Jump to content

JDB lawyers paying shills to troll this board


Recommended Posts

I may or may not have run into a little troll of a man today from a law firm that represents a JDB. Towards the end of our convo (shout out to you if you're reading this or your little office lackey found it and printed it for you), seeing that I had zero intention of resolving a case where they have failed at proving standing, the attorney said (not verbatim) "I know who you are....you're xxxxxx (an old account that I've since changed the name from)...on creditinfocenter.com....I know what you said about me (I did call him a lying scumbag, but let's be call a spade a spade, shall we?)....you know that's a public forum don't you? That's public information (gee, no I didn't I don't have a fancy law degree to tell me that the internet is a public forum, thanks for your elucidation)." He even had a print out of (I'm assuming as he trolled through his pile to find a printout of something) it. He sure looked pissed! Hey, once again, if you're reading this, I'm sure your parents are super happy their son became a lawyer! Sure, it's too bad you did so not to better society but to work for an unethical junk debt buyer whose only motivation is to line their pockets, regardless of whether what they are doing is ethical or even valid, but hey--mazel tov!

Just thought I'd let folks know their writings here don't go unnoticed. Now, if only some of those lackeys he has trolling the net could have spent some time expediting paperwork that I requested over a year ago. Oh well!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We're well aware that sometimes people from the dark side wonder in.  There have indeed been instances where something a member posted here was used against them in court.

 

We encourage all members to be aware that this is a public forum and if you post information that can be used to identify you, it may come back to haunt you.

 

And, with that in mind, we also encourage posters to be civil...not only to each other, but to their opponents.  There have been instances where a member won their case in court but was awarded nothing because the jury did not offer them sympathy.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...We encourage all members to be aware that this is a public forum and if you post information that can be used to identify you, it may come back to haunt you...

 

I always recommend fudging innocuous details of a case or flat out omitting some in order to make identifying a poster difficult for any lurkers; dates (of some paperwork, maybe not so much of deadlines), names (ex. affidavit affiants), dollar amounts, etc. So long as the information posted can communicate what the poster is dealing with, then CIC members can understand and be able to help.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well said, @willingtocope.

 

Libel, slander and defamation lawsuits are increasing as a result of internet messages. I've had attorneys representing the other party that I thought were lower than pond scum, but I would never post their name online with a negative comment. Also, I was not their client so I could not offer a "client review." 

 

Everyone should be careful in their posts. The problem you are trying to resolve can become a far larger legal problem if you defame someone online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest usctrojanalum

In the future, I would highly suggest not calling any attorney, or anyone for that matter, a scum bag on this message board.  You set yourself up for something you might not want to get into.  He was telling you it's a public forum and public information because you are walking a razor thin line between voicing your opinion and libel/defamation.  I encourage everyone just be extremely extremely careful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I usually stick to the truth in my postings and in court.

 

A JDB or OC DC attorney wishing to successfully sue me must prove, by admissible evidence, EACH of the required elements of their alleged claims. Their subject matter expertise lies in lawsuits for alleged debts and their performance in many cases that I have read and/or experienced have not been all that impressive. By wandering off into another area of law I would think they will need to hire competent representation, if they really wish to prevail.

 

To assist those JDB and OC attorneys in avoiding bringing frivolous claims before an Arizona court, (as they routinely do in their debt collection attempts that I have seen and/or experienced) I am providing the following link: http://www.mitchell-attorneys.com/legal-articles/the-elements-of-a-defamation-claim-in-arizona/

 

I find that by telling the truth I don't have to worry too much about being extremely careful. YMMV

 

Who knew it was possible to "impeaches the honesty, integrity, or reputation of a person, or which is damaging to his professional reputation" regarding a JDB DC attorney. Perhaps someone has a case or three that they can point out in an effort to educate the board as to any success that a DC attorney has had on a defamation or similar lawsuit against a harassed and frustrated alleged debtor.

 

There was a online poster I recall that spat all over a DC attorney. I don't recall any defamation lawsuit being filed against that poster despite what *should* have been overwhelming admissible evidence. Although, I would recommend civility and maintaining a bit of privacy while posting online.

 

Any one can file a lawsuit for any reason. I find winning one to be a huge effort.YMMV

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heh. With the propensity of DC groups for hiring fresh out of law school, lots of their own debt, attorneys, we have an easy way to deal with our frustration with them.

 

I just call them boys and girls. Heck, they may be older than my youngest, but some I KNOW are younger than my oldest child.

 

It reminds me, too, of something they try really hard to forget: they took these jobs because they needed the money, and they were led to believe that they were dealing with debt dodging pond scum, themselves. And that most of the debt dodgers wouldn't even bother to respond to their suits. (That part is true, unfortunately.)

 

Suddenly, they're in court, with the person on the other side appearing to be a well spoken, decent human being, who believes that they, with their shiny new Bar memberships, are pond scum, themselves. Whether or not they are, in the final analysis, bad people, is between them and their consciences. What helps us is that most of them aren't very good attorneys. 

 

And really, we check insideARM for scoop. Why would we think they would not check here, at DB, or any other large forum for those fighting collection lawsuits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if calling the guy pond scum was the nicest thing to do, but it's not worth prosecuting, give me a break. Everything I said in terms of him lying was true. Lucky for me, NY is a state where only one person need know a voice recording is occurring. Meaning the person doing the recording. I have every conversation recorded with this company, and can show that what they said, and what they did, differ greatly. If calling that lying is a genuine offense, there is something further wrong with the judicial system than I already knew. If you don't like being called a liar, I think your best course of action is not to lie. Not lie, and then whine when you're called out for it. Why do so many who graduated law school seem like they forgot things they learned in Kindergarten? Uh oh, sue me lol!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Uh oh, sue me lol!

 

Be careful what you wish for. See:  http://jmorrisseylaw.com/john-morrissey-defamation-case.html

 

and:  http://rt.com/usa/yelp-critics-anonymous-court-387/

 

I'm certainly not a fan of junk debt buyers and their attorneys, but we can all share info and assist each other without trying to publicly defame someone. As a practical matter, its asking for trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be careful what you wish for. See:  http://jmorrisseylaw.com/john-morrissey-defamation-case.html

 

and:  http://rt.com/usa/yelp-critics-anonymous-court-387/

 

I'm certainly not a fan of junk debt buyers and their attorneys, but we can all share info and assist each other without trying to publicly defame someone. As a practical matter, its asking for trouble.

“They took three minutes out of their life to call me a thief and I had to spend three years of my life to get it removed,” he said. “It’s patently unfair.”

Welcome to the world of leverage. JDBs use lawsuits to wage war against clueless consumers. Some might even call it "unfair".

 

In Morrissey's case there was apparently an attempt to destroy his reputation and impair his income. I would want to review the case to better understand what actually happened. As I read the webpage story it appears that Morrissey spent $100k mostly on representing himself on a default judgment and a 2 day damages trial.

 

Even after he got a judgment against the brothers in October when they failed to respond to the lawsuit, Google refused to scrub the comments.

...

This month, after a two-day trial, a jury understood. Since Crow had already ruled that the brothers posted the defamatory comments, jurors were only asked to decide how much they should pay Morrissey for damaging his reputation.

...

This month, a jury agreed his reputation had been harmed and ordered Gerald and Jason Siew, brothers who posted the comments, to pay him $400,000 in damages.

...

Morrissey said he will head back to court to ask that the Siews also be forced to cover the roughly $4,500 he spent on court costs and more than $100,000 it cost him to represent himself.

 

An alleged debtor calling a JDB DC attorney names will likely only serve to increase their marketability and perceived value to their chosen clientele IMO. They are just being "aggressive".

 

I prefer prevailing in litigation to calling my opponent names. I prefer a very favorable settlement to litigation. I find my opponents often prefer to call me names and would rather litigate until they lose versus settle on my terms.

 

As a practical matter, suing an engaged opponent that knows the elements that must be proven and has the facts & the law on their side is asking for trouble. Big trouble.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest usctrojanalum

 

There was a online poster I recall that spat all over a DC attorney. I don't recall any defamation lawsuit being filed against that poster despite what *should* have been overwhelming admissible evidence. 

 

 

This poster also had 37k in attorneys fees awarded against him, almost solely because of the posts made on this board. seems like any defamation lawsuits would be moot after that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a online poster I recall that spat all over a DC attorney. I don't recall any defamation lawsuit being filed against that poster despite what *should* have been overwhelming admissible evidence. 

 

YET.  The case is ongoing and the SOL on filing that defamation and slander case has not expired.  Considering he is still running his mouth on the internet in a defamatory way all he is doing is extending their time to file.  

 

The First Amendment guarantees your freedom of speech but just because you CAN say something does not mean you SHOULD.  ANYTHING you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.  He found that out the hard way via a $37k award of attorney fees.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This poster also had 37k in attorneys fees awarded against him, almost solely because of the posts made on this board. seems like any defamation lawsuits would be moot after that.

I would distinguish between an appeal-exhausted award of attorneys against a plaintiff in a non-defamation lawsuit versus a plaintiff filing AND successfully prosecuting a defamation lawsuit by proving up all the elements. Attorney fee-shifting awards are pretty routine from what I have read and experienced. DC attorney defamation lawsuit wins do not occur nearly as often as attorney fee-shifting AFAIK.

 

Not every DC attorney is qualified to bring a successful defamation lawsuit (that can survive an appeal) against a cranky consumer alleged to owe some debt to some party. Those DC attorneys that believe they can prove, by admissible evidence, each of the elements of their claims should stop profiting by filing debt collection lawsuits that lack evidence to prove all their elements and often result in a default judgment and focus intensely on the "easy" money suing on alleged "defamation" (Although, self-represented attorney Morrissey did not make successfully suing on defamation sound like easy money in the webpage previously posted.). They should drop everything and sue that party that harmed their "reputation" as a debt collector (assuming such is even possible). They should also seek competent legal representation ASAP. As should everyone, defendant or plaintiff, that can afford such representation IMO.

 

...

Perhaps someone has a case or three that they can point out in an effort to educate the board as to any success that a DC attorney has had on a defamation or similar lawsuit against a harassed and frustrated alleged debtor.

...

Or perhaps there are no on-point DC collector defamation cases that did not settle out, were reversed on appeal, or have other clearly distinguished circumstances from those discussed on this thread. I would think it prudent to let the case law in my jurisdiction guide my decisions/behavior. Everyone is welcome to do as they see fit.

 

I would guess that defamation lawsuits are brought more often by alleged debtors than DC attorneys. I would also guess that they are not often successful. YMMV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(Although, self-represented attorney Morrissey did not make successfully suing on defamation sound like easy money in the webpage previously posted.). 

 

It should be pointed out that the Mr. Morrissey is NOT a debt collection attorney.  The two brothers who slandered him on line stated "he was a thief" and there is 100% NO truth to their claim.  He tried for months to get them to take it down and they refused to even respond.  This attorney is an estate attorney who was appointed by the court to clean up the messy estate the men's father had left upon passing.  The men were not even his clients they were simply unhappy that the final accounting did not leave them as much as they thought they were entitled to so they resulted to slandering and defaming the attorney for it.

 

They also never showed up for trial either to defend themselves.  Though based on their postings I don't know what defense they had.

 

Or perhaps there are no on-point DC collector defamation cases that did not settle out, were reversed on appeal, or have other clearly distinguished circumstances from those discussed on this thread. I would think it prudent to let the case law in my jurisdiction guide my decisions/behavior. Everyone is welcome to do as they see fit.

 

I would guess that defamation lawsuits are brought more often by alleged debtors than DC attorneys. I would also guess that they are not often successful. YMMV

 

Or perhaps if there are suits they were settled with non-disclosure clauses that resulted in the case being sealed along with the parties ability to discuss the outcome.  

 

My guess is that there aren't many because the majority don't stoop to the idiocy and risk level that one person did for their own ego stroking.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, in the final analysis, the point is that I'd rather win and get it done. I'm not a professional. Neither am I an attorney nor a person who makes her living from responding to civil suits and finding the holes in them so I can prevail.

 

I have an entire life outside of dealing with JDBs. And any action on my part that has the potential to extend that dealing, by giving them even a ghost of a reason to continue to pursue me for any reason at all, is a foolish action. I just want to win and have them go away.

 

I certainly understand that I MUST win before they'll go away; but why prolong the agony by being mouthy?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the information reported, John Morrissey appears to have had a solid claim, did not have to become a DC attorney to make a living, graduated with honors, opposing failed to defend and it still took him 3 years and $100k to get his win. This case as reported is instructive to me. I do not believe I would want to bring a defamation claim unless I had no other alternative.

 

Again, lacking any applicable DC attorney defamation case wins (it is obvious that Morrissey and the attorney fee-shifting poster referenced in this thread are not DC attorneys involved in defamation cases) I am left with the impression the risk of a defamation lawsuit by a DC attorney claimed in this thread is likely over-stated.

 

I believe it is already clear that I prefer the truth versus the lies and name calling made by my opponents and their DC attorneys in the court record. I am not impressed by defendants OR plaintiffs on the other side of my caption using bluster instead of case law to guide the court. Bluster to control someone that is making annoying comments/posts about a DC attorney is unnecessary and causes a loss of credibility IMHO.

 

Posting annoying stuff that is perceived as a risk to a forum owner may get a poster warned/banned from a board but I see no real purpose in speculating on what happens behind confidentiality agreements without being able to back it up with on-point cases supporting those theories.

 

Collection cases are typically won by an engaged party that has the better leverage. The main reason *I* would not speak ill (the truth being an exception) of a specific DC attorney in a public forum is that it *might* give them some leverage in my collection case. They may be able to bring in admissible evidence that paints me in a poor light to the court. By mentioning their name they may be able to locate my posts/comments online with greater ease.

 

My fear of a winning defamation lawsuit brought by a DC attorney (if such cases even exist) would not instruct my behavior anywhere near as much as my desire to deny opposing leverage while creating my own leverage.

 

There are many reasons to be civil: forum rules, decency, potential loss of leverage, and other reasons. Lacking several applicable on-point cases, the fear of a winning DC attorney defamation lawsuit brought against me would not be too high on my list of reasons to be civil. YMMV

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

YET.  The case is ongoing and the SOL on filing that defamation and slander case has not expired.  Considering he is still running his mouth on the internet in a defamatory way all he is doing is extending their time to file.  

 

The First Amendment guarantees your freedom of speech but just because you CAN say something does not mean you SHOULD.  ANYTHING you say can and will be used against you in a court of law.  He found that out the hard way via a $37k award of attorney fees.  

 

For those that are Plaintiffs AGAINST a JDB it really doesn't matter. FDCPA is strict liability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.