birdsmom Posted February 28, 2013 Report Share Posted February 28, 2013 I'm being sued by an attorney for a junk debt buyer in GA state court. I have filed my answer and now want to start discovery process. I need advice on whether to file it all at once or whether breaking it out over time is better. Example: sending the request for production of documents first, waiting for their reply and then filing admissions and interrogatories? Or would that be risky due to time contrainsts? Also, because I just filed my answer yesterday, do I need to wait to hear from plaintiff or can I go ahead & start discovery process now? Thanks for the advice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Amos Posted February 28, 2013 Report Share Posted February 28, 2013 Check your rules, but I would start discovery now (if the rules allow it). At least for set one I would just go with the request for production of documents. Nice and simple, just requesting 4 or 5 docs that they would need to prove the allegations. There's plenty of info on discovery here. I'm being sued by an attorney for a junk debt buyer in GA state court. I have filed my answer and now want to start discovery process. I need advice on whether to file it all at once or whether breaking it out over time is better. Example: sending the request for production of documents first, waiting for their reply and then filing admissions and interrogatories? Or would that be risky due to time contrainsts? Also, because I just filed my answer yesterday, do I need to wait to hear from plaintiff or can I go ahead & start discovery process now? Thanks for the advice! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrunoTheJDBkiller Posted February 28, 2013 Report Share Posted February 28, 2013 What court is this? If it is Magistrate Court you don't get discovery unless the opposition agrees to it or the court approves it. Otherwise, send production of documents first. Wait until you see what they have, then serve admissions for each item not produced. Sending them together makes no sense because you don't know what they have yet. ROGs are a bit iffy for credit card cases, they don't serve much purpose as a rule. These cases are won or lost with paperwork. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdsmom Posted February 28, 2013 Author Report Share Posted February 28, 2013 Thank you for your answer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flyerfan Posted February 28, 2013 Report Share Posted February 28, 2013 What court is this? If it is Magistrate Court you don't get discovery unless the opposition agrees to it or the court approves it. Otherwise, send production of documents first. Wait until you see what they have, then serve admissions for each item not produced. Sending them together makes no sense because you don't know what they have yet. ROGs are a bit iffy for credit card cases, they don't serve much purpose as a rule. These cases are won or lost with paperwork. I've stated this before. The only reason I like Interrogatories is usually your court rules will allow interrogatories to inquire about work location, phone numbers, job title, employment history, etc. regarding the affiants of the affidavits they sent you. I agree with Bruno that they are typically useless but I do like it for this purpose alone. They don't like to give out this information. They'll object and you can hold that over them to help avoid an MSJ. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Amos Posted February 28, 2013 Report Share Posted February 28, 2013 I've stated this before. The only reason I like Interrogatories is usually your court rules will allow interrogatories to inquire about work location, phone numbers, job title, employment history, etc. regarding the affiants of the affidavits they sent you. I agree with Bruno that they are typically useless but I do like it for this purpose alone. They don't like to give out this information. They'll object and you can hold that over them to help avoid an MSJ. That is a good point. Maybe if people already have affidavits before they send discovery they can get the affiant's information with interrogatories, and if they don't already have affidavits; they can send discovery set 2 with interrogatories when they get an affidavit. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upsman40 Posted February 28, 2013 Report Share Posted February 28, 2013 I tripped up ASSet in MI with Interrogs......not that they wouldnt have shot themselves in the foot anyway, but they stated in an interrog that they did not have the underlaying contract in their possesion, but would produce it and forward to the defendant before trial. Tis then set them up in admissions etc.... and u;ltimatley is what got the judgment dismissed with prejudice. These guys are so arrogant they think the average person is stupid and does not pay attention to what is going on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anon Amos Posted February 28, 2013 Report Share Posted February 28, 2013 I tripped up ASSet in MI with Interrogs......not that they wouldnt have shot themselves in the foot anyway, but they stated in an interrog that they did not have the underlaying contract in their possesion, but would produce it and forward to the defendant before trial. Tis then set them up in admissions etc.... and u;ltimatley is what got the judgment dismissed with prejudice. These guys are so arrogant they think the average person is stupid and does not pay attention to what is going on.Another good point, so interrogatories and RFA's; not a bad idea when used in moderation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Public Enemy Posted March 1, 2013 Report Share Posted March 1, 2013 I tripped up ASSet in MI with Interrogs......not that they wouldnt have shot themselves in the foot anyway, but they stated in an interrog that they did not have the underlaying contract in their possesion, but would produce it and forward to the defendant before trial. Tis then set them up in admissions etc.... and u;ltimatley is what got the judgment dismissed with prejudice. These guys are so arrogant they think the average person is stupid and does not pay attention to what is going on. Could you please elaborate a bit more on what you did after receiving their statement that they did not have the underlaying contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts