quagga

Plantiff failed to Respond to CCP96

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

 

I've been following ASTMedic's post as my guide for my battle with Legal Recovery Law Offices.http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/317277-how-i-beat-midland-in-california/

 

So per his post I've sent them my DISC-015 and have waited patiently for over 30 days and still no response to my request.  The only question now is how should i prepare my trial brief and MIL.  I figure i would just modify the MIL to specify all evidence and not just the Affidavit in Lieu of Testimony.  As for the Trial brief should focus my whole argument around their failure to comply with CCP96 or should I still follow the arguments listed in the original trial brief?

 

Thanks again for your help

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all,

 

I've been following ASTMedic's post as my guide for my battle with Legal Recovery Law Offices.http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/317277-how-i-beat-midland-in-california/

 

So per his post I've sent them my DISC-015 and have waited patiently for over 30 days and still no response to my request.  The only question now is how should i prepare my trial brief and MIL.  I figure i would just modify the MIL to specify all evidence and not just the Affidavit in Lieu of Testimony.  As for the Trial brief should focus my whole argument around their failure to comply with CCP96 or should I still follow the arguments listed in the original trial brief?

 

Thanks again for your help

Well congratulations; you won this case. They cannot enter ANY evidence at all against you. Your main focus now should be that they cannot be permitted to introduce evidence at trial. You could keep your arguments in the MIL's and trial brief, but now; state the fact that they did not comply with the ccp 96 as the first statement in these writings. You might find some case law on plaintiff's not complying with the ccp 96 (just in case). Once the plaintiff receives copies of your MIL's stating they did not comply with the ccp 96, they should dismiss (no sense going to trial with no evidence) Usually people file MIL's as late as possible (to hide their strategy) but in your case this will not be necessary. I would send the the MIL's as soon as you can. Or; you might file a legal notice with court saying they did not respond to the ccp 96. Nice work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait a few more days and see if you don't get a response.  If you do not, You should argue that plaintiff is precluded from offering any documents or witnesses at trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well congratulations; you won this case. They cannot enter ANY evidence at all against you. Your main focus now should be that they cannot be permitted to introduce evidence at trial. You could keep your arguments in the MIL's and trial brief, but now; state the fact that they did not comply with the ccp 96 as the first statement in these writings. You might find some case law on plaintiff's not complying with the ccp 96 (just in case). Once the plaintiff receives copies of your MIL's stating they did not comply with the ccp 96, they should dismiss (no sense going to trial with no evidence) Usually people file MIL's as late as possible (to hide their strategy) but in your case this will not be necessary. I would send the the MIL's as soon as you can. Or; you might file a legal notice with court saying they did not respond to the ccp 96. Nice work.

 

Hello Anon thanks for the response.  I'm still a little confused, on whether I should or should not use elements in ASTMedic's trial breif and MIL.  His MIL attacks the Affidavit in Lieu of Testimony and his Trial brief attacks the other documents the Plantiff has submitted as evidence.  However since the JDB failed to comply CCP96 and can submit no evidence, I don't see how the arguments in ASTMedic's Trial brief and MIL apply to me anymore.  Or should I just fill out my trial brief based on the documents I received during discovery?

 

Thanks again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello Anon thanks for the response.  I'm still a little confused, on whether I should or should not use elements in ASTMedic's trial breif and MIL.  His MIL attacks the Affidavit in Lieu of Testimony and his Trial brief attacks the other documents the Plantiff has submitted as evidence.  However since the JDB failed to comply CCP96 and can submit no evidence, I don't see how the arguments in ASTMedic's Trial brief and MIL apply to me anymore.  Or should I just fill out my trial brief based on the documents I received during discovery?

 

Thanks again

If arguments in ASTMedic's trial brief and MIL's apply to your case; then nothing has happened that changes that, the arguments are still valid. You have just been gifted MORE ammo from the bottom feeder is really all that has happened. You could still use his arguments (and case law)if it fits your case; but just put this new argument (failure to comply with the ccp 96) ahead of them, and mention it first. This way maybe you have 1, 2, and 3 good arguments (or whatever the case may be) because you never know what might happen. I would not can a good argument just because I found a better one; I would just place the strongest argument first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or should I just fill out my trial brief based on the documents I received during discovery?

 

Thanks again

I think you should file MIL's based on the documents you received in discovery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A defendant (plaintiff's should to) always cover every base and argument possible. I would start out your brief as if they had no evidence what so ever. However what happens then if the judge improperly gives them a pass? So you argue an alternative just in case. I have seen trial briefs, motions, etc in some really complex litigation that have dozens of alternative arguments.

Share this post


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