Dotheyeverstop?

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

Recommended Posts

Since you used the US post office's Express Delivery, I think you could explain that if you were ever questioned about the proof (I thought it was the correct proof of service because I did use the US postal Service").  So I would go ahead and drop a footnote in your trial brief that the CCP 96 response was sent by overnight mail.  Plaintiff's response was due on ____ and was not received until ____.

 

If you are asked for a proof of service and someone notices that it does not specify express mail very, explain as above.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

@sadinca

 

I sent mine Fed Ex overnight.  I used POS 40.   So then after tomorrow (20+2) they are done?  Sweet, then I will prepare my trial brief and be sure to send it on Monday morning.   As of today I have NEVER heard from these people outside of court documents.   Interesting way to do business.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Still chuggging along.   Sending trial brief today

 

I'd consider also doing an Objection/MIL to preclude plaintiff from offering any evidence or witnesses at trial.  Gives the judge something simple and straightforward to rule on (as opposed to your trial brief which likely sets forth every argument you have).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd consider also doing an Objection/MIL to preclude plaintiff from offering any evidence or witnesses at trial.  Gives the judge something simple and straightforward to rule on (as opposed to your trial brief which likely sets forth every argument you have).

Objection/MIL to the non answered CP96?  I could do that.   I did say in my declaration that the time frame for answering the 96 had passed with no response.   And I filed an objection to the Declaration in Lieu as well as all documents attached (their whole case)

Link to post
Share on other sites

My thought of the day:  Midland is not sending  an offer to settle, and is not dismissing the case because.....if I don't show up at court, they win.   Same bs tactics through out.   If you don't answer they win--if you don't object they get hearsay admitted and win--if you don't show up-- they win.  This is why people have been showing up at court and having the case dismissed when they get there, why didn't I see this before?  Makes me much calmer.  (if I'm wrong maybe don't tell me the real reason until after my court date)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

My thought of the day:  Midland is not sending  an offer to settle, and is not dismissing the case because.....if I don't show up at court, they win.   Same bs tactics through out.   If you don't answer they win--if you don't object they get hearsay admitted and win--if you don't show up-- they win.  This is why people have been showing up at court and having the case dismissed when they get there, why didn't I see this before?  Makes me much calmer.  (if I'm wrong maybe don't tell me the real reason until after my court date)

 

 

You are correct.  All you have to do is read the winners thread and see.

 

Having said that, you must still prepare for court.  You must understand the evidence and your objections.  You must be prepared for a last-minute request for continuance and come with copies of the California Rule of Court that says a continuance must be requested by written motion.  And you must think about what you will say if you are cross-examined.

 

Belt and suspenders time.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.  There's an example on my thread.

Thanks, I'll get that done and filed today.   The more I can pile on them the better.

 

You are correct.  All you have to do is read the winners thread and see.

 

Having said that, you must still prepare for court.  You must understand the evidence and your objections.  You must be prepared for a last-minute request for continuance and come with copies of the California Rule of Court that says a continuance must be requested by written motion.  And you must think about what you will say if you are cross-examined.

 

Belt and suspenders time.

Working on my trial binder now.   There's a whole lot of paper to go in there already :)   I've been researching cases at my local courthouse (only Midland so far) and in over 500 cases (3 months) only 3 people have taken them to trial.  All have lost BUT the first one lost on an answer in her interrogatories and the other 2 never objected to the Declaration in Lieu.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you again @calawyer!  I have edited the brief to match your wording.   I find it interesting that  the declaration states "For a reasonable period of time, during the 20 days immediately prior to trial I agree to accept service at any of the following locations:  (list of 5 locations and 5 c/o lawyers). Clearly he wants service to be accepted through a 3rd party.  These people have to know that they cannot accept service this way, so why bother?   And the 2 cases cited are pretty clear cut, I doubt you would even need the subpoena in order to win the objection.  Although, why tempt it?   

 

 

You might consider dropping a footnote somewhere in your objection:

 

If the Court needs any further proof that plaintiff did not make a good faith effort to comply with CCP 98, it can be found in the fact that plaintiff has given five address at which the witness purportedly may be served.  The witness must be served personally.  CCP 1987 (a).  Plainly, the witness can not be present at each location.  Nor should defendant be required to guess at which of these locations, if any, the witness may actually be found.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Got the CP96 response yesterday.   They mailed it on October 31st, which I believe puts them in the correct time line.  There evidence is :

1. Testimony of Plaintiff's Person Most Knowledgeable, employee of Midland Credit Management ("MCM") ....another unqualified witness who I'm sure I can shoot down the same way as the person who's Declaration they sent

2. Affidavit in Lieu....already objected to

3. Testimony of myself....cause apparently my words are going to change magically on the day of trial

4. Correspondence from them to me informing of new ownership and pre-legal review....already said I never got them

5. Another letter with a later date...again never got it

6. Yet another letter I didn't recieve

7. Final billing statement from OC....not sure what that is?   Maybe the paper they printed out with account info?

8. Billing statements for a year from OC...already objected to

9. Bill of Sale Already objected to

10. Data printed by Midland from records provided by OC...already objected to 

11. Affidavit of sale of Account by XXX  already objected to

12. Affidavit of sale of Account by XXX already objected to

13.-17 Discovery papers.

Nothing new here, except I think by mailing on day 20+2 they got it in on time.    Objection was already filed with the Declaration in Lieu and case law as well as Objections are ready to go.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Number 1 is objectionable.  CCP 96 says they must give you the names and addresses of witnesses they intend to call.  "Person most knowledgeable" is neither.  It is a vague description.

 

I did a letter to tweak plaintiff's that you can probably find if you search for "CCP 96 response".  Or you can just make up one of your own.  The letter just identifies the deficiency and states that you will object at trial to any attempt at calling a witness that was not properly identified in the CCP 96 response.

Link to post
Share on other sites

how is this:

 

Dear JDB,

 

this letter is to address the deficiencies found in your Plaintiffs response to Defendants ccp96.

 

CCP 96 requires Plaintiff  " serve on the undersigned, within 20 days, a statement of: the names and addresses of witnesses (OTHER THAN A PARTY WHO IS AN INDIVIDUAL) you intend to call at trial."

By stating that Plaintiff will use the "Testimony of Plaintiff's Person Most Knowledgeable, employee of Midland Credit Management ("MCM").) Plaintiff's failure to identify alleged witnesses it intends to call at trial  is prejudicial to defendant deprives him/her of the ability to prepare for trial and formulate a cross-examination specifically tailored to that person.  Please take notice that Defendant intends to object if Plaintiff attempts to call any of these witnesses at trial.

 

 

Defendant

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

how is this:

 

Dear JDB,

 

this letter is to address the deficiencies found in your Plaintiffs response to Defendants ccp96.

 

CCP 96 requires Plaintiff  " serve on the undersigned, within 20 days, a statement of: the names and addresses of witnesses (OTHER THAN A PARTY WHO IS AN INDIVIDUAL) you intend to call at trial."

By stating that Plaintiff will use the "Testimony of Plaintiff's Person Most Knowledgeable, employee of Midland Credit Management ("MCM").) Plaintiff's failure to identify alleged witnesses it intends to call at trial  is prejudicial to defendant deprives him/her of the ability to prepare for trial and formulate a cross-examination specifically tailored to that person.  Please take notice that Defendant intends to object if Plaintiff attempts to call any of these witnesses at trial.

 

 

Defendant

Sounds good!   My trial is on Monday though.   If I mail it, they probably won't read it before trial.   I think I will fax my letter to them and, if I can find a fax number, to the rent a lawyer they will be using.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@calawyer @Seadragon @RyanEX @Anon Amos

 

CCP96 states that:

 

(a) Any party may serve on any other party a request in substantially the following form: TO: ____________________________________________ , attorney for ____________________________________:
You are requested to serve on the undersigned, within 20 days, a statement of: the names and addresses of witnesses (OTHER THAN A PARTY WHO IS AN INDIVIDUAL) you intend to call at trial; a description of physical evidence you intend to offer; and a description and copies of documentary evidence you intend to offer or, if the documents are not available to you, a description of them. Witnesses and evidence that will be used only for impeachment need not be included.

 

if the ccp 96 that @Dotheyeverstop? and us received is only a laudry list of the items they intent to call use at trial but no actual documents were ever attached. this means that they did not actually comply to ccp 96.

or is this because they tried to slide it through their ccp 98?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@calawyer @Seadragon @RyanEX @Anon Amos

 

CCP96 states that:

 

(a) Any party may serve on any other party a request in substantially the following form: TO: ____________________________________________ , attorney for ____________________________________:

You are requested to serve on the undersigned, within 20 days, a statement of: the names and addresses of witnesses (OTHER THAN A PARTY WHO IS AN INDIVIDUAL) you intend to call at trial; a description of physical evidence you intend to offer; and a description and copies of documentary evidence you intend to offer or, if the documents are not available to you, a description of them. Witnesses and evidence that will be used only for impeachment need not be included.

 

if the ccp 96 that @Dotheyeverstop? and us received is only a laudry list of the items they intent to call use at trial but no actual documents were ever attached. this means that they did not actually comply to ccp 96.

or is this because they tried to slide it through their ccp 98?

I believe that items 2-17 are fine, if you've already received them via discovery and with the CCP 98.   It all comes down to getting the CCP 98 thrown out AND discrediting their affidavits of sale etc.   I doubt they will bother to even bring a witness, they are counting on the CCP 98.   Interestingly enough, they filed their POS of the 96 today, so I am going to not only send them a letter, but I will write an official objection to #1 to bring with me and file before court in case they do bring someone.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the ccp98 affiant reside in California? If their address is in another state then use the target v. rocha caselaw.

The 98 affiant gave his MCM address in San Diego which is more than 150 miles. Then 5 different c/o addresses. I used Rocha and I used CACH v. Rogers.   Cach v. Rogers was actually a case from my courthouse, although not my judge.  The affiants (2) in the bill(s) of sale are both out of state, so I will pull out those same cases again if it comes down to that.   My trial brief is very similar to the one homeless posted.   I will have each objection outlined in my book and I will have copies of all cases for the judge if asked.   I'm asking myself how low they'd have to go in a settlement offer in order for me to drop this.   I almost want to fight it regardless (if they even offer) but Cach v. Rogers is a perfect example of things going awry and I'd really like to have my life back.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrote and sent my trial brief....found out new info (CP96 response)  got trial brief back from court because I need to file on day of trial.   So can it be changed before filing?   Plaintiff has it already

 

(my opinion:) not filed, it can be changed.  just give a copy of revised brief to plaintiff.

  • Like 1
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.