turtlepower

Motion To Compel Further Documents (Asset Acceptance, California)

Recommended Posts

General Info About My Case

Info About My Bop Request

Info About My Request for Docs

 

I just started to work on a motion to compel further response and I was wondering if I should include information about the BOP request & dropping the first cause of action in the background section or if I should only talk the request for docs.

 

Also, should I make it a motion to compel further response or in the alternative an order to preclude?

 

And just to make sure, I will need to submit?

Notice of Motion to Compel Further Response
Motion to Compel Further Response
Exhibits
Separate Statement in Support of Motion to Compel 
Proposed Order with Sanctions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Plaintiff’s response to BOP was inadequate.
 

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL BILL OF PARTICULARS
NAME
Address
San Bernardino, CA 91755
Defendant, In Pro Per
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA,
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
111 North Hill Street, San Bernardino, CA 91755
Branch – Civil Limited
XXXXXXXXX,
Plaintiff,
vs.
XXXXXXXXX,
Defendant,
Case No.:

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO COMPEL BILL OF PARTICULARS; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS & AUTHORITIES; DECLARATION of XXXXXXXX IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE TO BILL OF PARTICULARS

DATE: July X, 2012
TIME: 8:30 am
DEPT: 77




 

TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on XXXX, 2012 at 8:30 a.m. in Department 77 of the above-entitled Court located at 111 North Hill Street, Los Angeles, California, Defendant will move, and hereby does move, for an Order compelling Plaintiff to respond fully to Defendant’s Bill of Particulars or, in the alternative, to be precluded from offering any such evidence at the trial of this matter. The motion is made pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 454 on the ground that Plaintiff has refused to respond to Defendant’s demand for a Bill of Particulars and good cause exists for the relief requested in this motion.

This motion is based on this Notice of Motion, the Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of XXXXXXXXX filed herewith, all of the papers and pleadings on file in this action and such other evidence and argument as shall be adduced at or before the hearing hereof.
DATED: April 23, 2012 ___Signature_____________
Name, In Pro Per

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I. INTRODUCTION

On October 12, 2011, plaintiff filed a complaint in this matter. The complaint alleges that defendant owes plaintiff the sum of $XXX.XX pursuant to an agreement between defendant and Capital One Bank (USA) NA. No such agreement is attached to the complaint. The complaint sets forth no facts supporting the amount claimed to be owing.

For this reason, on March 13, 2012, defendant served Via Certified Mail RRR, a request for Bill of Particulars on plaintiff.

Plaintiff’s response was wholly inadequate. No contract has been produced. Nor has plaintiff produced all account statements justifying the amount claimed to be owed in the complaint.

Defendant therefore asks that this Court order plaintiff to supplement its Bill of Particulars producing a complete accounting, a copy of the contract referred to in the complaint and a copy of any agreement assigning this claim to plaintiff. In the alternative, defendant asks that the Court enter an order precluding plaintiff from offering any such evidence at the trial of this matter.

II. ARGUMENT

Code of Civil Procedure section 454 governs the use of a Bill of Particulars in California. Pursuant to this section, a plaintiff need not detail all items of an account in the complaint. However, upon request, plaintiff must provide all such information within 10 days or be precluded from giving evidence thereof at trial:

"It is not necessary for a party to set forth in a pleading the items of an account therein alleged, but he must deliver to the adverse party, within ten days after a demand thereof in writing, a copy of the account, or be precluded from giving evidence thereof. The court or judge thereof may order a further account when the one delivered is too general, or is defective in any particular."

Here, defendant served a request for a Bill of Particulars on March 13, 2012 pursuant to CCP 454. Declaration of XXXXX in Support of Motion for Further Bill Of Particulars paragraph 1.

Defendant asked for a bill of particulars setting forth the items and details of the account on which the cause of action for goods sold and delivered of plaintiff’s complaint is based, including the date of each item or transaction, a description of services, materials or goods supplied or other considerations rendered, the price or charge made for each such item or transaction; and all payments or credits that have been made to the account. A true copy of the mailing declaration and Demand of Particular is attached hereto as Exhibit "A."

Plaintiff’s response was wholly deficient. Plaintiff responded to Defendants demand for Bill of Particulars by contending that a Bill of particulars is innapplicable to plaintiffs cause of action.

A true copy plaintiff’s response is hereto attached as Exhibit "B." It did not provide contract, itemized details of the account on which the cause of action for goods sold and delivered including the date of each item or transaction, a description of services, materials or goods supplied or other considerations rendered; and the price or charge made for each such item or transaction.

Defendants good faith effort to meet and confer to avoid the necessity of bringing this motion were futile.

On March 29, 2012, Defendant sent to Plaintiffs attorney, Mark D. Walsh, a second request for Bill of Particulars, Via Certified Mail RRR. A true copy of my March 29, 2012 letter is attached as Exhibit "C."

On April 2, 2012, Plaintiff responded to Defendants demand for Bill of Particulars by claiming Plaintiff has not yet completed its discovery and/or investigation as to what other amounts plaintiff may be entitled to in accordance with the law and/or the parties’ agreement. As such, plaintiff reserves the right to amend this response at any point prior to and at the trial. A true copy of plaintiff’s response is hereto attached as Exhibit "D".

On April 13, 2012, Defendant sent to Plaintiffs attorney, Mark D. Walsh, a letter Via Certified Mail RRR, attempting to meet and confer in good faith. A true copy of my letter is hereto attached as Exhibit "E".

On April 17, 2012, Defendant sent to Plaintiffs attorney, Mark D. Walsh, a second letter, Via Certified Mail RRR, attempting to meet and confer in good faith. A true copy of my letter is hereto attached as Exhibit "F".

The information requested in Defendant’s Bill of Particulars is the bare minimum that plaintiff will need to prove its case at trial. Plaintiff should have had this information in its possession before filing suit. There is simply no reason that it should not be produced in response to a properly served Request for Bill of Particulars. The Court should require plaintiff to do so immediately.
III CONCLUSION

Plaintiff’s response to defendant’s Bill of Particulars is inadequate. The Court should require plaintiff to supplement its response immediately and produce all statements pertaining to this account from inception showing all payments made and charges to the account at issue. In addition, plaintiff should produce the contract referred to in the complaint and any agreement assigning the claims at issue to the plaintiff. In the alternative, the Court should enter an order pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 454 precluding the plaintiff from offering any such evidence at trial.
DATED: April 23, 2012XXXXXXXXX
In Pro Per

DECLARATION OF XXXXXXXXX IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL
FURTHER RESPONSE TO BILL OF PARTICULARS
I, XXXXXXXXXX declare as follows:

I am the defendant in the above-entitled proceeding. I have personal knowledge of all the facts contained herein, and if called to testify, could and would testify competently thereto.

1. Defendant served his Demand for Bill of Particulars Via Certified Mail RRR to Plaintiff’s attorney, Mark D. Walsh, on March 13, 2012. A true copy of the mailing declaration and Demand of Particular is attached hereto as Exhibit "A."

2. On March 20, 2012, defendant received Plaintiff’s objection to Demand for Bill of Particulars, claiming that a Bill of Particulars may be served on the plaintiff only in an action on an account. It is not necessary for a party to set forth in a pleading the items of an account therein alleged, but he must deliver to the adverse party after a demand thereof in writing, a copy of the account, or be precluded from giving evidence thereof…"A bill of Particulars is not appropriates in an action on account stated, because an account stated is deemed to merge the various items on which the earlier accounts were based: i.e., there is nothing left to itemize. Plaintiffs complaint alleges breach of contract and account stated as causes of action. As such it is plaintiff’s position Bill of particulars is inapplicable to plaintiff’s cause of action. A true copy plaintiff’s response is hereto attached as Exhibit "B."

3. On March 29, 2012, Defendant sent a letter, Via Certified Mail RRR, to Plaintiff’s attorney Mark D. Walsh, observing that plaintiff’s response was incomplete and insufficient and requesting that Plaintiff provide a supplemental response. A true copy of my March 29, 2012 letter is attached as Exhibit "C."

4. On April 2, 2012, defendant received Plaintiff’s response to Bill of Particulars and One (1) Capital One Bank (USA) NA Statement for April 2012. No further documents were produced. Plaintiff responded by letter claiming that plaintiff has not yet completed its discovery and/or investigation as to what other amounts plaintiff may be entitled to in accordance with the law and/or parties’ agreement. As such, plaintiff reserves the right to amend this response at any point prior to and at trial. A true copy of plaintiff’s response is hereto attached as Exhibit "D".

On April 13, 2012, Defendant sent to Plaintiffs attorney, Mark D. Walsh, a letter Via Certified Mail RRR, attempting to meet and confer in good faith. A true copy of my letter is hereto attached as Exhibit "E".

On April 17, 2012, Defendant sent to Plaintiffs attorney, Mark D. Walsh, a second letter attempting to meet and confer in good faith. A true copy of my letter is hereto attached as Exhibit "F".

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this 23rd day of April, 2012 at San Bernardino, California.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry my post must be confusing, but  I'm not compelling a bop. I'm trying to motion to compel further response to my request for production of documents. =) The example does help me though.

 

I had to drop the bop since they dropped the open account and went with just account stated stated. I sent a discover requests (all periodic statements, all documents referring to or constituting an agreement made in my county, and all documents constituting assignment--per ReadyToWininCA). They sent me what I guess is the usually suspects (a couple of documents printed from their internal systems with a card agreement and a sign affidavit from an out of state person) with a "We're not the OC, so we'll get back to you with the rest" statement. They've never gotten back to me (of course). =P

 

I was wondering if I should mention in the background info that I tried for a BOP first or if I should just focus on the RFPOD issues only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/317277-how-i-beat-midland-in-california/#entry1202922

http://california-discovery-law.com/

http://california-discovery-law.com/meet_and_confer_web.htm

http://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=three&linkid=rule3_1345

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:puoxosiqBgAJ:documents.jdsupra.com/08f044d0-e4dd-4176-a59f-8d6a42a3bb3a.pdf+&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESibYp4Boa3sppMutMOilncY4aFwY0mcMEcUnOVCIp5tQvgkqDyfGHc5zEKc-MUnsn1IBfr2oRb60_sGcPS_jp_AUJTSwvKL20KHb_e2ig8K_HaFKRc6Gk23-ZQrgPoVF3yl39Ce&sig=AHIEtbRpea3GyuS8YLnFuBKUNgFCG770WA this is a good example

 

Before filing a motion to compel the party seeking to compel the further responses must make a reasonable effort to meet and confer with the other party to avoid the need for judicial intervention. California Rule of Court 3.1020 requires that a separate statement be filed and served listing each discovery request, the response, and the basis for compelling a further response.

This means more than just sending one letter, or making one phone call. It is good practice to send the first meet and confer letter requesting further responses within 10 days, if no responses are received, then another meet and confer letter should be sent mentioning the first letter and demanding further responses within 7 days. If no responses are received then a phone call should be made in a last attempt to work something out.

Document everything.

To establish this claim,plaintiff must prove all of the following:

1. That [name of defendant] owed [name of plaintiff] money from previous financial transactions;

2. That [name of plaintiff] and [name of defendant], by words or conduct, agreed that the amount stated in the account was the correct amount owed to [name of plaintiff];

3. That [name of defendant], by words or conduct, promised to pay the stated amount to [name of plaintiff];

4. That [name of defendant] has not paid [name of plaintiff] [any/all] of the amount owed under this account; and

5. The amount of money [name of defendant] owes [name of plaintiff].

Sources and Authority

  • “The essential elements of an account stated are: (1) previous transactions between the parties establishing the relationship of debtor and creditor; (2) an agreement between the parties, express or implied, on the amount due from the debtor to the creditor; (3) a promise by the debtor, express or implied, to pay the amount due.” (Zinn v. Fred R. Bright Co. (1969) 271 Cal.App.2d 597, 600 [76 Cal.Rptr. 663], internal citations omitted.)
  • “The agreement of the parties necessary to establish an account stated need not be express and frequently is implied from the circumstances. In the usual situation, it comes about by the creditor rendering a statement of the account to the debtor. If the debtor fails to object to the statement within a reasonable time, the law implies his agreement that the account is correct as rendered.” (Zinn, supra, 271 Cal.App.2d at p. 600, internal citations omitted.)
  • “An account stated is an agreement, based on the prior transactions between the parties, that the items of the account are true and that the balance struck is due and owing from one party to another. When the account is assented to, it becomes a new contract. An action on it is not founded upon the original items, but upon the balance agreed to by the parties.” Inquiry may not be had into those matters at all. It is upon the new contract by and under which the parties have adjusted their differences and reached an agreement.’ (Gleason v. Klamer (1980) 103 Cal.App.3d 782, 786—787 [163 Cal.Rptr. 483], internal citations omitted.)
  • “To be an account stated, ‘it must appear that at the time of the statement an indebtedness from one party to the other existed, that a balance was then struck and agreed to be the correct sum owing from the debtor to the creditor, and that the debtor expressly or impliedly promised to pay to the creditor the amount thus determined to be owing.’ The agreement necessary to establish an account stated need not be express and is frequently implied from the circumstances. When a statement is rendered to a debtor and no reply is made in a reasonable time, the law implies an agreement that the account is correct as rendered. Actions on accounts stated frequently arise from a series of transactions which also constitute an open book account. However, an account stated may be found in a variety of commercial situations. The acknowledgement of a debt consisting of a single item may form the basis of a stated account. The key element in every context is agreement on the final balance due.” (Maggio, Inc. v. Neal (1987) 196 Cal.App.3d 745, 752—753 [241 Cal.Rptr. 883], internal citations omitted.)
  • “An account stated need not be submitted by the creditor to the debtor. A statement expressing the debtor’s assent and acknowledging the agreed amount of the debt to the creditor equally establishes an account stated.” (Truestone, Inc. v. Simi West Industrial Park II (1984) 163 Cal.App.3d 715, 726 [209 Cal.Rptr. 757], internal citations omitted.)
  • The common count is a general pleading which seeks recovery of money without specifying the nature of the claim Because of the uninformative character of the complaint, it has been held that the typical answer, a general denial, is sufficient to raise almost any kind of defense, including some which ordinarily require special pleading.’ However, even where the plaintiff has pleaded in the form of a common count, the defendant must raise in the answer any new matter, that is, anything he or she relies on that is not put in issue by the plaintiff.” (Title Ins. Co. v. State Bd. of Equalization (1992) 4 Cal.4th 715, 731 [14 Cal.Rptr.2d 822, 842 P.2d 121], internal citations and footnote omitted.)
  • “The account stated may be attacked only by proof of ‘fraud, duress, mistake, or other grounds cognizable in equity for the avoidance of an instrument.’ The defendant ‘will not be heard to answer when action is brought upon the account stated that the claim or demand was unjust, or invalid.’ ” (Gleason, supra, 103 Cal.App.3d at p. 787, internal citations omitted.)
  • “An account stated need not cover all the dealings or claims between the parties. There may be a partial settlement and account stated as to some of the transactions.” (Gleason, supra, 103 Cal.App.3d at p. 790, internal citation omitted.)
  • “In the common law action of general assumpsit, it is customary to plead an indebtedness using ‘common counts.’ In California, it has long been settled the allegation of claims using common counts is good against special or general demurrers. The only essential allegations of a common count are ‘(1) the statement of indebtedness in a certain sum, (2) the consideration, i.e., goods sold, work done, etc., and (3) nonpayment.’ ” (Farmers Ins. Exchange v. Zerin (1997) 53 Cal.App.4th 445, 460 [61 Cal.Rptr.2d 707], internal citations omitted.)
  • “A common count is not a specific cause of action, rather, it is a simplified form of pleading normally used to aver the existence of various forms of monetary indebtedness, including that arising from an alleged duty to make restitution under an assumpsit theory. When a common count is used as an alternative way of seeking the same recovery demanded in a specific cause of action, and is based on the same facts, the common count is demurrable if the cause of action is demurrable.” (McBride v. Boughton (2004) 123 Cal.App.4th 379, 394 [20 Cal.Rptr.3d 115], internal citations omitted.)

Secondary Sources

4 Witkin, California Procedure (4th ed. 1997) Pleading, § 515

1 Witkin, Summary of California Law (10th ed. 2005) Contracts, §§ 972—973

1 California Forms of Pleading and Practice, Ch. 8, Accounts Stated and Open Accounts, §§ 8.10, 8.40—8.46 (Matthew Bender)

1 Matthew Bender Practice Guide: California Contract Litigation, Ch. 9, Seeking or Opposing Quantum Meruit or Quantum Valebant Recovery in Contract Actions, 9.02, 9.15, 9.32

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Turtlepower,


I sent you a note earlier today (sorry for the huge delay, I explain in the note). Anyway, I posted my entire motion in my thread, so please feel free to use what you need! Starts on post #128, enjoy & good luck!  

 

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/315816-ca-asset-acceptance-open-acct-acct-stated-s-about-discovery/page-7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.