and possess a high school diploma or the equivalent, although more stringent requirements may be imposed by local law. As a result of these standards, while most magistrate judges are familiar with the principles of tort and contract law, we have occasionally encountered judges who were not as familiar with the law as one would hope or who may have been more interested in administering “justice by fairness” than strictly adhering to statutes or case law.

The Magistrate Court Litigation Process

A Magistrate Court Plaintiff initiates his case by filing a “Statement of Claim” which by statute must contain “reasonable notice of the basis for each claim,” the Defendant’s name, address, and must be verified by the plaintiff under oath or affirmation. The Defendant’s Answer, to be filed within thirty days after service of process, must only “admit or deny” the plaintiff’s claim. If either the Plaintiff or Defendant asks the Court for assistance with their pleading, the Court is required to reduce the Statement of Claim to writing, which can put the Court in an awkward position: the judges and clerks are not supposed to provide legal advice to either party but are still required to help draft the pleadings. Perhaps to avoid this situation, some Magistrate Courts have implemented an “e-filing” system permitting claimants to complete their pleadings by filling out internet web pages.

The statutes governing Magistrate Court contain provisions regarding default and counterclaims which are substantially similar to those in the “higher courts.” Importantly, if the amount of a counterclaim is greater than $15,000.000 then the Magistrate Court’s jurisdictional limit applies and the case must be transferred to a court with proper jurisdiction.

Compulsory discovery in most Georgia courts is governed by the Georgia Civil Practice Act, which authorizes interrogatories, requests for production, depositions, etc. The Civil Practice Act does not apply in Magistrate Court and as a result, although it is much less expensive to litigate in Magistrate Court, trials are significantly less predictable. However, but this does not mean that the parties cannot investigate their claims or engage in informal discovery: Counsel may call witnesses and ask Plaintiff or third parties to provide documents supporting a claim for liability or damages. Often, plaintiffs will forward at least some documentation in order to facilitate settlement discussions. Care should be used not to suggest that a response is mandatory: there is no requirement that a party or non-party provide documents in the absence of a subpoena duces tecum.

The Rules -- or Lack Thereof

Trials in Magistrate Court are typically “fast tracked” and often appear on a calendar within sixty days of the filing of an Answer. There are no jury trials: judges typically hear the evidence and rule from the bench, although they occasionally take cases under advisement. Magistrate Court judges are instructed by statute to conduct the trial in “such manner as to do substantial justice between the parties according to the rules of substantive law” and to liberally construe rules and regulations that relate to pleading, practice, and procedure. Trial is not governed by the Civil Practice Act.

This does not mean, however, that there are no rules in Magistrate Court. As discussed above, magistrate court does have a procedural scheme, albeit one that is somewhat simplified from the “higher courts.”

Moreover, the rules of evidence are not contained within the Civil Practice Act and are therefore supposed to be applied by the Magistrate Judge. Counsel can and should assure that plaintiff is required to lay a foundation for particularly harmful evidence or expert “hearsay” such as medical record, but there is a balance to be considered between holding the pro se plaintiff to their standard and taking advantage of them. As a practical matter, most pro se plaintiffs will be unprepared to lay a proper foundation for even the most basic evidence. However Judges are often protective of pro se litigants and a fight to exclude evidence which would obviously be admitted if plaintiff knew the proper foundational questions will be perceived as bullying and a waste of time. Additionally, most magistrate courts provide plaintiffs with some type of resource (pamphlets, a website, etc.) that explain how to present their evidence. Defense counsel should be familiar with the materials distributed by the local court and how plaintiff could have accessed those materials if they chose, in order to rebut any argument that the plaintiff was unaware of the rules.

Bringing Order to Chaos: Can We Apply the Civil Practice Act and When?

There is case law for the proposition that a Magistrate Judge may apply the Civil Practice Act where doing so would “do substantial justice” but unsurprisingly, there is little case law elaborating on what specific rules may be applied: in the end, it is up to the judge. However we have had success persuading Magistrate Courts that some defenses which may appear procedural do, in fact, further the interest of “substantial justice.” Specifically, we have had success persuading trial courts to dismiss claims of professional negligence which are not accompanied by the expert affidavit required by O.C.G.A. § 9-11-9.1. The affidavit requirement is a provision of the Civil Practice Act which provides that certain professionals (doctors, dentists, lawyers, etc.) may not be sued for malpractice unless the Complaint is accompanied by an affidavit from another member of their profession setting forth at least one act of negligence against the Defendant. We have argued that the affidavit requirement, although procedural, does “substantial justice” because it was implemented in order to protect professionals from frivolous claims and the accompanying consequences such as increased insurance premiums, etc. (Without expert testimony at trial, the plaintiff should not be able to prevail anyway but the possible consequences of any adverse verdict could make it safer to have the case dismissed than take it to trial.)

Upon Further Review: Appeal of Magistrate Court Rulings

Any magistrate court judgment may be appealed to the State or Superior Court within thirty days, meaning that the trial court loser can take the case to State Court and litigate from “scratch.” A divided Georgia Supreme Court recently explained in Long v. Greenwood Homes 285 Ga. 460, 679 S.E.2d 712 (2009) that an “appeal” from the magistrate court essentially wipes the magistrate proceeding from the books and the appeal is to be treated as a “re-filing” of the case in State or Superior Court. Therefore, when a plaintiff appealed a magistrate court verdict and dismissed the action, it was treated not as the dismissal of an “appeal” but rather a dismissal of the litigation, permitting her to refile the entire case within six months!

In the end, Magistrate Court is simply a different “creature” than State or Superior Courts. Costs are low, dockets move fast and although there is less predictability at trial this is balanced by the availability of a de novo appeal in the event of an adverse outcome. Provided that counsel pays attention to the fast docket, the keys to success at trial remain the same: know the facts, know the law and come to trial prepared.

thats interesting, since you can take an unfavorable ruling to the next level and erase the outcome of the first, the magistrate court decision will only be final on default judgment(failure to appear) and consent judgments(both parties agree). All others are appeal able as a do over. Does this mean that if I get a judgment they can go to the state court and get a do over?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is what i found

 

APPENDIX B1 - UNIFORM RULES FOR THE MAGISTRATE COURTS

 

Rule 40. Pre-trial discovery.

Use of O.C.G.A. §§ 9-11-26 through 9-11-37 for purposes of pre-trial discovery in the

magistrate court is not favored; however, requests for such discovery may be

entertained when made by joint request of all parties. Requests for use of these

provisions may also be allowed for preservation of testimony, obtaining evidence from

out-of-state, minimizing expense and similar purposes in order to do substantial justice

or lessen the expense to the parties.

No party or attorney may file any discovery request pursuant to O.C.G.A. §§ 9-11-26

through 9-11-37 without permission of the court; any such filing shall be a nullity.

Where discovery is permitted by the magistrate court, the magistrate may nevertheless

decline to rule on a motion pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-37 in which case such motion

may be renewed upon de novo appeal.

 

Although discovery may be allowed you must have a reason(substantial justice) and you must be granted permission by the court.

 

I could ask the court in a motion.

It sounds like you would need to have the jdb to agree to the discovery as well "discovery may be entertained when made by joint request of all parties" and you know that won't happen. I did not read everything that Racecar posted, but what I did read is surprising and not too encouraging. It might be like the equivalent of having a corrupt judge. If you fight this you will want to learn about appealing the courts ruling, and how to object properly to secure the appellate file. Hopefully if you do fight you can cause the jdb enough trouble where they dismiss the case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to request discovery jointly with all parties, ...not likely


The way it looks, if either party is not happy with the outcome of a judgment they can proceed de novo to a higher court and start anew. This really is a court where the only thing with teeth is default judgment(not appealable) or an agreement between parties and it is designed to facilitate just that.

 

At the Default hearing I went to a week ago, many defendants were there for their trials and they were encouraged and implored by the judge to go out in the hall and work something out because if he decided the case someone was not going to be happy(he looked at the gallery and not plaintiffs counsel when he said this...message received). But since you can start with a clean slate and appeal(de novo) in a higher court if filed within 30 days, a judgment other than consent or default has no teeth if opposed.

 

The appeal is treated like a new trial. All the evidentiary rules of civil procedures apply at the state court and plaintiff will have to come up with business records, affidavits and witnesses that will pass the sniff test which aren't required at the Magistrate Court.

 

If I refuse consent judgment the other side knows that even with a win and judgment in their favor, it will be set aside by an appeal where they will have to show proper evidence. If they lose in magistrate, they do so in front of the masses of consent signers so they stand to lose alot more going forward with trial at magistrate court because it might give the masses hope to see a dissenter win. That's probably why they dismiss and try it later at state court so they can try to trip you up procedurally with admissions interrogatories and discovery but more importantly they dont give the masses any idea that they have nothing if you don't agree to it. What an f'ed up system!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How from what I have just read, if you submit a written demand for a Jury Trial it will automatically be removed to the next higher court and rules of discovery apply.

 

I don't know if I can request a jury trial at this point do you have the reference? we could just skip to the next level and get it over with if we can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure of the timing of the defaults for the accounts themselves or when the accounts were open.

You may want to review using arbitration and throwing Hana and the 3 accounts out of court, forcing them to spend additional funds to pursue the collection.

Linda in the arbtration forum has a good number of threads regarding how to do this, depending on the amount of time you prior to date of apperance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure of the timing of the defaults for the accounts themselves or when the accounts were open. You may want to review using arbitration and throwing Hana and the 3 accounts out of court, forcing them to spend additional funds to pursue the collection. Linda in the arbtration forum has a good number of threads regarding how to do this, depending on the amount of time you prior to date of apperance.

 

I haven't thought much about arbitration because I intend to dispute and make them prove the case. If I ask for arbitration, does it imply that I admit some culpability and now just want to argue about the price?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have an opinion about arbitration with Cap1.

 

My suits name cap1 as plaintiff

 

last payment 18 months ago SOL in Georgia is 4 years

 

Im in magistrate court where there is no discovery and I don't know what Fred Hanna and Associates has.

 

They referenced the account in the complaint as XXXX XXXX XXXX 1234 is this acceptable, they could have merely gotten that from my credit report.

 

I read about the cost strategy of arbitration and the costs to the creditor probably will make them back down but there is no final decision if we dont actually arbitrate or go to court, is this the strategy? to wait out SOL...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have an opinion about arbitration with Cap1.

 

My suits name cap1 as plaintiff

 

last payment 18 months ago SOL in Georgia is 4 years

 

Im in magistrate court where there is no discovery and I don't know what Fred Hanna and Associates has.

 

They referenced the account in the complaint as XXXX XXXX XXXX 1234 is this acceptable, they could have merely gotten that from my credit report.

 

I read about the cost strategy of arbitration and the costs to the creditor probably will make them back down but there is no final decision if we dont actually arbitrate or go to court, is this the strategy? to wait out SOL...

Im also assuming still with OC since CR does not say sold or transfered

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know If I have accounts that were opened in 2002 and 1999 whats the likelyhood that cap one has signed contracts?

 

Do they need actual signed contracts if they are suing for breach of contract as opposed to account stated?

 

I would think the likelihood of any jdb ever having a signed contract is slim to none, most people never sign a contract in cc cases, sometimes they may sign an application for credit, but I doubt they would still have or be able to get it.

 

As far as the breach of contract goes, I would definitely hold them to that, and not let them try to turn the case into something else (that is not an allegation in the complaint). If you are sure that there is no way you can send discovery (check the rules) You will have to find another way to get at their evidence...Maybe a request for witness and exhibit list (check your rules)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is supposedly the OC capital one, O have nothing to confirm it though.

 

I'll look into the request for witness/exhibit list.

 

If they cant produce an actual contract and this is a breach of contract suit does that mean I win?

That would certainly be my argument. If they sued under breach of contract I would pressure them for the proof, and force them to stick to the allegations in the complaint. I don't know if they gave you any evidence at all yet but sooner or later they need to produce something, one way or another, if they are going to go to trial. If you can't do discovery, maybe send a letter to the attorney asking them to prove up the allegations on "good faith", and if not; you may have to motion the court for sanctions & frivolous lawsuit. You do have to be careful with empty threats however, if you say you will do something, they need to know its reliable. Also, always attack their standing, you need proper proof they own the alleged debt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sweetwater, abitration is handle just like a court. Evidence must be provided, discovery is allowed, etc. The difference is that the cost to the OC to pursue the case with jump up dramatically and in all probability they will back off and let it lie. If this is the OC and I'm still not sure it is either way the cost for them is usually so high they drop it.

Having lived in Kennasaw several years back, knowing what has been said and knowing some of the wierdness of GA courts, I'd take my chance's in arbitration, especially if you can get in JAMS, try to avoid AAA as it is cheaper for them.

 

That will pull it out of Magistrate (kangaroo court) and give you a better chance.

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.