If things do not work out for you!

[Beergoggles]

If you use something from someone else's thread or take advice from some here you do so at your own risk.  Do not blame that person for your outcome.  We are not responsible for what you file with the courts or opposing party only YOU are responsible.  I for one will feel no sorrow for you if you used something out of my threads and it did not work out for you.  The things in my thread are just that,  mine.  Every case and judge is different, and so are the laws and rules of procedure, as well as the interpatation of those by each judge.

 

[Credator]

Ditto.

 

If someone doesn't like my posts, that are based on my experiences, I would recommend that they do not read my posts. They are always welcome to go out and get their own hard won litigation experiences.

 

If someone blames others for their failures I would think that things are not likely to improve for them any time soon.

 

The hope I found by purchasing the scribblings of someone that claimed to have "been-there-done-that" kept me in the game long enough to figure out what was useful and what was a waste and thereby encouraged me to work hard to figure out what it takes to win in litigation.

 

If someone is unwilling to do their own research/work or write a check to a competent attorney I have no idea why they would believe they deserve to win.

 

Forums like this are not fit for use by other than responsible, thinking adults.

[Savoir]

What prompted this thread?

[HotWheels96]

What prompted this thread?

I also would like to know what caused this. It should go without saying that people should listen to other posters at their own peril. This applies to all posters here no matter how experienced they are; from A Creditors Nightmare to Zeke.

 

Choosing to blame others for your failure is unfair and despicable. It's the reason we put our disclaimers in our signatures in the first place.

[hot in az]

I will be honest and tell you I prompted this thread. I PM'd BG about my situation and how part of what happened pertained to advice I was given to do what he did.  I never had any contact or advice from BG because while my case was going on he was moving and not on this forum.

I also told him I did NOT blame him for my situation but only to make sure that all the newbies from AZ don't make a mistake or do everything based on what he did.  I specifically refer to Stomp's thread # 38 in which BG says "See my threds(his spelling) I beat them twice at the same time. Just wanted to say every case IS different

 

I agree that we have to be diligent in figuring out what to do in our own case and it is hard work. I think this is a great support group for people and a wonderful resource of information.  I hope that I helped in letting fellow members know that we are here to help but not responsible if you take our advise and like BG said It doesn't work out for you.

Hope you all appreciate my honesty and understand I was not attacking BG. Thanks  Hot in Az

[Harry Seaward]

I will be honest and tell you I prompted this thread. I PM'd BG about my situation and how part of what happened pertained to advice I was given to do what he did.  I never had any contact or advice from BG because while my case was going on he was moving and not on this forum.

I also told him I did NOT blame him for my situation but only to make sure that all the newbies from AZ don't make a mistake or do everything based on what he did.  I specifically refer to Stomp's thread # 38 in which BG says "See my threds(his spelling) I beat them twice at the same time. Just wanted to say every case IS different

 

I agree that we have to be diligent in figuring out what to do in our own case and it is hard work. I think this is a great support group for people and a wonderful resource of information.  I hope that I helped in letting fellow members know that we are here to help but not responsible if you take our advise and like BG said It doesn't work out for you.

Hope you all appreciate my honesty and understand I was not attacking BG. Thanks  Hot in Az

 

Props for owning up to it, Hot.

It might help others facing a similar situation to know exactly went down that was not to your expectation, but I'd understand if you don't want to get into the details.

[racecar]

I have seen people use the same defenses or cases over and over some win their case some lose. WHY??

The judge may be friends with the plaintiff's attorney.

The judge may be having a bad day and wants to clear his docket.

The plaintiff may have the goods on you.

You may not have presented any valid defenses.

You were not prepared for court.

Did I mention you were not prepared for court.

The judge may not like your hair or the color of your suit or your Metallica tee shirt or your cell phone ringing, bad paperwork, bad court manners, not following the rules of the court.

There are hundreds of reasons why someone wins or loses.

You never have a second chance to make a first impression.

BTW there was nothing wrong with beergoggles case he convinced the judge the debt was not his and defeated midland twice and got paid for doing it.

[texasrocker]

Remember you can always lay the groundwork for an appeal by objecting to everything a JDB attorney presents so if the initial outcome is not favorable you still have a chance to win.

[Spikey]

I've found the tricky thing with helping people is to make it as clear as you can that something you've provided to them is just a sample and they need to use it as such, not a mad libs document they can just change the names and submit. Every case is different, every court is different, every judge is different. Treat it as such or you will probably lose.

[bmc100]

I agree with this thread. As I PM with other posters who try to help newbies, I am always saying how some posters on here just cut and paste what they find on here into their pleadings. As I posted into my sticky in the first post, the top 3 reasons why posters lose in court are posters who do not want o take the time to learn and want other people to do the work for them.

 

Most importantly, they do not learn the RCP for their state.

[HotWheels96]

posters who do not want to take the time to learn and want other people to do the work for them.

This happens to be one of my biggest pet peeves about boards like this. I've been tempted on several occasions to say something to posters like this but I refrain. None of this is easy, because if it was, the default rate wouldn't be what it is. It takes time, oh boy does it take a lot of time, energy, research, and even money. It takes patience on the part of your family and friends and it takes learning some hard lessons sometimes.

We are all responsible for our own cases and all posters, from the n00bs to the tried and true would do well to keep this in mind. I'm incredibly thankful for this board and the posters on it for all the help but I do my very best to try to find the information out for myself.

At this point, I have a small library of books from Thomas Reuters, my very own account with a well known 'mail from home' business (Post Offices aren't typically accessible for wheelies like myself) for sending certified mail in my pajamas, and usually have what my family jokingly refers to as my command center...which is multiple computers side by side dispatcher style for easy research/legal paper drafting mode.

We all MUST do what gives us our most likely chance to win based on our resources. And we all MUST remember that even if what you are told seems to be absolutely what you need, you need to research until you're really sure, and even then accept that some judges don't care about the laws.

Failure happens and we need to accept that it does and do our best to learn from it and even let others know about it just in case it can save them from the same pitfalls.

[Credator]

...

At this point, I have a small library of books from Thomas Reuters, my very own account with a well known 'mail from home' business (Post Offices aren't typically accessible for wheelies like myself) for sending certified mail in my pajamas, and usually have what my family jokingly refers to as my command center...which is multiple computers side by side dispatcher style for easy research/legal paper drafting mode.

...

Failure happens and we need to accept that it does and do our best to learn from it and even let others know about it just in case it can save them from the same pitfalls.

This explains your wins. At least to me. Dedication and taking the matter of winning seriously. Very seriously.

 

Failure happens. Make sure it happens to the other guy.

 

If a party has not had opportunity to correct a judge's erroneous decision on more than one occasion they should consider themselves lucky or possibly in their first litigation defense. YMMV

 

The simple explanation to my wins: I want it more than opposing counsel. Opposing has wanted it pretty bad in my cases. Hopefully others will have a bit less dedicated opponent. But I would not bet on it. I'd plan on hard work, lots of hard work.

 

Family is a factor. Friends, not so much. Most still believe the promoted fiction that the global financial meltdown was caused by wannabe homeowners taking out more loan than they could afford. I regularly dissuade them of that fantasy.

 

When we get to the point where we can be confident that a jury of our peers will rule correctly on the facts in a collection case then we will know that the tide has turned and the rule of law is becoming a respected idea. I do not believe we are close to that point so I will let the judge try to follow the law and the evidence and assist in correcting any errors.

[Spikey]

 I'd plan on hard work, lots of hard work.

 

There is no shortcut to winning, just hard work. If you don't prepare for the worst case scenario, which is usually going to trial, then you really stand no chance at all.

[Flyerfan]

Couldn't agree more. Working hard and keeping up with your case is what it is all about.

 

That being said, acting, dressing and speaking professionally and intelligently is not often talked about. (Saw something on a show that prompted this thought).  I don't care how much you know or even whether you are right or wrong, if you show up to court in shorts, flip flops and a Pink Floyd concert shirt (no offense to Floyd \m/) and say "like" and "dude" every third word or can't articulate one coherent sentence, the judge will not want to listen to a word you say and you will lose.

 

Call it profiling or discrimination, whatever, you will lose. Present yourself as an attorney at all times. I dressed in a full suit just to drop papers off to the clerk. I also wore a suit to hand deliver papers to the plaintiff's attorney.

 

Dress, act and speak like a winner if you want to be one.

 

My two cents.

[debtzapper]

There is a saying among lawyers that "the law is a  jealous mistress."   I have known and or worked for a number of personal injury and criminal defense lawyers.  There were very few of them who did not work 10-12 hour days, 6 days a week.  Pro se litigants can be expected to do no less.

[racecar]

 zapper you left out the bramble bush book.

http://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-bramble-bush-9780195368451;jsessionid=2B597701D8E1D6DD9DB180932917CA03?cc=us〈=en&

[ASTMedic]

Couldn't agree more. Working hard and keeping up with your case is what it is all about.

 

That being said, acting, dressing and speaking professionally and intelligently is not often talked about. (Saw something on a show that prompted this thought).  I don't care how much you know or even whether you are right or wrong, if you show up to court in shorts, flip flops and a Pink Floyd concert shirt (no offense to Floyd \m/) and say "like" and "dude" every third word or can't articulate one coherent sentence, the judge will not want to listen to a word you say and you will lose.

 

Call it profiling or discrimination, whatever, you will lose. Present yourself as an attorney at all times. I dressed in a full suit just to drop papers off to the clerk. I also wore a suit to hand deliver papers to the plaintiff's attorney.

 

Dress, act and speak like a winner if you want to be one.

 

My two cents.

 

This was something I learned in my trial. Not that I didn't know it to be true already but when you hear people sitting behind you comment that they "thought he was a lawyer" it really makes it hit home.

 

This happens to be one of my biggest pet peeves about boards like this. I've been tempted on several occasions to say something to posters like this but I refrain. None of this is easy, because if it was, the default rate wouldn't be what it is. It takes time, oh boy does it take a lot of time, energy, research, and even money. It takes patience on the part of your family and friends and it takes learning some hard lessons sometimes.

We are all responsible for our own cases and all posters, from the n00bs to the tried and true would do well to keep this in mind. I'm incredibly thankful for this board and the posters on it for all the help but I do my very best to try to find the information out for myself.

At this point, I have a small library of books from Thomas Reuters, my very own account with a well known 'mail from home' business (Post Offices aren't typically accessible for wheelies like myself) for sending certified mail in my pajamas, and usually have what my family jokingly refers to as my command center...which is multiple computers side by side dispatcher style for easy research/legal paper drafting mode.

We all MUST do what gives us our most likely chance to win based on our resources. And we all MUST remember that even if what you are told seems to be absolutely what you need, you need to research until you're really sure, and even then accept that some judges don't care about the laws.

Failure happens and we need to accept that it does and do our best to learn from it and even let others know about it just in case it can save them from the same pitfalls.

 

I've noticed a few as of late that are locking up once they get to a point where they can't just use simple discovery and have to actually write docs that are specific to their case. They start to become a bit heated that they don't fully grasp the process of law and that we are unwilling to type it out for them. I spent an easy 2-3 hours, after working a 12 hour shift, working on docs or studying so I understood what I had to argue before the judge.

[Spikey]

This was something I learned in my trial. Not that I didn't know it to be true already but when you hear people sitting behind you comment that they "thought he was a lawyer" it really makes it hit home.

 

The court clerk mistook me for a lawyer. I guess most pro se's don't dress up.

[Anon Amos]

When we get to the point where we can be confident that a jury of our peers will rule correctly on the facts in a collection case then we will know that the tide has turned and the rule of law is becoming a respected idea. I do not believe we are close to that point so I will let the judge try to follow the law and the evidence and assist in correcting any errors.

I personally would always demand a jury, of course this would definitely not be for everyone. Opposing council had a fit over the jury request, getting rid of the jury was almost his main focus.

My court is extremely corrupt and a mere extension of the debt collection industry, so I really did not feel there was a choice in choosing the jury. I had seen the judge many times in court and he does not act the same way when there is a jury and court reporter present.

[Credator]

Some believe that I am somehow jaded/angry/bitter/whatever because I point out the truth that all attorneys I have opposed have lied in the record before the court. I do not point this out because I dislike all attorneys or that any of these attorneys have ever won litigation against me. I point it out because it is likely the reality of what you will face in court. It is what it is. When opposing is comfortable lying and they have a bar card the presumption in court is that they are telling the truth. This causes me to have to work that much harder to prevail.

 

There are books, ebooks, law libraries, resources like Fastcase, Jurisdictionary, Google Scholar and online forums. Self represented never had it so good. Still, there is no easy button. Whining because opposing counsel is lying will get you nowhere. Documenting their lies in the court record might occasionally get you a bit of leverage.

 

Blaming others of course will get you nowhere in winning your case. Adults know this intuitively, responsible adults choose their battles wisely and play a top notch game in an effort to accomplish their goals.

 

Personally, I would always rather win than be accused of being a lawyer (no offense to Floyd lawyers ).

 

A big advantage self represented types have is this may be their only case they ever fight and they can afford to take it very serious and overwork to win their case. For the opposing DC attorney this is likely just another in a stack of DC cases. Although, in my experience,  they seem to take it rather personal when they lose.

 

The opposition's greatest strength is also their greatest weakness. They use templates and routine documents to great advantage and efficiency. When they cannot rely on those to win because we are mixing it up for them with a good defense and offense (well documented in the trial court record to preserve any necessary appeal) it consumes time and resources that they don't normally have to expend on a routine case. The effort or quality can show signs of being diminished. That makes sense. Everyone likes the low hanging fruit.

 

The downside is that they seem to take an engaged litigant kind of personal and they seem as hard to stop as they morph into a dedicated opponent. When that happens to me (seems routine) I take some satisfaction out of knowing that they have limited resources that would be better spent ($$$) harassing some poor consumer that would just default or fold on a flimsy plaintiff's MSJ. Instead they are tied up with little old me for what has been an average of almost 2 years and then they get to lose. That is not a great use of limited court resources by DC attorneys IMNSHO.

 

If you don't want to make the required effort or don't know what you are doing and are not willing to learn you should stay out of court. That applies to everyone whether bar members, non-bar members, court staff, or judges.

[Anon Amos]

I am often surprised at how long some people wait until they actually get their local court rules; and start learning the rules of evidence. It doesn't hurt if you watch some live cases as well, in fact it's probably one of the best things you can do. You can step into the court room and see how your nerves react; the more cases you watch, the more you will learn and the better you will feel when your time comes (if it does).

The law library is also a very important and often overlooked free resource.

[Anon Amos]

Some believe that I am somehow jaded/angry/bitter/whatever because I point out the truth that all attorneys I have opposed have lied in the record before the court.

Wow, I was under the impression that this was common knowledge to us all (that the lawyer will lie to the court). I didn't think (a jdb lawyer) could win without lying (unless by default or admission from defendant).

There are SOME very good (and honest people) that are lawyers however, I have a few friends that do fall into this category.

[Credator]

Wow, I was under the impression that this was common knowledge to us all (that the lawyer will lie to the court). I didn't think (a jdb lawyer) could win without lying (unless by default or admission from defendant).

There are SOME very good (and honest people) that are lawyers however, I have a few friends that do fall into this category.

Not all here seem to believe that my experience is typical. Hopefully most go into litigation with their eyes wide open.

Agree on the JDB lawyer thoughts. That is my impression of a JDB DC lawyer from the cases I have seen.

 

I personally would always demand a jury, of course this would definitely not be for everyone. Opposing council had a fit over the jury request, getting rid of the jury was almost his main focus.

My court is extremely corrupt and a mere extension of the debt collection industry, so I really did not feel there was a choice in choosing the jury. I had seen the judge many times in court and he does not act the same way when there is a jury and court reporter present.

Despite the favorable facts and law I am skeptical that a jury would be sympathetic to me on a OC collection suit YMMV. Perhaps in a JDB case I would receive better traction in the minds of the jury. IDK

 

It is good to know what concerns opposing as it can be used for leverage.

 

The judge probably has better focus when a court reporter is making a trial court record that can be used for appeal should it be required.

 

I have had successful cases against OCs without a jury. If someone knows of some successful cases defending against an OC or JDB where a jury was involved that they can share that would be of interest to me. Unfortunately the one that comes to mind is Coltfan (granted as plaintiff) with a jury. No real "jury joy" was had as it was reported.

 

A jury would seem to provide risks for both parties. This should lead to leverage for the defendant if opposing, for example, has a high level of anxiety over something being exposed they would prefer to keep private. If you have any dirty laundry (you are human, right?) expect to MIL away because I am suspicious that a jury trial will be an attempt at character assassination instead of an attempt by opposing to to argue their case based on their weak or non-existent merits and complete lack of supporting stare decisis.

[Anon Amos]

@Credator

Agreed. In terms of the jury; I am thinking (primarily) for jdb cases. I would want to know how the judge is before making the jury decision. If you have the right judge you are probably better off without the jury.

I don't think you will get sympathy from a jury, but then again I don't know how much respect Banks, Debt Collectors, & Lawyers (nothing against lawyers)will be able to get out of a jury either (especially in todays economy).

One thing for sure; the judge and lawyer will not band together and bully you in front of a jury (this is important to a very few defendant's that will have to experience a corrupt court (you don't even hear about that here).

In my case the jury trial added considerable leverage.

[Credator]

...

In my case the jury trial added considerable leverage.

Sweet!