Getting sued by Midland in Oregon, part 2

[midlandvictim638]

I've prepared my responses to the best of my abilities. I need to serve these today (9/23/13), it is the very last day allowed under ORCP. I think I can technically get away with filing the documents with the court on a later date as long as the service is performed on time, but that doesn't net me any benefit since I'll be out and about anyway (and I'm not taking any more chances).

 

 

Contents of 20130923 - anon - Response to Request For Admissions.docx

Defendant, xxxx, pro se, in the above action, makes the following responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Requests for Admissions:

 

1.       Admit that you had a credit account with CITIBANK.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

 

2.       Admit that you received a copy of the terms for the credit account.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

 

3.       Admit that under the terms of the Account, you agreed to pay for the credit balance on the Account.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

 

4.       Admit that you used the Account to obtain goods, services, or money.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

 

5.       Admit that you received periodic statements from CITIBANK regarding your account.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: OBJECTION - Assumes facts not in evidence that Defendant was the owner of the account, and therefore denies.

 

6.       Admit that you did not object in writing to any charges or fees on the Account within 60 days of the receipt of the periodic statement reflecting an allegedly disputed charge/fee.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

 

7.       Admit that you stopped making payments on the account.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: OBJECTION - Assumes facts not in evidence that Defendant was responsible for payments and made payments on the account, and therefore denies.

 

8.       Admit that you were notified that your account was in default.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: OBJECTION - Assumes facts not in evidence that Defendant was the owner of the account, and therefore denies.

 

9.       Admit that you are indebted to the Plaintiff, the lawful assignee of CITIBANK, for the full current Account Balance stated above.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

 

10.    Admit that you have no evidence to disprove or defend against Plaintiff's claims in the action.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

 

11.    Admit that under the terms of your agreement with the CITIBANK, you agreed to pay interest at the rate stated in the Complaint on the principle balance of your account, plus any additional court costs and attorney fees incurred to enforce the agreement.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: OBJECTION - Calls for a legal conclusion, the purvey of which is best left to the trier of fact.

 

 

Contents of 20130923 - anon - Response to Request For Production.docx

Defendant, xxxx, pro se, in the above action, makes the following responses to Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents:

 

1.       Any documents that relate or refer to the Plaintiff's claims or your defenses in this Action.

 

RESPONSE: Defendant is unaware of any such documents, therefore, Defendant is unable to provide Plaintiff with said documents.

 

2.       Any agreements, applications, statements, receipts, proofs of payment or other documents related to the Account.

 

RESPONSE: Defendant is unaware of any such documents, therefore, Defendant is unable to provide Plaintiff with said documents.

 

3.       Any correspondence with CITIBANK or the Plaintiff regarding the Account or this Action.

 

RESPONSE: Defendant is unaware of any such documents, therefore, Defendant is unable to provide Plaintiff with said documents.

 

4.       Any correspondence with anyone related to this account, including without limitation, any witnesses, professionals, and experts (whether they have been retained to testify or not).

 

RESPONSE: Defendant is unaware of any such documents, therefore, Defendant is unable to provide Plaintiff with said documents.

 

5.       Any documents you may present as evidence or exhibits in a trial of this Action.

 

RESPONSE: Defendant does not intend to introduce any documents at the time of trial. However, Defendant reserves the right to provide Plaintiff with such documents as may become available prior to the time of trial.

 

6.       Any reports or exhibits prepared by any expert or lay witnesses pertaining to this Action.

 

RESPONSE: Defendant does not intend to introduce any documents at the time of trial. However, Defendant reserves the right to provide Plaintiff with such documents as may become available prior to the time of trial.

 

 

Contents of 20130923 - anon - Certificate of service.docx

Defendant, xxxx, pro se, in the above action, under penalty of perjury, sent a true and exact copy of Response to Plaintiff’s First Request for Admissions and Response to Plaintiff’s First Request for Production of Documents with a copy of this certificate of service on September 23^rd, 2013, to Plaintiff’s attorney at the following address via USPS Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested:

 

Johnson Mark LLC

901 N Brutscher Street, Suite D, PMB 401

Newberg, OR 97132

 

 

The article number from the service label is:

 

______________________________________________

 

 

 

Hopefully I haven't done anything terribly wrong! Will what I have work okay? Any fixes/changes/other recommendations?

 

The only thing I really have a question about is in the Request For Admissions, #11. I'm not sure if I should object as I have it written, object with different wording, or simply deny.

 

I realized I never posted my answer to the summons. It was based on a template that racecar PM'd me. Should I post this, and if so, where?

 

 

Original thread: http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/321195-getting-sued-by-midland-in-oregon/

[midlandvictim638]

I added "Defendant therefore denies." to the end of my response to RFA 11, just in case.

 

Got all my paperwork together, mail in the envelope with CMRRR labels, and about to head to the post office and the courthouse. It almost looks professionally done. REALLY hoping I got everything right... It seems there's lots of room for subtle-yet-significant issues.

 

Now I need to work on my own requests for production and admissions...

[racecar]

11.  Admit that under the terms of your agreement with the CITIBANK, you agreed to pay interest at the rate stated in the Complaint on the principle balance of your account, plus any additional court costs and attorney fees incurred to enforce the agreement.

 

 

Response: The information known or readily obtainable by the Defendant is insufficient to enable a response to the request. Defendant denies the request until such time as sufficient information is known to make a different response

leaving Plaintiff to submit proof that it is true.

[midlandvictim638]

Oops, I forgot to subscribe to the thread.

 

In any case, too late to change it... I submitted the documents within the hour following my post. Hopefully it isn't too bad...

[racecar]

#6 in admissions

6. Admit that you did not object in writing to any charges or fees on the Account within 60 days of the receipt of the periodic statement reflecting an allegedly disputed charge/fee.

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

This is a trick question plaintiff got you to admit to the account.

I'm assuming your denying the account if not then its ok.

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED RESPONSE TO PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST REQUEST FOR ADMISSSIONS

Now that the undersigned has had the opportunity to review the case, Defendant moves for leave of this Court to amend its response to Plaintiffs’ Request for Admission No.6

[midlandvictim638]

UGH, the issues with these things are really subtle. I didn't think that one through. >_< I think my response to that should be something like "OBJECTION - Assumes facts not in evidence that Defendant was responsible for the Account and that Defendant received periodic statements for the Account."

 

This is the thread I based my responses on, because the poster (teachersrule) has (had?) a very similar case to mine (Midland and Johnson Mark LLC in Washington County, Oregon):

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/319539-please-review-answers-to-request-for-admissions-to-midland-funding-llc/#entry1234039

 

ORCP has this to say about amendments:

 

AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS

RULE 23

 

A Amendments. A pleading may be amended by a party once as a matter of course at any time before a responsive pleading is served or, if the pleading is one to which no responsive pleading is permitted, the party may so amend it at any time within 20 days after it is served. Otherwise a party may amend the pleading only by leave of court or by written consent of the adverse party; and leave shall be freely given when justice so requires. [...]

 

My response to Plaintiff's RFA strikes me as a pleading to which no response is permitted, so I should be able to just file an amendment, right? Can I call the courthouse for confirmation? Assuming I'm right with my thinking on that, I can just wait until I file my request for production / request for admissions tomorrow or early next week.

 

I can presumably also fix my response to 11 with an amended response.

 

Speaking of which, the post I was drafting last night on the matter...

 

As to my own requests for production/admissions, I've found these posts to chew on:

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/319912-being-sued-by-midland-funding-llc-halfway-through-hit-a-snag-in-discovery/page-3#entry1241057

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/314488-can-you-take-a-long-at-my-reqeust-for-productions/

http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/298428-defendants-request-for-admissionsproduction-of-documents-to-plaintiff/

 

I'm wondering a few things about the requests though:

 

Since there has been no evidence by Plaintiff, should I include anything referencing a forward flow agreement, or other documentation which I don't yet "know" exists? I don't even have a bill of sale or an affidavit, let alone a contract, or anything else.

 

From the first link, what the logic is behind 11 and 12? Why is it important that Defendant has retained monthly statements for an "unreasonable amount of time"? Why would Plaintiff have evidence that Defendant has retained anything at all, even under normal circumstances?

 

I have to get ready for work now. I'll draft something together some time after work and ask more specific questions then.

 

Thanks for your and others' ongoing assistance, by the way! This forum is nothing short of an incredible help. I'd be royally screwed without resources such as this.

[racecar]

Why is it important that Defendant has retained monthly statements for an "unreasonable amount of time"? Why would Plaintiff have evidence that Defendant has retained anything at all, even under normal circumstances?

 

its receipt and retention by the debtor without objection

 

 

"An account stated is an agreement between persons who have had previous transactions of a monetary character fixing the amount due in respect to such transactions and promising payment." Steinmetz v. Grennon, 106 Or. 625, 634, 212 P. 532.

 

 

The owner maintains that no implication of account stated arises when the relationship of the parties is governed by the terms of a special contract. By "special contract", in this connection, we assume is meant an express contract, out of the performance of which the account arose. In such case, if the account is at variance with the terms of the contract, its receipt and retention by the debtor without objection raises no implication of assent by such debtor to its correctness. Blanck v. Pioneer Mining Co., 93 Wash. 26, 159 P. 1077; Valley Lumber Co. v. Smith, 71 Wis. 304, 37 N.W. 412; Newburger-Morris Co. v. Talcott, 158 N.Y.S. 785.

 

In this case, defendant's affidavit claimed that he was not liable for some of the charges upon which plaintiff was suing. It follows that there was no "agreement * * fixing the amount due," and that there was therefore no account stated.

Plaintiff maintains, however, that defendant had acquiesced in the account by failing to object to it, thereby converting it into an "account stated." It is true that an 494*494 account stated may be created by the failure to object within a reasonable time to a repeated billing. Crim v. Thompson, 98 Or. 599, 613, 193 P. 448 (1920). However, there is nothing in the facts shown by the affidavits in this case to suggest that it was reasonable to expect defendant to have objected to the billings. If, for instance, defendant was an agent for the company which he claims is responsible for a portion of the account, there might have been no reason for him to object. His first reason to object did not arise until he learned that plaintiff felt he was personally liable for the entire amount.

The plaintiff's claim was on an "account," not an "account stated." It follows that defendant was entitled to dispute the amount he owed on the account.

ORS 18.105(3) authorizes summary judgments where "there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and * * * the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law." The affidavits establish that there was a genuine issue of fact as to the amount defendant owed on this account. Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment was properly denied.

[midlandvictim638]

I spent some more time analyzing my response to Midland's RFA. Other than fixing my responses to 6 and 11 of course, I think I should change my response to 9 from a denial to an objection.

 

9. Admit that you are indebted to the Plaintiff, the lawful assignee of CITIBANK, for the full current Account Balance stated above.

 

ADMIT OR DENY: DENY

 

It refers to Plaintiff as the lawful assignee of the (alleged) OC. This is something yet to be proved by Plaintiff, and by denying the admission, am I not admitting that portion, or at the very least being ambiguous as to what I'm denying? Should I instead put something like "OBJECTION - Assumes facts not in evidence that Plaintiff is the lawful assignee of CITIBANK, and therefore denies."?

 

 

This is what I have so far for my Request for Production of Documents:

(based on this post http://www.creditinfocenter.com/community/topic/319912-being-sued-by-midland-funding-llc-halfway-through-hit-a-snag-in-discovery/page-3#entry1241057)

 

Defendant requests the Plaintiff produce the documents and information described below in accordance with ORCP 36 and 43.  Defendant's request extends beyond all documents and information within Plaintiff's possession to include all documents and information within Plaintiff's custody or control and may, therefore, require Plaintiff or Plaintiff's attorney to seek and obtain the specifically requested documents and information.  This request will be satisfied by making the original documents and information available within 30 days at the residence of Defendant.

 

Finally, Defendant's request is intended to be continuing throughout the pendency of this action so that any new documents of information following within the classifications below should be forwarded to Defendant within 10 days after such document or information comes within Plaintiff's possession, custody or control and under no circumstances later than 10 days prior to the trial of this matter.

 

Defendant hereby propounds to Plaintiff the following Requests for Production of Documents to which it is to respond within thirty (30) days in accordance with Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure.

 

 

Requests for Production of Documents

 

1. The original application, bearing Defendant’s signature, establishing the Account.

 

2. The original written agreement in which Defendant allegedly assented to the terms of the Account.

 

3. Charge slips bearing Defendant's signature which establish use 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 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 canceled checks or copies of canceled 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.”

 

Chain of Custody and Forward Flow

 

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 document governing this transaction.

 

Other Related Documents

 

15. Any documents not specifically requested which Plaintiff may present as evidence or exhibits in a trial of this Action.

 

16. Any documents not specifically requested which relate or refer to Plaintiff’s claims in this Action.

 

I've found numerous other lists of things to request, but this set of requests seems to cover everything. I threw in 15 and 16 to reflect similar requests in Plaintiff's first RFP.

 

 

Here's the RFAs that I have so far, compiled from numerous posts and edited:

 

Admit that there is no written agreement between Defendant and Plaintiff.

Admit that Plaintiff and Defendant have not exchanged consideration, monetary or otherwise, which would create an agreement between both parties.

Admit that Defendant has not been provided a copy of the cardholder agreement or other governing document for the account.

Admit that Plaintiff is unable to provide a complete accounting for the amount claimed.

Admit that Plaintiff has not provided Defendant with proof of assignment.

Admit that Plaintiff does not have any monthly statements sent to Defendant.

Admit that as of the date Plaintiff filed the Complaint, it had no evidence admissible at trial that proves Defendant owes the debt.

 

Admit that Plaintiff is not a bank.

Admit that Plaintiff is not a savings and loan association.

Admit that Plaintiff is not a credit union.

Admit that Plaintiff does not accept deposits.

Admit that Plaintiff does not lend money or extend new credit.

Admit that Plaintiff purchases charged-off debts for not more than cents on the dollar.

Admit that under the terms of the agreement pursuant to which Plaintiff acquired the alleged debt of Defendant, it did not acquire copies of account applications, account agreements, or monthly statements.

Admit that when Plaintiff acquired the alleged debt of Defendant, all Plaintiff obtained was a computer printout of alleged debtors, addresses and identifying information, and the supposed balances owed.

Admit that Plaintiff did not receive any business records kept in the ordinary course of business by the bank that originally issued the credit card allegedly issued to Defendant.

 

In total, that's 16 RFAs out of the 30 I am allowed for the entire case (I think it's 30 - I need to find where this is set forth to make sure). I don't know if I want to lump them all together with the RFPs above, lump them together after I get Midland's response to my RFPs, or do the first group with the RFPs and the second group after I get their response (the disadvantage here being three filing fees instead of two).

 

 

Am I generally on the right track here?

 

I have until 10/14 to file my amended response, so I have more time to sort things out this time around. Though obviously, the sooner I file the better.

[midlandvictim638]

I think I'm going to go ahead and object to Plaintiff's RFA #9.

 

This is what I have currently for my RFA to send along with my amended response and RFP:

 

1. Admit that no affidavits or evidence were included with the Summons or Complaint.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

2. Admit that Plaintiff does not have a written agreement or contract, signed by Defendant, between the Defendant and the Original Creditor.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

3. Admit that Defendant has not been provided a copy of the cardholder agreement or other document setting forth the terms of the account.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

4. Admit that Plaintiff has not provided original documents, true copies, or authenticated records of application for credit which the alleged Original Creditor relied on, or a copy of any promissory note or other document indicating that Defendant agreed to be bound by any credit agreement.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

5. Admit that Plaintiff does not have any account application signed by Defendant.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

6. Admit that there is no written agreement between the Defendant and Plaintiff regarding this alleged debt.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

7. Admit that Plaintiff and Defendant have never signed a contract, or exchanged consideration, monetary or otherwise, creating an agreement between both parties.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

8. Admit that Plaintiff does not have custody or legible copies of any documents with Defendant's signature on it.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

9. Admit that Plaintiff is unable to provide a complete accounting for the amount claimed as the alleged debt.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

10. Admit that Plaintiff did not send the Defendant any notification of assignment of the account or assignment of rights or proof of assignment.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

11. Admit that Plaintiff does not have the original or a true copy of any assignment between CITIBANK and Midland Funding, LLC alleging the Defendant.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

12. Admit that Plaintiff did not receive any business records, kept in the ordinary course of business, by CITIBANK alleging issue of any credit card or alleged existence of any account, open or otherwise, with Defendant.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

13. Admit that Plaintiff is not in possession of any records of communication with CITIBANK regarding performed duties and obligations, pursuant to the alleged agreement with Defendant.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

14. Admit that as of the date Plaintiff filed the Complaint, no admissible evidence existed that proves Defendant owes any debt to the alleged Original Creditor.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

15. Admit that Plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim.

 

ADMIT OR DENY:

 

I'm going to file either tomorrow or Monday.

[racecar]

You always want to try and sneak in a request like Admit Defendant owes midland funding no money.

Just in case they don't answer your requests.

[midlandvictim638]

So I filed my things on the 14th. I now have an arbitrator assigned to my case (this happened on the 11th, but I didn't get the notice until the night of Monday the 14th). I have a couple of troubling issues now that I don't know how to deal with.

 

I received a letter in the mail instructing me to contact the arbitrator to schedule a hearing date. When I got in touch with them, I found out that the hearing had already been set for 11/21, without my involvement at all. Even if Plaintiff had received my requests for discovery, their 30 day window ends very near to the hearing date. I asked the arbitrator if I could get the date pushed out by 10 days or so, and they said I would need to ask the courthouse to change the date. I haven't been able to find any information about how to do this.

 

The other issue is, I have not received the signature receipt from plaintiff for my filing on the 14th. Every other time took at most 3 business days, it has now been 7. Should I re-send the papers to plaintiff? How does this affect their 30 day window to respond? I'm concerned that they will act as though nothing was sent to them...

 

Also, plaintiff's counsel has filed a motion for appearance by phone, since they are in Newberg and the arbitrator is in Portland. The arbitrator's assistant told me I can appear in person or by phone at my option, or I can submit a written opposition to plaintiff's appearing by phone by the end of the 28th. I haven't researched this at all yet.

[Spikey]

The other issue is, I have not received the signature receipt from plaintiff for my filing on the 14th. Every other time took at most 3 business days, it has now been 7. Should I re-send the papers to plaintiff? How does this affect their 30 day window to respond? I'm concerned that they will act as though nothing was sent to them...

 

Assuming you sent it CMRR through the post office, it can take 10 days or so to get the green card back. 7 days is more typical but it depends. Getting the green card back doesn't change the response window.

[TomnTex]

Force them to appear in person and not by phone. Very important you do so.

[BV80]

@midlandvictim638

 

If you sent the responses by certified mail, you can track your mail on the the USPS website. 

 

I don't see a problem with the attorney wanting to appear by phone.  If they had a witness, that's when you'd object to a telephonic appearance.

[midlandvictim638]

Wow, thanks for the replies you guys!

 

Yes I sent it CMRR. The USPS website says it was delivered on the 16th. (I didn't know you could track mail like that - cool tip!) I didn't think that the signature receipt would change their window for response--especially seeing as ORCP gives 3 additional days for service by mail--but I'm not sure what to do because without the return receipt, I don't have proof that they got the mail, and they might try to argue that they never received it. What's the worst that could come of a tactic like this? In thinking on it, the most it would do is give them grounds to ask for an extension on their response timeframe.

 

I agree with BV80 on his thinking, appearing by telephone is only really an issue if there's a witness. However, I only have until the 28th to say anything on the matter, which is well before the end of their 30 day response window. I don't think I have a way to know whether they plan to have any witnesses testify until they respond to my requests for discovery. Can I object and specify that my objection is conditional on their introducing witnesses?

 

I really would like to figure out how to push out the hearing date... I want to have enough time to analyze their response and formulate my defenses before the hearing.

[BV80]

@midlandvictim638

 

Is this mandatory arbitration ordered by the court?

[midlandvictim638]

Yep. In Oregon, civil cases for amounts less than $50,000 go to mandatory arbitration.

[BV80]

@midlandvictim638

 

We have mandatory arbitration in my state, as well.  You need to find out what takes place at the proceeding.  In my state, mandatory arbitration is nothing more than an attempt to settle the case outside of court.  We simply try to negotiate.  It is not a hearing on the merits of the case.

 

JDBs don't usually bring witnesses unless it's to a trial.  Even then, they don't always have a witness.  If your aribitration is actually a hearing, you might want to object to a telephonic appearance.  However, if it's merely an attempt to negotiate a settlement, I don't see why they'd have a witness.

[midlandvictim638]

Arbitration is in lieu of a trial with the courthouse. A binding judgment will be entered. I don't know how many proceedings there will be. When I spoke on the phone with the arbitrator's assistant, she referred to the event as a hearing.

 

Here's the relevant law: http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/36.400

 

I have more information collected at home that I'll be digging into further... I think arbitration follows a different set of rules than the UTCR.

[BV80]

@midlandvictim638

 

That appears to be more than a settlement negotiation.  If the attorney filed a motion for a telephonic hearing, and if you feel they might have a witness, you might be able to file a response to their motion objecting to a telephonic appearance on the basis that they have not yet responded to your discovery requests, and you don't know if they will have a witness.  I don't know if it would work, but you could try.

[Spikey]

Arbitration is in lieu of a trial with the courthouse. A binding judgment will be entered. I don't know how many proceedings there will be. When I spoke on the phone with the arbitrator's assistant, she referred to the event as a hearing.

 

Here's the relevant law: http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/36.400

 

I have more information collected at home that I'll be digging into further... I think arbitration follows a different set of rules than the UTCR.

 

Sounds similar to the mandatory arbitration we have here other than either side can throw the arbitrators ruling out for a fee and push the case to a trial.

[midlandvictim638]

@BV80

They didn't submit any evidence with the complaint, so I have absolutely no idea what they have or what they plan to do. I just don't want to get caught off-guard.

 

@Spikey

In Oregon you can pay a fee to get a trial de novo, which is handled by the court. The case with the arbitrator is sealed until after the new proceeding ends.

[Spikey]

@BV80

They didn't submit any evidence with the complaint, so I have absolutely no idea what they have or what they plan to do. I just don't want to get caught off-guard.

 

@Spikey

In Oregon you can pay a fee to get a trial de novo, which is handled by the court. The case with the arbitrator is sealed until after the new proceeding ends.

 

Do you still get a discovery period prior to the arbitration hearing?

[midlandvictim638]

Here's the rules governing arbitration in Oregon (UTCR chapter 13): http://courts.oregon.gov/OJD/docs/programs/utcr/2012_UTCR_ch13.pdf

 

This is what it says about discovery:

 

13.140  DISCOVERY

Discovery shall be conducted in accordance with Oregon Rules of Civil Procedure, and all

motions shall be determined by the arbitrator. The arbitrator shall balance the benefits of

discovery against the burdens and expenses. The arbitrator shall consider the nature and

complexity of the case, the amount of controversy, and the possibility of unfair surprise that may

result if discovery is restricted.

 

 

13.170 sets forth rules that work to ensure that no one gets caught off-guard about anything any party intends to introduce. However, the arbitrator has a lot of leeway about what is allowed and when, so it's possible that the plaintiff will be able to get away with not disclosing evidence ahead of time, and then introducing it at the hearing. I probably won't be able to defend myself if they do that and get away with it.

 

@Huey Pilot has been through Oregon's arbitration and calls it a thoroughly corrupt system, so I'm not going to be surprised by anything they pull. It sounds like filing for a trial de novo is pretty much a given outside of statute of limitations cases, at which point they're very likely to just dismiss the case.

[heartglass]

Good luck , I just went to Arbitration in Toledo last week , it was a total joke . They had requested telephonic appearance of the plaintiff and their so called witness from citi bank . The Arbitrator swore them in over the phone . pleeeezze really what a farce I knew I was screwed right then. Yes I had filed a motion in opposition to them using the phone it was denied. I have another Arb coming in Dec its just about paying the Oregon money machine , and then you have to file trial de novo ...

 

keep me up to date how it goes for you ...it feels like a total rights violation ...

Keep cool ...stick with whats on the record ....I was totally blindsided ....

SH