Dotheyeverstop?

Sued by Midland Funding Court date in 31 days....

Recommended Posts

I was sued by Midland Funding -Open Books Account- Trial date set for November 10

 

Today is 31 days out and I received their CCP 98 today;

 

I did send a CCP 96 overnight mail to be delivered tomorrow (day 30).

 

I am going to subpeona Andy MIn who submitted the declaration at the closest of the 5 addresses listed and will file a motion in limine After he can't be served.  

 

My questions are about the paperwork I received today:

An Affidavit Signed by Tina Weedin of Missouri

   She's a robo-signer as I've seen her name listed on this forum many times starting as far back as 2012.  Also her information is incorrect...can I subpeona her or have her affidavit thrown out in the motion in limine or is it a trial defense (wrong information) that I have to wait to use?

An Affidavit of Sale of Account by Original Creditor signed by Patricia Hall stating transferred records are true.   Signed in SD.  

Bill of Sale and Assignment stating records were kept and reflect all material in the banks data base by Patricia Hall

Certificate of Conformity saying the stuff regarding Patrica Hall conforms with SD laws.

How do I get these things thrown out?

This is the first time I've seen the Affidavits as the evidence sent in discovery had only the copied billing statements.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dotheyeverstop?
 

An Affidavit Signed by Tina Weedin of Missouri.   She's a robo-signer as I've seen her name listed on this forum many times starting as far back as 2012.  Also her information is incorrect...


Can you redact your information from the above affidavit and post it here?  Why do you say her info is incorrect?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Affidavits are inadmissible at trial unless not objected to, California evidence code 1200 Elkins v Superior Court.

You don't know if they will try to introduce the affidavit until they answer the ccp 96.

You would also file an objection to the bill of sale as well. You would have to show that it does not meet the business records exception to hearsay. And it is irrelevant if it doesn't show your account number etc.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

She states that she is an employee of citibank and that her job includes reviewing and obtaining account information in Citibanks records...

....The Account information reflects that the Account was opened on 12/1/1991 and reflects that the Account holders name was XXX x Married name.

In 1991 I was a 20 year old single female.   That wasn't my name.   So her information is not correct

The Affidavit was included with the declaration in Lieu of Testimony as an exhibit.  All of the documents I'm questioning were included.

That's where I am confused.   Do I include the above referenced affidavits in the motion in limine or do I object to them individually as a separate matter?

Andy Min can not testify about the above mentioned documents if they are not admitted, correct?  He works for Midland.   I just need to be sure they don't slip them in somehow (like by attaching them to the ccp 98)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dotheyeverstop?

 

Can you redact your information from the above affidavit and post it here?  Why do you say her info is incorrect?

She states that she is an employee of citibank and that her job includes reviewing and obtaining account information in Citibanks records...

....The Account information reflects that the Account was opened on 12/1/1991 and reflects that the Account holders name was XXX x Married name.

In 1991 I was a 20 year old single female.   That wasn't my name.   So her information is not correct

The Affidavit was included with the declaration in Lieu of Testimony as an exhibit.  All of the documents I'm questioning were included.

That's where I am confused.   Do I include the above referenced affidavits in the motion in limine or do I object to them individually as a separate matter?

Andy Min can not testify about the above mentioned documents if they are not admitted, correct?  He works for Midland.   I just need to be sure they don't slip them in somehow (like by attaching them to the ccp 98)

Link to post
Share on other sites

She states that she is an employee of citibank and that her job includes reviewing and obtaining account information in Citibanks records...

....The Account information reflects that the Account was opened on 12/1/1991 and reflects that the Account holders name was XXX x Married name.

In 1991 I was a 20 year old single female.   That wasn't my name.   So her information is not correct

The Affidavit was included with the declaration in Lieu of Testimony as an exhibit.  All of the documents I'm questioning were included.

That's where I am confused.   Do I include the above referenced affidavits in the motion in limine or do I object to them individually as a separate matter?

Andy Min can not testify about the above mentioned documents if they are not admitted, correct?  He works for Midland.   I just need to be sure they don't slip them in somehow (like by attaching them to the ccp 98)

 

I'm not familiar with California's procedure.  I believe you can object & strike the affidavits in a Motion in Limine.  Also, if the affidavits have defects in form & substance, then you can add those points along with the hearsay objection.  Meaning, if they have your name wrong, amount due, dates, etc... and/or including 'best of my knowledge" or based on 'information and belief', you can object to the form & information provided, as it shows they are untrustworthy.  Obviously, you'll want to research Cali case law for reference.

 

Maybe @calawyer or @Anon Amos can chime in here regarding the best thing to do in California.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Affidavit was included with the declaration in Lieu of Testimony as an exhibit.  All of the documents I'm questioning were included.

That's where I am confused.   Do I include the above referenced affidavits in the motion in limine or do I object to them individually as a separate matter?

 

 

Your Motion In Limine should actually be titled "Objection" (same doc, different title); it will be to preclude the declaration in lieu and all attachments.  Take a look at some examples posted by CA members.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anon has it right.  Affidavits are inadmissible at trial unless not objected to.  Elkins v Superior Court is your case.

 

I think it is better to call it an objection to Declaration instead of a Motion in limine but the document is exactly the same.  You will object to the CCP 98 declaration citing Target Bank and Rodgers if the declarant cannot be served.  You will also have a one paragraph objection to the declaration of Tina Weedin on the ground that affidavits are not admissible at trial.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

LAST PAYMENT WAS may  2010 it states on your 1st doc. Is this California? Does that mean the SOL has run out? That was over 4 years ago. But did they serve you prior to this date? I am going to assume they did as if you have a Nov. court date, it must of been given over a year ago as the courts in CA are backed up for a year.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you all so much!   Knowing that they were trying to slip that in through a backdoor, but having no idea how to stop it, was driving me batty.   I am exhausted today and will surely mess up anything I try to research and/or write, so I'm going to put it to rest until tomorrow and then start working on my objection to declaration, trial brief and get the subpeona ready to be served on the day we hit 20 days out.   @credit2011 The suit was filed on 12/05/2013.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just looked up the judg'es rules of court and all motions must be filed 20 days prior to trial.   Soooo, that kind of messes me up with using the subpeona as a cause.   I can maybe get around that due to the timing of the service, but in reading this CCP 98 I discovered that every single one of the addresses listed for service are c/o someone.

 

example:  Andy Min, Legal Specialist, Midland Credit Management, Inc.  c/o Steve Levy, Esq., xxx E. washington blvd suite 290 XXXXX ca 

 

Can I argue that he didn't follow CCP 98 in that he did not provide an address for personal service within 150 miles of the court?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just looked up the judg'es rules of court and all motions must be filed 20 days prior to trial.   Soooo, that kind of messes me up with using the subpeona as a cause.  

 

You shouldn't serve the subpoena until 20 days before trial, but you might be able to get away with filing an Objection within the 20 days.  If necessary, I would bring copies to trial and hand them out there, and if push came to shove, I'd just make the objection orally at trial.

 

 

in reading this CCP 98 I discovered that every single one of the addresses listed for service are c/o someone.

 

example:  Andy Min, Legal Specialist, Midland Credit Management, Inc.  c/o Steve Levy, Esq., xxx E. washington blvd suite 290 XXXXX ca 

 

Are any of the addresses within 150 miles of court?  I'd pick one address and have personal service attempted there before leaving the subpoena with someone else.  (I'd leave out the c/o.)

 

 

Can I argue that he didn't follow CCP 98 in that he did not provide an address for personal service within 150 miles of the court?

 

Yes, after you've made the attempt(s), via your Objection.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@string

 

I will have a summons served on pretrial day 20, Looking up civil codes for objection per my local court rules, I can state legal basis only, no arguments so I'm trying to format the Objection(s)  on one doc and write the arguments at the same time on another doc.    Objections must be filed in a timely manner...that leaves a bit of wiggle room.   I plan on serving the subpoena and filing the Objection on the same day, making it day 20 pre-trial.    I want to object to the qualifications of the person making the declaration, as I've read that Midland often has this person testify via phone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A Quick rant about Midland Funding LLC:    I am recently separated from my husband, I am the sole defendant in this suit, I make 700/per month own an eleven year old vehicle and nothing else.    If I were to lose I could and would stop any wage garnishment, and there is NOTHING to put a lien on.   So why are they pursuing?   My only guess is that they hope to garnish the joint account my husband and I still hold, (It would be illegal and unethical to close said account in the middle of a law suit)  , in an effort to take HIS money.  Or perhaps they want to do the same with my daughter's college fund account.    SCUM   and both of those tactics are easily (legally) subverted.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They filed the suit ahead of the SOL running out, they just want the judgment. You may not have anything they can garnish right now, but they'll sit on that judgment and hope you have some money they can take in the future. A person not having money only makes for a more attractive target in their eyes: such a person is less likely to have the resources to get a lawyer and fight them > they want easy cases. Scum indeed.

 

You're already a thorn in their side by denying their claim and getting yourself educated on defending against these low-lifes.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In his declaration in lieu of testimony are the following 2 paragraphs:

8. “MCM’s records state that MCM or its agents made demand for payment of the balance herein prior to making this affidavit and defendant(s) failed to make full payment of the amount owed on the account” 

9. MCM's records state that there is no record of an active dispute or of a prior unresolved dispute.

 

I'm going to assume this is to try to show Account Stated in the event that the card statements are thrown out.   I told them in discovery that I had never seen the letters, and therefore could not dispute their validity.  Should I object to the letters while I object to the rest of the Declaration in Lieu or should I let it go?   Also if I object, on what basis?   Basically it's their word that they were mailed against mine that I didn't get them, 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index.cfm?title=three&linkid=rule3_1354

 

This is where I got the format and why I only posted code and not arguments.   Am I using the wrong format?

 

Looks like that rule refers to objections to evidence on a motion for summary judgment.  I'd search for examples from other CA posters (including MILs - just don't title it MIL) and format off those.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks@Anon Amos and @string it's actually a lot easier the way Astmedic formatted, AND I can argue that way.   I plan to have this ready before Monday (day -20) so that I can file it as soon as subpoena isn't served...then get my trial brief in by about day 7.   I'm a little curious as to why I've yet to receive a settlement offer.   That seems a little strange all things considered.   Taking today off from this to celebrate my daughter's birthday.   Thanks for all your help...AGAIN!

Link to post
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.