combingwyoming

Samples of interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission

Recommended Posts

Hi fellow pro se'ers,

 

Can someone please guide me to some good examples of interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission?

 

Thank you very much!!

 

CombingWyoming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Below is earlier info I posted about this suit:

 

 
3. How much are you being sued for? APPROXIMATELY 10K 
 
5. How do you know you are being sued? (You were served, right?) YES 
 
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? WYOMING 
 
12. What is the status of your case? Suit served? Motions filed? You can find this by a) calling the court or  looking it up online (many states have this information posted - when you find the online court site, search by case number or your name). MY WIFE WAS SERVED. THE SUIT INCLUDED AN EXHIBIT WITH A GENERIC EXCEL STYLE 1 LINE ACCOUNT BALANCE WITH THE AMOUNT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST BUT NO REFERENCE TO MY WIFE. THE SUIT ALSO INCLUDED AN AFFIDAVIT FROM THE LAST JDB OWNER OF THE DEBT WHICH INCLUDED MY WIFE'S NAME ON IT. BOTH THE EXHIBIT AND THE AFFIDAVIT INCLUDED THE SAME OC. SHE DENIED ALL COMPLAINTS AND DEMANDED STRICT PROOF. TRIAL DATE WAS SET AND THEN THE ATTORNEY FOR THE PLAINTIFF ASKED TO RESCHEDULE THE DATE FOR PERSONAL REASONS. A NEW TRIAL DATE WAS SET. MY WIFE THEN RECEIVED DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS FROM THE PLAINTIFF AND A REQUEST TO FILE HER DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS. SHE DID NOT RESPOND TO THOSE YET (AND COULD USE SOME GUIDANCE). SHE ALSO RECEIVED FROM THE PLAINTIFF A MOTION FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO AMEND PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT A TO THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT AND AMENDED AFFIDAVIT OF INDEBTEDNESS. THIS MOTION SOUGHT TO CHANGE THE OC IN THE ORIGINAL COMPLAINT TO A NEW OC. FOR THIS CHANGE THEY ADDED A NEW GENERIC EXCEL STYLE 1 LINE ACCOUNT BALANCE WITH THE AMOUNT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST BUT NO REFERENCE TO MY WIFE. THEY ALSO ADDED A NEW AFFIDAVIT FROM THE SAME AFFIANT (RYAN) AS BEFORE. THEY ALSO ADDED TWO ADDITIONAL AFFIDAVITS, ONE THAT SHOWS THAT THE OC SOLD THOUSANDS OF ACCOUNTS FOR MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO JDB #1 AND A SECOND AFFIDAVIT THAT SHOWS THAT JDB #1 SOLD DEBT TO THE JDB WHERE RYAN IS PRESIDENT [NOTE: NEITHER OF THE LATER 2 AFFIDAVITS MENTION MY WIFE AND RYAN'S AFFIDAVIT MENTIONS THE OC BUT NOT JDB #1]. FINALLY, THE LAST THING THEY INCLUDED WAS A GENERIC CONTRACT FROM THE OC WHICH DID NOT HAVE MY WIFE'S SIGNATURE ON IT. I HOPE THIS IS ALL CLEAR AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. 
 
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? COURT DATE HAS BEEN SET. DATE IS COMING UP SOON. 
 
Any help and guidance on how my wife should move forward would be greatly appreciated. Thank you very much! 
 
CombingWyoming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you read any of the rules for civil procedure for WY?  They sent you disclosures, what you need to do is search and see if there are other rules of discovery.  In colorado there is no other discovery allowed unless it is ordered by the court.  Other states you are able to send for a request for documents, request for admissions, etc.  That information is needed to help direct you.

 

You ca print out a disclosure form from your court website, or you can make one, just make it look like theirs.  Under documents, you just put "defendant has no documents at this time, but may supplement at a later date if any documents become available"

 

Under witnessess you can put "Defendant has no wittnesss at this time, but may cross examine Plaintif's witnessess for purposes of impeachment"

 

Then sign it, and mail CMRRR to lawyer.  Check your rules to see if you need to file it with the court, most you don't but you may need to file the proof of service, check your rules.

 

After you find out the discovery rules, come back and let us know, and we can direct you better for the rest of your case. :)

 

I would also look at some of the threads by people if Utah, they have similar discovery rules with disclosure, and also Colorado.  1st timer is a good one for colo., and there are quite a few from Utah on the 1st page of this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you homeschool mom  very much. The ASTMedic thread was awesome to read but I didnt come across any examples of interrogatories or requests for admissions. Did you see any of such samples? Can someone point me to some samples/examples that are tried and proven?

 

Thank you Shellieh very much. Yes, my wife did have a meeting with the judge and plaintiffs attorney and the judge set deadlines for all kinds of things before trial. One of the deadlines is for interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission. Have you seen on this forum any great examples of in interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission?

 

Thank you all so so much!

 

CombingWyoming

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are great they always object to them all.

 

1. The original signed application establishing the account.

2. Charge slips bearing defendant's signature which establish use of the account.

3. The original written agreement in which defendant allegedly assented to the terms of the account.

4. A complete history of the account from day one, establishing the legitemacy of the balance sought.

5. Any document setting forth the choice of law provision.

6. Any document plaintiff intends to introduce at trial which establishes the exact day the subject account went into default.

7. Any document produced by plaintiff in the normal course of business which states and defines the exact statutes of the choice of law provision it seeks to enforce.

8. Any recording, or transcript of any recording, of telephone calls in which defendant disputed the alleged amount owed.

9. Any cancelled checks or copies of cancelled checks, or other verified payments on the account plaintiff intends to introduce as evidence at trial.

10. Proof of mailing of monthly statements to defendant.

11. Any documents evidencing that defendant retained monthly statements for an unreasonable amount of time.

12. Any document produced by plaintiff in the normal course of business defining "unreasonable amount of time."


13. Documents establishing the chain of custody of the alleged debt, starting with the original creditor, each one to show in clear detail the manner in which the debt was allegedly transferred to subsequent assignees. These documents should show the account number and name of the account holder.

14. The forward flow or media document(s) governing this transaction.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you racecar for taking the time to share with me these great resources! I perused through the website you suggested and found lots of great material but there is so much more I can learn, its freaken endless! I have a couple of questions:

 

1. I have up to 30 interrogatories. What are the musts to include (and why)?

2. I am certain that my affidavits were robo-signed, should I hit them for that in my interrogatories or should I file some other paper for that? Any suggested legalese?

 

Thanks so much,

 

CombingWyoming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is your rogs and admissions a total of 30? or do you get 30 of each?  I have some stuff Ill post, and you can pick and choose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Requests for Production of Documents-

 

1.  The original signed application establishing the account.

 

2.  Charge slips bearing defendant's signature which establish use of the account.

 

3.  The original written agreement in which defendant allegedly assented to the terms of the account.

 

4.  A complete history of the account from day one, establishing the legitimacy of the balance sought.

 

5.  Any document setting forth the choice of law provision.

 

6.  Any document plaintiff intends to introduce at trial which establishes the exact day the subject account went into default.

 

7.  Any document produced by plaintiff in the normal course of business which states and defines the exact statutes the choice of law provision seeks to enforce.

 

8.  Any recording, or transcript of any recording, of telephone calls in which defendant disputed the alleged amount owed.

 

9.  Any cancelled checks or copies of cancelled checks, or other verified payments on the account plaintiff intends to introduce as evidence at trial.

 

10. Proof of mailing of monthly statements.

 

11. Any documents evidencing that defendant retained monthly statements for an unreasonable amount of time.

 

12. Any document produced by plaintiff in the normal course of business defining "unreasonable amount of time.

 

13. A complete copy of the agreements that constitute the chain of title for the alleged account at issue in this lawsuit starting with the agreement between the originator of the account and its assignee and including each agreement between an assignee of the account and another assignee of the account and/or CACH, LLC. This is a request for the entire agreement, not just the bill of sale or exhibit to an agreement and includes master or "flow" agreements whose terms relate in any way to or are incorporated by an agreement transferring rights to the account at issue in this lawsuit.  In order to protect the privacy of other debtors whose accounts may be included in such agreements, CACH,LLC may redact or otherwise omit information identifying any debtor other than the defendant. 

 

14. Complete and unredacted Credit Card Purchase Agreement between Bank of America, N.A. and CACH, LLC including all of its Exhibits.

 

15. All documents and tangible things CACH, LLC received from any assignee or assignor in connection with the account that is the subject of this lawsuit. 

 

16. All documents containing any warranties or representations made by the originator or any assignee of the account at issue in this lawsuit to CACH, LLC or any other assignee of the account.

 

17. All materials intended to be used at trial that have not already been produced.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Requests for Admissions

 

 

1.      Admit that LHR inc is not the original creditor which allegedly extended credit to the Defendant, which such extension of credit is the subject matter of this lawsuit against the Defendant.

 

2.      Admit that LHR inc has never entered into a contract, directly, with the Defendant.

 

3.      Admit that LHR inc never sent any billing statements, in reference to the alleged account which is the subject matter of this lawsuit, or demands to Defendant, prior to the date in which LHR inc allegedly became the alleged successor in interest to First National Bank, N.A.

 

4.      Admit that LHR inc allegedly purchases defaulted alleged debts and/or accounts as a regular course of business.

 

5.      Admit that LHR inc is not an affiliate or subsidiary of First National Bank, N.A.

 

6.      Admit that LHR inc does not produce or originate any billing statement records on behalf of First National Bank, N.A.

 

7.     Admit that LHR inc, at the time of the alleged default on the alleged account, which is the subject matter of this lawsuit, had no records in their possession and/or immediate custody and/or control with Defendant's name, address, phone number, or social security number on any such record. 

 

8.     Admit that LHR inc, at the time of the alleged default on the alleged account, which is the subject matter of this lawsuit, maintained no records which referenced the Defendant in any manner.

 

9.    Admit that LHR inc did not allegedly purchase Defendant's alleged account and alleged defaulted debt with no other allegedly defaulted accounts, as part of the alleged sale of accounts to LHR inc

 

10.  Admit LHR inc has no personal, first hand knowledge of the record keeping procedures and/or practices of First National Bank, N.A.

 

11.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, is not a current employee of First National Bank, N.A.

12.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, has never been employed by First National Bank, N.A..

 

13.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant forLHR inc, has no personal first hand knowledge of the record keeping and business records keeping practices of First National Bank, N.A..

 

14.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, has no personal, first hand knowledge that Defendant defaulted on the alleged account and debt which is the subject matter of this lawsuit.

 

15.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, does not have in their immediate possession or custody and control of all records pertaining to the alleged account and debt of the Defendant, which is the subject matter of this lawsuit.

 

16.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, does not maintain all the alleged business records for the alleged account and alleged debt, which is the subject matter of this lawsuit.

 

17.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, is simply reading information off a computer screen that was electronically provided to LHR inc by First National Bank, N.A.

 

18.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, is only advised of the alleged balance allegedly owned to LHR inc by the Defendant, and has no direct, personal, first hand knowledge of the alleged account and alleged debt.

 

19.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, is only testifying in the affidavit as to what somebody else advised them, and has no personal first hand knowledge if the information which provided is in fact true and correct.

 

20.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, cannot attest to the authenticity of the alleged records, in the immediate possession and/or custody of LHR inc, which were allegedly provided to the Plaintiff by First National Bank, N.A., which allegedly show that Defendant is legally indebted to Plaintiff in the amount of $xxxx.xx

.

21.  Admit all records allegedly held by LHR inc, which allegedly prove Defendant is indebted to the Plaintiff, are not LHR inc's own business records which LHR inc originated and keep in LHR inc's regular course of business.

 

22.  Admit LHR inc allegedly bought Defendant's alleged defaulted account as part of a bulk sale transaction with First National Bank, N.A..

 

23.  Admit LHR inc has no document in their possession bearing Defendant's signature.

 

24.  Admit the Defendant never verbally agreed to pay LHR inc any sum of money.

 

25.  Admit the Defendant never, in written form, agreed by contract or any other legally binding document, to be indebted to LHR inc direct.

 

26.  Admit LHR inc is aware that simply taking somebody's else alleged business records, in which LHR inc had no personal first hand knowledge of their creation and their authenticity, and then putting those alleged business records into a file maintained by LHR inc, then referencing those records as LHR inc's business records, do not overcome the business records exception to hearsay.

 

27.  Admit all of LHR inc records, which allegedly show an obligation of the Defendant to LHR inc are hearsay.

 

28.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, if called to testify at trial against the Defendant, will be unable to testify as having any first hand knowledge as to the authenticity of the business records which xxxxx references in the affidavit, which was submitted as an exhibit as part of this lawsuit.

 

29.  Admit xxxxx, who is the affiant for LHR inc, if called to testify at trial against the Defendant, will be unable to testify, by personal first hand knowledge, to the authenticity of any alleged contract, oral or written, entered into by the Defendant with First National Bank, N.A..

 

30.  Admit LHR inc, at any point and time in the last five years, has been found by a court of competent jurisdiction, to have falsified affidavit(s), specifically, submitting affidavits in which the affiant had not conducted a review of the account as alleged in the affidavit.

 

31.  Admit LHR inc, in the alleged purchase agreement with First National Bank N.A., where LHR inc became the alleged successor in interest to First National Bank, N.A., for the alleged account which is the subject matter of this lawsuit, involved more than xxxxxthousand accounts and/or debts being transferred in the same transaction.

 

32.  Admit LHR inc routinely violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

 

33.  Admit LHR inc routinely violates state collection laws in at least one state in the United States of America.

 

34.  Admit no court should consider any evidence submitted for consideration by LHR inc, as LHR inc has an extensive record of violating state and federal laws.

 

35.  Admit LHR inc has no more than a spreadsheet with Defendant's name, which references an alleged account with an alleged amount in default, and now allegedly owed to LHR inc

.

36.  Admit the Defendant is not indebted to LHR inc in any sum of money.

 

37.  Admit the Defendant has no liability, at all, to LHR inc

 

38.  Admit LHR inc has violated the FDCPA in the collection attempts against Defendant.

 

39.  Admit LHR inc has never, in the past three years, had a business relationship, of any kind, with XXXXXXXXX, the Defendant in this lawsuit.

 

40.  Admit LHR inc does not send letters or other communications directly and for the sole benefit of First National Bank, N.A..

 

41.  Admit LHR inc should take nothing in their lawsuit against XXXXXXXXX.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would turn some of those admissions into rogs if I were you, just reword it.  And one thing I would include is ask who is answering the Rog, and what title do they hold within the company.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you shellieh very much for your help, I cant tell you how much I appreciate it!

 

How could I find out if the 30 interrogatories also includes or doesnt include the "requests for admission" and "requests for production"? The Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure only includes a number (30) of allowed requests by the subject of "interrogatories" but no reference to any allowed number of requests in its subject on "requests for production" and "requests for admission"...?! If someone can google Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure and let me know what I am missing, that would be a huge help. I right now have 48 requests between interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission and I would like to mail this out to the scum bag attorney for the plaintiff but dont want to get screwed.

 

Also anyone have additional samples of interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission?

 

Thank you very much,

 

CombingWyoming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.  In colorado there is no other discovery allowed unless it is ordered by the court. 

 

That's a terrible rule. Are you sure that's correct? You must be able to ask for leave of court to conduct discovery. It would be unconstitutional for the other side to be able to conduct discovery and not you.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No anon amos.  They have disclosure.  Everything needs to be included in disclosure, and if it is not, then it cannot be used.  They do have discovery, but you have to do a pre trial conference, and the judge has to order it.  He denied it in my case, said we didn't need it, just follow the disclosure rules.  It can work for or against you, It would depend on how well put together the jdb is.  If he only gives an affidavit and a handful of statements, it domes in very handy.  If they have everything, it sucks, lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

How could I find out if the 30 interrogatories also includes or doesnt include the "requests for admission" and "requests for production"? The Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure only includes a number (30) of allowed requests by the subject of "interrogatories" but no reference to any allowed number of requests in its subject on "requests for production" and "requests for admission"...?! If someone can google Wyoming Rules of Civil Procedure and let me know what I am missing, that would be a huge help. I right now have 48 requests between interrogatories, requests for production and requests for admission

 

It's probably 30 request total of any combination of the discovery methods, RFP's RFA's or ROGS (although I did not look it up) which should be more than enough. 48 is a lot of request, and you will need to file a motion to compel it all when they object. If you really feel you need that much, I would send it a little at a time. RFP's then maybe some RFA's or ROG's questioning what was sent in response to the RFPD's. All you really need (at least for now) is about 5 RFPD's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No anon amos.  They have disclosure.  Everything needs to be included in disclosure, and if it is not, then it cannot be used.  They do have discovery, but you have to do a pre trial conference, and the judge has to order it.  He denied it in my case, said we didn't need it, just follow the disclosure rules.  It can work for or against you, It would depend on how well put together the jdb is.  If he only gives an affidavit and a handful of statements, it domes in very handy.  If they have everything, it sucks, lol.

Well that's not so bad then. Close enough to the same thing anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's probably 30 request total of any combination of the discovery methods, RFP's RFA's or ROGS (although I did not look it up) which should be more than enough. 48 is a lot of request, and you will need to file a motion to compel it all when they object. If you really feel you need that much, I would send it a little at a time. RFP's then maybe some RFA's or ROG's questioning what was sent in response to the RFPD's. All you really need (at least for now) is about 5 RFPD's.

Thank you Anon Amos. I have seen it done both ways. Whats the advantage of only sending in a small amount of requests at a time vs. sending them all in at once (so I can have some peace and quiet for a little while :))? What do you recommend as the five most important RFPD's to start with?

 

Thank you,

 

CombingWyoming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Combingwyoming, it makes the plaintiff work.  They want to spend as little time as possible on these cases, they are all about default judgments.  By sending a little at a time, you are keeping the pressure on them, and making them work to prove their case.  If they don't have everything, or feel the win is not worth the time, they will in time dismiss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These are great they always object to them all.

 

Or just ignore the ones they don't like in my case. Then admit to having them. Then ignore a second request to produce them.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Anon Amos. I have seen it done both ways. Whats the advantage of only sending in a small amount of requests at a time vs. sending them all in at once (so I can have some peace and quiet for a little while :-))? What do you recommend as the five most important RFPD's to start with?

 

Thank you,

 

CombingWyoming

The advantage of a little at a time is that it will be easier to file a motion to compel when the time comes (and it will) because in the motion you will have to address the whole laundry list of discovery, how they objected, why they should not have, and how that  request you made can actually be considered to lead to discoverable evidence you could use at trial. With 45 request; that's going to be a lot of work.

Another reason is it's harder for them to object to (not that they won't anyway). You cannot expect them to admit things like "plaintiff Violated FDCPA, defendant is not indebted to plaintiff, etc. etc.) It's not so much as just as a little at a time, but just not a whole ton of stuff you don't really need, or have no expectation of receiving.

Also if you send request for documents first; then you can send ROGS and RFA's that pertain to the documents you received. Such as: "Admit that document "x" was created solely for the sake of litigation" "Admit that document "x" is not a true copy of or an exact duplicate" things like that. And at that point if you had to file a motion to compel you would only be trying to get the judge to compel 5 items from your RFPOD's that can be expected to lead to discoverable evidence instead of bombarding him/her with 45 request that the judge is going to have to go over your argument and their objection to it.

 

RFPOD's

 

1)    Please produce the application that pertains to defendant's alleged debt.

2)    "                      "all documentation evidencing plaintiff's assignment to alleged debt from the OC" 

3)    "                 "    any and all CC statements to alleged debt showing all charges and payments (providing a complete accounting from  a zero balance to amount allegedly owed)

4)   "                   "   terms to the alleged account.

5)  "          " any and all documents bearing defendants signature.

 

 

Nice and simple, easier to motion the court to compel, and when you finally do receive some documents you can keep more pressure on them by sending the ROG' and RFA's (if you need to) to get answers that may help you strike the evidence. No evidence - No case.

 

Just my opinion. Good Luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition, if they file a MSJ, discovery is still ongoing, which produces a issue of triable material facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In addition, if they file a MSJ, discovery is still ongoing, which produces a issue of triable material facts.

That's a good point. It is also very unlikely  they will file a MSJ in the first place if discovery is ongoing, and IF they do; they will be hard pressed to prevail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So heres an update:

 

I served the plaintiff my rogs, RFD's and RFA's before the deadline set in my pre-trial conference. The plaintiff served me with rogs, RFD's and RFA's a week after the deadline set by the judge at the pre-trial conference. They didnt respond yet to my discovery and I didnt respond yet to theirs.

 

Can I use this to my advantage to:

 

1. Get my case dismissed (lol)?

2. File something with the court to not be required to answer their discovery requests?

3. Give the plaintiff a run for his money?

 

Any guidance, advice or suggestions with examples would be a huge help.

 

Also, can someone guide me to some examples of defendants responses to discovery which I may be able to modify for my suit and also shed some light on the best time for me to respond to their discovery requests?

 

Thank you all so much for your amazing support, smart advice and kind care!

 

CombingWyoming

Share this post


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