TML

Midland Suing Me in Arizona - My Answer

Recommended Posts

Hello Everyone!  Like so many, I'm being sued by Midland Funding.  I would appreciate any help you all can offer.  The process is overwhelming and I could definitely use the support.  I've completed the questions below and have also included my Answer.  One thing to note with my case:  It took them 3 1/2 months to serve me so the courts entered a Pending Dismissal pursuant to Rule 4(i).  That's why I did not file an answer right away.  Does anyone think this makes a difference now?  Is dismissal still possible??

 

Thank you very much for your time!!  You all ROCK!!  (No pun intended with the Gem Show in town!)

 

 

1. Who is the named plaintiff in the suit? Midland Funding LLC

2. What is the name of the law firm handling the suit? Jerold Kaplan Law Office

3. How much are you being sued for? $7,564.00 plus fees/costs/interest


4. Who is the original creditor? (if not the Plaintiff) Wells Fargo

5. How do you know you are being sued? (You were served, right?) Yes, served on 12/30/12


6. How were you served? (Mail, In person, Notice on door) In person


7. Was the service legal as required by your state?  Yes

8. What was your correspondence (if any) with the people suing you before you think you were being sued? None


9. What state and county do you live in? Pima County, Arizona


10. When is the last time you paid on this account? (looking to establish if you are outside of the statute of limitations) December 2008
 

11. What is the SOL on the debt? 6 years

12. What is the status of your case? Suit served? Motions filed?

a)   Complaint filed:                                  09/18/2012

  1. Notice of Impending Dismissal

Pursuant to Rule 4(i):                        12/18/2012

c)   Served In Person:                             12/30/2012

d)   Application Default:                           01/30/2013

d)   Entry Default Judgment:                   01/31/2013

 

All of this information is also on the Pima Justice Courts website.

13. Have you disputed the debt with the credit bureaus (both the original creditor and the collection agency?) No

14. Did you request debt validation before the suit was filed? Note: if you haven't sent a debt validation request, don't bother doing this now - it's too late. No

15. How long do you have to respond to the suit? (This should be in your paperwork). If you don't respond to the lawsuit notice you will lose automatically. In 99% of the cases, they will require you to answer the summons, and each point they are claiming. We need to know what the "charges" are. Please post what they are claiming. Did you receive an interrogatory (questionnaire) regarding the lawsuit?


This is the exact wording on the Application and Affidavit of Default that I received in the mail:

 

Unless an answer of response is filed within ten (10) days from the filing of the Application, the Default will become effective and the entry of a Default Judgment will be requested.


16. What evidence did they send with the summons? An affidavit? Statements from the OC? Contract? List anything else they attached as exhibits.


a)  Affidavit

B)  CC Agreement

 

 

 

MY ANSWER

 

Defendant, appearing Pro se, replies to the complaint of the plaintiff, Midland Funding LCC as follows: All answers correspond to the numbered paragraphs of the complaint. All allegations of the complaint are denied unless expressly admitted herein:

Answer to paragraph one of complaint: The defendant admits to being a resident

of Pima County, State of Arizona. However, the defendant denies the rest of the allegations made in paragraph one because the defendant has insufficient evidence to determine whether the statements being made are true or false.

Answer to paragraph two of complaint: The defendant denies all of the allegations made in paragraph two by Midland Funding LCC and/or their attorney(s) Jerold Kaplan Law Office because the defendant has no knowledge of who Midland Funding LLC is and no recollection of the alleged debt.
 

Defendant prays this case be dismissed along with any further relief the court deems just and proper and with costs adjudged to the Plaintiff. 

I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

 

 

By the Defendant acting Pro se
 

 

Dated                                                                          

 

 

Signature                                                                     

                Defendant

 

CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

 

I CERTIFY that I have mailed a copy of this ANSWER on this same day to Jerold Kaplan Law, (plaintiff’s attorney), on                                                  and Pima County Justice Courts.

 

 

Dated                                                                          

 

 

Signature                                                                     

                Defendant

 

I've already used the information from other posts; Thanks again!!!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than likely Midland is sueing you for Account Stated as well as breach of contract. You will have to come up with a counter affidavit denying everything in Midlands affidavit and submit a motion to strike both affidavit and the account statement. 

 

Research Elements of Account Stated

Research Elements of Breach of Contract

Research Defending both and your MTS

 

Some of the senior members on the CIC team recommend a motion to compel private arbitration if that's in the terms of the agreement and go that way. Midland doesn't like to spend money.

 

Best,

 

HP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

a)   Complaint filed:                                  09/18/2012

  1. Notice of Impending Dismissal

Pursuant to Rule 4(i):                        12/18/2012

c)   Served In Person:                             12/30/2012

d)   Application Default:                           01/30/2013

d)   Entry Default Judgment:                   01/31/2013

 

 

  Wait, you got served in person on the 30th and you didn't respond within 30 days?   Why not?  What was the holdup?   You're going to have to justify your non-response through a motion to vacate judgment.   Its not that you've just been sued, based on the information above, default judgment has already been entered against you.  

 

     When they filed the complaint is irrelevant as long as they serve the lawsuit within 120 days in Pima County, which they did, you need to get to work on a Motion to Vacate ASAP.   

 

 

 The following link will give you an idea of what's required for a Motion to Vacate to be approved.  It is targeted towards those in NY but will give you an idea of what you need to do.   In a case like yours, considering how much you owe, consulting a quality attorney in consumer law might be a good idea. 

 

 

  http://www.nedap.org/hotline/vacating.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

d)   Application Default:                           01/30/2013

d)   Entry Default Judgment:                   01/31/2013

 

 

Has a default judgment already been entered against you???  Were you required to respond in 20 days or 30 days?

 

Rule 12(a). When Presented

 

(1) A defendant shall serve and file an answer

(A) within twenty days after the service of the summons and complaint upon the defendant, except as otherwise provided in Rules 4.2(d) and 4.2(m) of these rules;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has a default judgment already been entered against you???

 

 

    It appears that way since that was taken directly off the court website.   If he was served on the 30th of December and he has yet to respond, then its 100% guaranteed default was entered against him, he needs to get a Motion to Vacate together ASAP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not familiar with Arizona law but this seems similar to Louisiana's procedure for obtaining a default judgment.    In Louisiana, if a defendant does not respond within 15 days of valid service, the plaintiff can obtain a preliminary default.  3 days later they can "confirm" the default and obtain a judgment with competent proof of the allegation in the petition.    When the preliminary default is confirmed, it becomes a judgment of the court.  A defendant can still file an answer between the time the preliminary default is entered and the time the PD is "confirmed."

 

One of two things has happened in your case.   Either you have 10 days from January 30 to file an answer to avoid a final judgment or you already have a judgment against you.

 

If you still have time before a judgment is entered, you need to file an answer ASAP.  If Midland already has a judgment, you need to research the grounds for vacating the judgment before they start garnishing your wages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not familiar with Arizona law but this seems similar to Louisiana's procedure for obtaining a default judgment.    In Louisiana, if a defendant does not respond within 15 days of valid service, the plaintiff can obtain a preliminary default.  3 days later they can "confirm" the default and obtain a judgment with competent proof of the allegation in the petition.    When the preliminary default is confirmed, it becomes a judgment of the court.  A defendant can still file an answer between the time the preliminary default is entered and the time the PD is "confirmed."

 

One of two things has happened in your case.   Either you have 10 days from January 30 to file an answer to avoid a final judgment or you already have a judgment against you.

 

If you still have time before a judgment is entered, you need to file an answer ASAP.  If Midland already has a judgment, you need to research the grounds for vacating the judgment before they start garnishing your wages.

 

 

 

  In Pima County, you have 20 days to respond to a complaint after being served.  

 

 

  

Answer

  • Time Period: Within 20 days of Service of Complaint
  • Definition: This is the pleading filed by the Defendant that responds to the claims made by the Plaintiff in the Complaint. See, ARCP 7-15 & ARCP Rule 12

 

AFTER SERVICE:

1. THE TIMES LINES GIVEN TO THE DEFENDANT TO FILE AN ANSWER ARE:

a.

If the Defendant was served in the State of Arizona, the defendant must file an answer within TWENTY (20) days from the date of service.

b.

If the Defendant was served OUTSIDE of the State of Arizona, the defendant must file an answer within THIRTY (30) days from the date of service.

    

 

   OP had approximately until the 19th of January to respond with his answer. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Louisiana gives you 15 days to answer (10 days in City Courts) but there is two steps to obtaining a default judgment - the preliminary default and then the confirmation of the preliminary default.  The PD can be filed on day 16.  You must then wait 2 legal days and then can obtain the actual default judgment on the 3rd day after the PD.   I thought maybe Arizona was similar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  Wait, you got served in person on the 30th and you didn't respond within 30 days?   Why not?  What was the holdup?   You're going to have to justify your non-response through a motion to vacate judgment.   Its not that you've just been sued, based on the information above, default judgment has already been entered against you.  

 

     When they filed the complaint is irrelevant as long as they serve the lawsuit within 120 days in Pima County, which they did, you need to get to work on a Motion to Vacate ASAP.   

 

 

 The following link will give you an idea of what's required for a Motion to Vacate to be approved.  It is targeted towards those in NY but will give you an idea of what you need to do.   In a case like yours, considering how much you owe, consulting a quality attorney in consumer law might be a good idea. 

 

 

  http://www.nedap.org/hotline/vacating.html

 

Thanks for the link.  The reason I didn't answer was because of the pending dismissal.  I stated in my first post, I have 10 days to answer.  I confirmed this yesterday on the phone with the court as well.  I plan to file the Answer ASAP - but I wanted to get feedback from all of you first.

 

I'm thinking that neweuquol's comparison to Louisiana may be right.  The paperwork I received clearly states that I still have 10 days to respond or the default will become effective and an entry default will be entered.  (Maybe Midland is trying to pull a fast one and combine both the application (preliminary?) and the entry default"?

 

Otherwise, why would the court confirm I have 10 days to answer and the plaintiff include this in the Application for Default if it wasn't true? 

 

Does anyone think I should address this in my Answer or just go forward with the standard denials and "lack of standing" defense?  Or should I enter a Motion to Vacate? So many questions....sorry!  This is all new to me.

 

Thanks again for all of your input.  I hope I haven't screwed this up.........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get that to the court Mon. fo sure. also start to prepare your disclosure statement. better have a snappy reason why you didn't answer" Like what service, or the dog ate it, or You were trying to procure counsel and didn't know what to do until now(best).

 

I hope that you don't have to file a motion to vacate. It is sad that the court didn't dismiss immediately. Maybe you can say that the court was dissmissed the case. was it handed to you or to someone else that would be substitute service.

 

I hate to say your delay may have screwed you, so file it on Monday and hope for the best. make sure you put some affirmative defenses in the answer also:

Failure to state a claim

Statute of Limitations

unclean hands

in pari delicto

estoppel

 

something good to make the judge want to let you defend. pound that you were unable to find a lawyer and have submitted an answer. State that these cases necessarily have to be tried on the merits not default. I was looking up the requirements for aswering after diligently looking for a lawyer.

 

Hope you get to defend

However a motion to vacate would need to be made if they do not accept it on Mon. As far as the statute goes they have default right now, you have to race to the court before it signs an order. and maybe getting a little ahead of the game from this scary situation is in order.

 

Good Luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the link.  The reason I didn't answer was because of the pending dismissal.  I stated in my first post, I have 10 days to answer.  I confirmed this yesterday on the phone with the court as well.  I plan to file the Answer ASAP - but I wanted to get feedback from all of you first.

 

I'm thinking that neweuquol's comparison to Louisiana may be right.  The paperwork I received clearly states that I still have 10 days to respond or the default will become effective and an entry default will be entered.  (Maybe Midland is trying to pull a fast one and combine both the application (preliminary?) and the entry default"?

 

Otherwise, why would the court confirm I have 10 days to answer and the plaintiff include this in the Application for Default if it wasn't true? 

 

Does anyone think I should address this in my Answer or just go forward with the standard denials and "lack of standing" defense?  Or should I enter a Motion to Vacate? So many questions....sorry!  This is all new to me.

 

Thanks again for all of your input.  I hope I haven't screwed this up.........

 

 

   I'm totally confused at this point.    When did the Court decide on the Rule 4 Dismissal?   If you were served on the 30th, then you should have responded within 20 days to the Complaint, regardless of what other motions were before the Court, don't ever wait on the Court if you're up against a certain timeline. 

 

  I'd make sure to get down to the Court on Monday, request to see all paperwork in the case to verify what is there and attempt to submit your Answer at that time. 

 

 

  Additionally, you need to upgrade your Answer, you can't basically just say "I deny everything and #$% you very much", you need to include some affirmative defenses, basically ways that you're going to attack their complaint.   The deal with affirmative defenses is if you neglect to use them early on, you could be restricted from using them later.  It isn't enough to say "I deny this", you should say "I deny this..........because I never did business with these jerk's, I've never heard of these jerk's, I dispute the validity of this account, I dispute the amount(s) claimed...etc...etc...etc.    There's loads of good examples of affirmative defenses on this website

 

 

   Here's a good breakdown on filing a response to a debt collection's lawsuit in Arizona.

 

 

   http://consumerwarrior.com/151/how-to-draft-an-answer-to-a-debt-collection-lawsuit-in-3-steps/

 

 

 

 

 

            Below is an example of an Answer in Arizona against Midland

 

  1. In regards to Paragraph 1 Defendant agrees that he is a resident of the ****** PRECINCT, ****** County, State of Arizona.  
  2. In regards to Paragraph 1, Defendant disagrees with the assertion made by the plaintiff that Defendant is or ever has been married at anytime. 
  3. In regards to Paragraph 2 of the Plaintiff’s Complaint, The Defendant is at this time without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained therein.   Defendant has not had any sort of contractual relationship with the plaintiff, either now or in the past. 
  4.  This Complaint is not substantiated with a proper evidence supporting the Plaintiff’s claims, whereas such initial supporting documentation is required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 26(a)(1).

    5. The Plaintiff lacks standing to sue the Defendant,

    since at no time did the Defendant cause any harm to the Plaintiff:

    a) the Defendant has never had any sort of relationship, business or otherwise, with the Plaintiff;

    B) at no time did the Defendant become indebted to the Plaintiff;

    c) as such, the Defendant has no obligation to the Plaintiff, monetary or otherwise.

    6. The Defendant claims Lack of Privity as the Defendant has never entered into any contractual or debtor/creditor arrangements with the Plaintiff.

    7. The Plaintiff has not proven that it has acquired the alleged account from

    the original creditor. 

    8. The Plaintiff has not proven that it is the real successor-in-interest.

    The Defendant demands proof of ownership specifically that the alleged account is the legal property of the Plaintiff with all of the original creditor’s rights and privileges intact.

    9. The Plaintiff's claims are barred by the Statute of Frauds (A.R.S. §44-101) as the purported contract(s) or agreement(s) fall(s) within a class of contracts or agreements required to be in writing.

    The purported contract(s) or agreement(s) alleged in the Complaint (is) (are) not in writing and (is) (are) not signed by the Defendant or by some other person authorized by the Defendant and who was to answer for the alleged debt, default or miscarriage of another person.

    10. The Defendant alleges that the granting of the Plaintiff's demand in the Complaint would result in Unjust Enrichment, as the Plaintiff would receive more money than the Plaintiff is entitled to receive.

    11. The Plaintiff's alleged damages are limited to real or actual damages only.

    For estimation such damages, the Defendant attach a Memo from the Plaintiff to U.S. Federal Trade Commission dated by July 31st, 2009 (Exhibit 1).

    This memo states (at the bottom of the 1st page 3rd Paragraph) that Plaintiff has invested $1.3 Billion to acquire 27 million consumer accounts with a face value of $43 Billion.

    The simple mathematical action of division shows that the Plaintiff has paid in average $48.15 for each consumer account, whereas

    the Plaintiff claims the damage in the amount of $1745.79

    12. The Plaintiff admits voluntarily purchasing the alleged account,

    causing the Plaintiff's damages to its own self, therefore Plaintiff is barred

    from seeking relief for such self-inflicted damages.

    13. The Plaintiff has not proven that it is authorized and licensed to collect claims for others in the State of Arizona, or solicit the right to collect or receive payment of a claim of another.

    14. The Defendant reserves the right to plead other affirmative defenses that

    may become applicable and/or available at a later time.

    15. The Defendant reserves the right to submit counterclaims that may become applicable and/or available at a later time.

    The Defendant prays this case be dismissed with prejudice along with any further relief the court deems just and proper.

 

Dated this **th day of ***********, 2012

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Rule 4(i) dismissal was cured when they managed to get you served (in most states). I hope you still have time. I do not know how hard it is to vacate a judgment when you have been personally served in Arizona. It is impossible in Louisiana.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SanTanStan,

 

I agree that each separate allegation needs to be addressed.  However, does AZ allow for a general denial when one is denying all the allegations except for possibly jurisdiction and venue?

 

I disagree with many of the defenses listed.  Some are not valid defenses and others don't apply.

 

 

5. The Plaintiff lacks standing to sue the Defendant,
since at no time did the Defendant cause any harm to the Plaintiff:
a) the Defendant has never had any sort of relationship, business or otherwise, with the Plaintiff;
B) at no time did the Defendant become indebted to the Plaintiff;
c) as such, the Defendant has no obligation to the Plaintiff, monetary or otherwise.

 

Raising standing to sue in an answer has been a point of debate on these boards.  Most states do not require "Lack of Standing" to be raised in an answer to a complaint.  The reason is because it's one of the very basics in filing suit and sometimes cannot be determined until discovery is completed.  Unless one's rules require standing to be raised in the answer, many of us believe it's best to raise it at a later point.  Why give the JDB a heads-up as to your strategy?

 

Also, the explanation "at no time did the Defendant become indebted to the Plaintiff" doesn't really work.  If they can prove they purchased the account, then by law you did become indebted to them. 

 

I agree that no one owes a JDB.  But that's not the point.  The law allows for accounts to be assigned/sold.  Simply claiming we didn't have an agreement with the new "owner" is not a defense.

 

 

7. The Plaintiff has not proven that it has acquired the alleged account from the original creditor.

 

 

The above is not a valid defense.  It's an argument that goes to standing to sue.  It's what you'd argue to show how the plaintiff hasn't proven standing.

 

 

 

9. The Plaintiff's claims are barred by the Statute of Frauds (A.R.S. §44-101) as the purported contract(s) or agreement(s) fall(s) within a class of contracts or agreements required to be in writing.
The purported contract(s) or agreement(s) alleged in the Complaint (is) (are) not in writing and (is) (are) not signed by the Defendant or by some other person authorized by the Defendant and who was to answer for the alleged debt, default or miscarriage of another person.

 

 

Unless AZ requires credit card agreements to be signed by the defendant, the statute of frauds does not apply.

 

 

10. The Defendant alleges that the granting of the Plaintiff's demand in the Complaint would result in Unjust Enrichment, as the Plaintiff would receive more money than the Plaintiff is entitled to receive.

 

Unjust enrichment is a valid defense, but does it apply to JDBs?   I don't believe any JDB should get a single penny much less what they paid for the debt.  However, there are certain requirements to prove unjust enrichment. AZ would have to have a law that states a JDB or "subsequent creditor" can't receive more than they paid for the account.  OR there would have to be case law that supports it.

 

 

 

12. The Plaintiff admits voluntarily purchasing the alleged account,
causing the Plaintiff's damages to its own self, therefore Plaintiff is barred
from seeking relief for such self-inflicted damages.

 

 

Can one support this claim with state law or case law? 

 

 

13. The Plaintiff has not proven that it is authorized and licensed to collect claims for others in the State of Arizona, or solicit the right to collect or receive payment of a claim of another.

 

Note the word "proven".  You're making an argument.  If AZ law requires a CA to be licensed or bonded before collecting in your state, you then have to do your homework to see if they have complied with that law.  If they haven't complied with the law, then you use the defense that they are definitely not authorized and licensed. 

 

Please don't think I'm trying to be difficult because I'm not.  If we include defenses that are not valid or that have no bearing on the claims made by the plaintiff, we look unprofessional.  It also appears that we simply included every defense we could find on the internet. 

 

If you want to include defenses, make sure they are defenses that at least apply to the claims and stand a chance of succeeding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again everyone!  I am going to work on a revised Answer with affirmative responses and file it first thing in the AM.

 

I'll post it later for any last minute remarks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are my affirmative responses - please let me know what you think.  I'll be filing them in my answer first thing in the AM.

 

Thank you!

 

As and for Affirmative Defenses

  1. This Complaint is not substantiated with proper evidence supporting the Plaintiff’s claims, whereas such initial supporting documentation is required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 26(a)(1).
  2. The purported contract(s) or agreement(s) alleged in the Complaint (is) (are) not in writing and (is) (are) not signed by the Defendant or by some other person authorized by the Defendant and who was to answer for the alleged debt, default or miscarriage of another person.
  3. Failure of Consideration: No exchange of money or goods occurred between the plaintiff and the defendant.
  4. Midland Funding LLC has provided no reliable, credible, or admissible sworn statement or other evidence testifying to the accuracy or validity of their recollection of the alleged account.
  5. The Defendant reserves the right to plead other affirmative defenses that
    may become applicable and/or available at a later time.
  6. The Defendant reserves the right to submit counterclaims that may become applicable and/or available at a later time.
  7. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the averment and therefore DENIES.

Defendant prays this case be dismissed along with any further relief the court deems just and proper and with costs adjudged to the Plaintiff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Your case is not in federal court and even if it did Rule 26 does not apply to complaints, it applies to disclosures.

 

2.  I am not sure a written contract is required.  Louisiana is one of the states that say you agreed to a "contract" by using the card.

 

3.  Failure of consideration does not work if they were given a valid assignment of the debt.  You likely never did business with Midland and it does not matter.

 

4.  The evidence you are suggesting they have not provided can be provided in disclosures, discovery and at trial.   (Not that have that evidence).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Your case is not in federal court and even if it did Rule 26 does not apply to complaints, it applies to disclosures.

 

2.  I am not sure a written contract is required.  Louisiana is one of the states that say you agreed to a "contract" by using the card.

 

3.  Failure of consideration does not work if they were given a valid assignment of the debt.  You likely never did business with Midland and it does not matter.

 

4.  The evidence you are suggesting they have not provided can be provided in disclosures, discovery and at trial.   (Not that have that evidence).

 

Thank you neweuquol and everyone else for your comments. I have a few hours before I file so if there's anything else to add, I'd appreciate your suggestions.  Hopefully I will be given the chance to defend my case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Again,

 

I wanted to let you all know that I was able to file my answer today as I was within 10 days of the Application and Entry of Default - see Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 55 Default.  I believe this Rule was Amended and became effective as of January 1, 2013. 

 

Should I start to prepare my disclosure statement?  Or is there something else I should be working on?  Not sure what to do next.....

 

Thank you everyone!!

 

 

Get that to the court Mon. fo sure. also start to prepare your disclosure statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Again,

 

I wanted to let you all know that I was able to file my answer today as I was within 10 days of the Application and Entry of Default - see Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 55 Default.  I believe this Rule was Amended and became effective as of January 1, 2013. 

 

Should I start to prepare my disclosure statement?  Or is there something else I should be working on?  Not sure what to do next.....

 

Thank you everyone!!

 

 

 

  Start preparing Discovery, although you can expect not to get much of anything.

 

 

 

  You've obviously got some sort of Affidavit from Midland, you'll possibly get some statements from them, a generic Bill of Sale with all useful information redacted, a computer screen printout from their own internal systems and little else.  

 

 

Based on who the attorney is, you can also start preparing for MSJ, they will utilize it at some point against you.  As someone who is going through that now, it pays to prepare and have some legal arguments ready to fight back with.   I went ahead and attacked Midland's standing and assignment of the account.   It would be wise to get some court cases up your sleeve to help attack their various forms of "evidence."  

 

 

Ultimately, the MO seems to be this.

 

Complaint

Answer

Discover/ROGS

Pre-Trial

MSJ

Respond to MSJ

 

 

   and if you keep fighting, eventually they throw in the towel.....or you go to trial, expose their evidence as worthless, and get to collect legal fees for all your expenses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, thanks SanTanStan!  I'm in it for the duration now.  Guess I'll start looking through these forums and prepare for Discover, etc.

 

Good luck to you too!

 

TML

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great, thanks SanTanStan!  I'm in it for the duration now.  Guess I'll start looking through these forums and prepare for Discover, etc.

 

Good luck to you too!

 

TML

 

 

 Oh and just in case you start to feel overwhelmed at any point, just remember that this is what the "law firm" suing you looks like.

 

 

http://images.citysearch.net/assets/imgdb/85/c0/2d/9c/1e/4c/86/a0/7b/c0/ea/91/96/47/a6/b4/0/7/6/9/6070769.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, as of June 10, 2013, my case has been put on the inactive calendar:

 

"Notice of Pending Dismissal of Lawsuit. This case has been put on the inactive calendar pursuant to Rule 144(e) effective today. "

 

I'm afraid that somehow Midland will have have their attorneys try some dirty trick....is there anything I can do?  According to Rule 144 (e): 

 

e. Dismissal for failure to conclude a lawsuit within ten months. If a final judgment has not been entered within ten months from the date a lawsuit is filed, or if a party has not filed a written motion to extend the time for entry of judgment to a particular date, the court
shall mail a notice to the plaintiff and to any defendant who has appeared in the lawsuit informing them that unless this requirement is met within two months from the date of mailing, the court will dismiss the lawsuit for failure to have judgment timely entered. If the requirement has not been met within two months from the mailing of the court’s notice, the court may dismiss the lawsuit without further notice to the parties.
 

I've searched the forum to see what has happened with other cases and found nothing other than the JDB trying something shady.  But I didn't see if there was anything proactive that I could file at this time.

 

Any information would be very much appreciated!!  Thank You!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like they are tolling the SOL in case they decide to pursue.  Is discovery done? Do you feel confident? I would think if it is and you are you could file a motion summary judgement on them, that would kick them into high gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.