Recommended Posts

How did this case end? I found one that he prevailed on the suit, but awarded zero damages and then jury found complaint was filed for harassment and awarded defendant all their costs and fees. Anybody else have any data on it?

 

He is now clogging up the appellate court docket with an appeal of the award of attorney fees.  The law firm that got the fees has until next week to file their response to his appeal or file for an extension.  It will be late summer at the earliest before they appellate court hands down a decision unless they rubber stamp deny his appeal.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

They might be better served reading the resulting appeal decision.

Maybe, although I think too often people get on a "The CA called me at 7:59am and I WANT BLOOD!!!!!!" trajectory, and reading that opinion might shake them back to reality.

 

There is a huge difference between actual and statutory damages, and the FDCPA makes both available.  If you don't have actual damages, don't lie and say you do.  Take your UP TO $1,000 and move on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They might be better served reading the resulting appeal decision.

 

The ONLY thing he appealed is the motion for their fees.  He also made a GLARING error in that brief and far be it from me to help him out.  

 

I understand an appeal is currently being briefed, therefore the "case" has not ended.

 

Keep in mind he did NOT appeal the verdict on the actual court case.  He only appealed the award of attorney fees.  So the actual case is over and done.  The time to appeal has expired for the actual case itself.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no reason other than arrogance to file a separate federal FDCPA suit pro se anyway.  If you know you have a case then there will be no problem finding an attorney to take it on a contingency basis.  

 

Coltfan had the technical savvy to properly proceed but absolute zero as far as knowing how to act professionally - if he would have kept his mouth shut it most likely would have came out quite well in his favor. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Coltfan had the technical savvy to properly proceed but absolute zero as far as knowing how to act professionally - if he would have kept his mouth shut it most likely would have came out quite well in his favor. 

 

Not only this but they made 3 if not 4 settlement offers the last being approximately $6k which he turned down every time in a loud and obnoxious fashion.  Federal courts have ZERO tolerance for litigants who take up their time on trivial matters by refusing reasonable settlement offers.  So not only did the jury give him ZERO (which is what he deserved IMO) but he got nailed for the attorney fees for rejecting the settlement offers and having diarrhea of the mouth in bragging that he was doing this to harass them and "cost them as much money as possible."

Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire court transcript is available for viewing for those that care to seek it out. Colt's appellate brief is also available. There is a lot to learn here for those that check their preconceived notions at the door.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest usctrojanalum

The most important thing to learn is how not to act like a buffoon, and have 37k in attorneys fees awarded against you.  When you receive an offer of 6k to settle, take your 6k and run.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I find this entire thread fascinating, as well as the thread on DB. I "knew" colt fan there, and found him too unstable and grandiose to be of real help. The fact that he turned out not to be of real help to himself is not surprising.

 

What IS surprising is that so many people, on both this forum and that one, are willing to idolize someone whose accomplishments are, to a great extent, inside his own head.

 

What I appreciated about DB was the information. The cults and the backstabbing, not so much. What I appreciate about CIC is, again, the information. There seems to be a bit more transparency in the administering of the site, which I very much appreciate, and, while I've not been here that long, I don't see as many cult figures. Which, to my mind, is a VERY good thing.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire court transcript is available for viewing for those that care to seek it out. Colt's appellate brief is also available. There is a lot to learn here for those that check their preconceived notions at the door.

Probably not a bad idea. My preconceived notion is that it is best to wait for the case to end. Others are entitled to their own preconceived notions.

 

Marx changed nothing regarding the filing of a proper FDCPA claim inclusive of admissible evidence. This case will very likely change nothing regarding whether I file or prevail on my filing of any future FDCPA claim (or more likely negotiate a settlement). The hyper-ventilating of the ARM industry means little in a court of law. They seem over-joyed that some DC attorneys worked for free on an FDCPA claim that they successfully defended. Welcome to the world of the pro se litigant. GRC recovered their costs. Not too impressive being GRC and getting to pay your prevailing attorney.

 

I always assume court costs are at risk should I lose. FDCPA is not some magic shield for losers. I am not seeing a real problem with the practical implications of Marx. The problem is that an FDCPA claim had devolved in to being all (instead of mostly) about attorney fees since the statutory limits are so minuscule they are not a legitimate deterrent. Also, the bar to proving significant  damages in an FDCPA claim seems fairly high to this observer.

 

...

When you receive an offer of 6k to settle, take your 6k and run.

If you do not know this, then Marx and this case (when it ends) will probably be of little assistance to you. Marx refused a Rule 68 offer of judgment and apparently had no evidence to back their claims. Sometimes the voices in our head can be too strong. I believe it is best to lose the emotion and focus on winning, not being reversed, and/or collecting your judgment/relief. That applies to all the court room participants, from the judge on down. When a DC attorney chases an illusive judgment (that is not to be) against a party with no collectable resources for two years through active litigation I can only assume an emotional component has crawled into their head.

 

If you do not know to accept a decent settlement, then it is doubtful you will heed any insights from Marx or this case (when it ends). Those insights can likely be garnered elsewhere in any case. Don't bring junk claims to court. Don't improperly prosecute a winning case to the point of losing. This applies to FDCPA or other claims.

 

I have had opposing attorneys call me names in their court filings (similar to what happens on forums when someone is losing an argument). I try to avoid that. I try to keep the voices in my head from causing me to lose. Others should do what works best for them.

 

When you attack the other guy you have already begun a losing trajectory IMHO.

 

I often find opposing counsel to be unstable, grandiose, and inaccurate. I still learn from them on occasion, I use discernment to the best of my ability.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

The entire court transcript is available for viewing for those that care to seek it out. Colt's appellate brief is also available. There is a lot to learn here for those that check their preconceived notions at the door.

I grabbed the transcript and brief and will have a read through it this evening if I get some time. 

 

Whether he is right or wrong in his legal theories, one lesson to learn here is to not dare the court to make an example out of you.  There is no need to act the way he did at most times throughout the proceedings.  You can just as easily make your points acting like a normal person and you will probably find a more sympathetic jury (although he claims he didn't care about that part).

 

I will say it seems like the judge is pretty angry about the things Coltfan said and hypocritically used this ruling to retaliate against him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will say it seems like the judge is pretty angry about the things Coltfan said and hypocritically used this ruling to retaliate against him.

 

Read the ENTIRE brief and transcript before you jump off that cliff.  He had AMPLE time to accept one of a half dozen settlements and refused all while bragging on the internet on 3 different websites including this one about how he was going to make them pay.  The JURY is the one that found bad faith.  The judge merely used discretion to also decide he intended to harass CBOJ and the Mixon Law Firm.  His own words and actions did him in.  Don't forget he openly bragged in his posts that he deliberately sent a vaguely worded letter to "bait them to violate the law" so he could sue.

 

NOW he is claiming freedom of speech as his sole basis for the appeal of the attorney fees motion he lost.  There is one major problem:  the court NEVER censured his freedom of speech.  In fact they allowed him free rein to use it all he wanted.  What coltfan did not count on was that speech being used against him to show that all along his intent was in bad faith and for the purposes of harassment with that frivolous suit.  While Miranda applies to criminal cases there is on relevant part that can be applied to a civil case:  ANYTHING you say can and WILL be used against you in a court of law.  

 

Just because you CAN do something does not mean you SHOULD do something.  He had the right to remain silent just not the ability.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Harry Seaward

 

I don't believe that the judge's ruling was hypocritical.   Her ruling was based upon his actions and the jury's finding of bad faith.  While Coltfan's claim was valid, if he had accepted one of the offers made by the CA, the case would have been over and done.    The attorney fees would not have been nearly as high, there would have been no motion by the plaintiff for attorney's fees, Coltfan would have walked away with some money in his pocket, and the court's time would not have been wasted.  Based upon those facts, her ruling was not hypocritical.

 

Whether her ruling was correct is a different issue and for the Court of Appeals to decide.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Embarrassing and harassing members of the bar was not going to go unpunished. Refusing to distance himself from his on-line persona coupled with sending harassing emails directly to Mixon's office were the final nails in the coffin. Whether the judge has the discretion to punish him for his actions is a different story. I'm not sure I agree with the case law she cited in her decision, but I'm hardly experienced enough to have any credibility on the subject.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks...please be careful.

 

ColtFan caused enough problems when he chose to grace us with his presence.  Now that he's decided to take his business elsewhere, please don't let his ghost continue to haunt us.

 

If you feel the need to discuss him, please go over to DB...

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks...please be careful.

 

ColtFan caused enough problems when he chose to grace us with his presence.  Now that he's decided to take his business elsewhere, please don't let his ghost continue to haunt us.

 

If you feel the need to discuss him, please go over to DB...

And likewise it would be nice if Clydesmom stayed here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@willingtocope Oh thank you! Some of the recent posts were just rehashing of the same negativity previously posted, though some were helpful and represented a mature way to debate. I think this thread loses value when it veers from teaching members and lurkers alike to be careful in your attempts to teach a plaintiff a lesson, to name calling and character bashing against a person who cannot even defend themselves, no matter how deserving or undeserving of it they may be.

Finally, it gets downright hostile when some feel it perfectly acceptable to turn that behavior on members here who voice opposing positions. In my opinion it's at that point the thread should be locked to prevent members from being attacked.

Many of us prefer the welcoming atmosphere of this site and don't want to see that compromised.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest lesson for me here is that it's always, always important to keep your ego and your emotions in check, when dealing with legal matters.

 

I have only completed one court case, so far, and I was astonished at the unprofessionalism of the interchangeable attorneys that Gurstel threw at me in the little over a year that the case took. In my mind, they were the mean ones in my kids' AP classes: smart, and convinced that because they were smart, they were better than the kids in the mainstream of the school.

 

Since they were all about the age of my kids, as well, it was easy to think of them that way. But, my training was not in their area, so I knew I had to play my best game, and stay cool.

 

The subject of this thread had more experience than I did. It's easy to get cocky, and seeing what's happened to date, reminds us all once more that cockiness can cost more than we are willing or able to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Spikey

The entire court transcript is available for viewing for those that care to seek it out. Colt's appellate brief is also available. There is a lot to learn here for those that check their preconceived notions at the door.

I would like to thank you for extending this challenge.  I hadn't realized there was so much procedural information in the transcripts and brief.  I have only glanced the brief and am just finishing the first of the two parts to the transcript, but it has given me a greater understanding of the entire process from motions in limine to jury selection to jury instruction.  I had seen how the witness testimony goes from watching O.J. and Jodi Arias, but these documents give a much more detailed (and definitely more boring to those that just want to be constantly stimulated by shock and awe) background into the entire process.  I got a chuckle out of the judge talking with the lawyers about the old judge that used to bring his dog in to court.  Spoiler alert - the dog died, which was sad, but you can see how these are just regular people having conversations like any other. It's definitely helped to lower some of my apprehension about my own case.

 

So, thanks.  :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@BV80

@Harry Seaward

 

I don't believe that the judge's ruling was hypocritical.   Her ruling was based upon his actions and the jury's finding of bad faith.  While Coltfan's claim was valid, if he had accepted one of the offers made by the CA, the case would have been over and done.    The attorney fees would not have been nearly as high, there would have been no motion by the plaintiff for attorney's fees, Coltfan would have walked away with some money in his pocket, and the court's time would not have been wasted.  Based upon those facts, her ruling was not hypocritical.

 

Whether her ruling was correct is a different issue and for the Court of Appeals to decide.

Maybe hypocritical was not quite the right word, but she kept illustrating his vindictive nature in the online posts, and then her reasoning for awarding the attorney's fees was essentially to punish him for the way he acted.

 

At least that was the impression I came away with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of how anyone feels about CF's case, or how he handled it, our opinions are meaningless. The only opinion that matters is the one put forth by the 8th circuit at this point. Continuing to analyze or bicker over what he did, or how he handled himself is a waste of time that takes away from this forums mission. 

 

When the 8th hands down a ruling, and we've all had a chance to read and digest that ruling, lets come back and throw around our non-legal mind opinions and banter.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally, it gets downright hostile when some feel it perfectly acceptable to turn that behavior on members here who voice opposing positions.

 

I agree but I am also used to their attacks.  This is the tactic that coltfan and his minions use on ANYONE who dares to challenge his public image of superiority that he has cultivated.  They attempt to "silence" or isolate them in anyway possible so that the wizard behind the curtain is not exposed as a mortal man whose public image of infinite power is nothing more than an illusion on a screen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was shocked at some of the things that Coltfan said and did. My opinion is that the stress turned him into his own worst enemy.  Very sad indeed. People under stress tend to say and do things they normally would not do. 

 

The only thing I think might happen with his appeal,  is that the attorney fees will be significantly reduced.  

 

When is the appeal decision set to come down?  I missed that.

 

SkippieB

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