Dotheyeverstop?

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

Recommended Posts

Thank you @string and @Anon Amos I will add the CP96 objection to #1.   And hand the amended trial brief to Midland before trial.   Tomorrow is my day to go over my folder and be sure everything is organized and ready, Sunday I will take a break, and Monday is time to kick some Midland a$$ 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First:  No decision.   The judge will read my trial brief and review the Objection as well as the lawyers case laws against the Objection and let us know.

 

Went to court, got up before the judge.   He said he would review the Objection to CCP 98 and questioned the legality of the declarer's testimony and then asked if there were any other questions or objections...we went back and forth a little and the lawyer for them (who isn't the lawyer on file) threw out some case studies.   She then hammered me on the Sears Bills.  Are they mine etc.  Don't remember dont' recall....  I have  2 questions, the judge kept asking me if there was anything else it felt as if I was missing something.  Could I have objected to the lawyer not being the lawyer on record?   Also they showed no proof of payment, no checks or anything, could he have been waiting for me to object to that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I would have objected to the substitution.  If a lawyer says she is present and represents a party, I would let her argue.

 

Sounds like it went well.  If I take it correctly, no witness showed up? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how they can win without a witness.  What evidence of assignment did they put on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see how they can win without a witness.  What evidence of assignment did they put on?

The only evidence offered was that which was attached to the CP98 declaration.  So 2 affidavits of sale signed in another state without the proper wording AND in my objection I questioned the methods as one stated she had reviewed records including those from Citibank (north dakota), but never mentions Sears Mastercard, which according to the dates was the original creditor.  All I know is that after the rent a lawyer read my objection she drilled me on the card statements.   She was extremely frustrated and angry by the time she was done.   

I think by waiting to read my objection and trial brief, the judge did me a favor.   It's a lot easier to be calm and rational writing a paper then it is standing in court.   I was shaking so badly I'm surprised I was still standing

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 She was extremely frustrated and angry by the time she was done.   

 

Good job, I expect nothing less.  :waah:

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not much for waiting.   Woke up at 2 am with a list of worries "what if they win?"   So I made this list: 

IF they prevail; they will be true bottom feeders and may not try to work out a payment plan.   Their options are : Try to put a lien on the house (not worried about this one, the house is either upside down or close to it, and California has a homesteader law) PLUS in case of divorce the husband gets it.   Try to seize bank accounts:   My name is on a checking and savings account with my estranged husband, that could be worrisome, because he pays the mortgage, and the kids stuff.   Answer: Can't remove my name, as that is illegal, but nothing says he must use that account, this morning he is opening a new checking and savings and transferring direct deposit, they could try to attach my wages, but I make less than federal minimum wage so I can fight that.  Now I feel better.   Going into this I "owed" 5700.00 If they win I will owe 6000.00 and know that I put up a damn good fight!   Also there is the Appeal process, and I objected to everything.    No decision has been posted :(   Wonder how long the judge will take?   He was furiously looking up case law and evidence codes when we were before him, so I feel good about that part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it went well for you. You did a good job leading up to the trial and did great when being questioned, IMO. It seems to me that when judges aren't familiar with the objection to CCP 98, they tend to rule for the plaintiff - I think it's good that your judge is going to look closely at your objection and rule later. He will undoubtedly take note of the Rocha & Rogers cases. If he rules against the CCP 98 then all the evidence attached to it goes out the door too; since you gave them nothing in testimony, the plaintiff doesn't have a case.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am thinking more he doesn't want to step on the toes of his very own appellate division. He has to take CACH v. Rogers because it is county precedent. Looks good, I also think that the court was prompting you to request a directed verdict.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am thinking more he doesn't want to step on the toes of his very own appellate division. He has to take CACH v. Rogers because it is county precedent. Looks good, I also think that the court was prompting you to request a directed verdict.

Perhaps that was what he wanted?   I've almost stopped thinking about it :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It could just be that he didn't want to rule against a fellow bar member as he's standing in front of him, or he may really be researching the law. Either way, it could very well be in your favor. In any event; there's nothing you can do about it now, and you will know soon enough. Keep your fingers crossed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still waiting.   Minutes posted this morning:

XXXX DobXXX specally appearing for counsel K E. L present for Plaintiff (s)

XXXX XXXX self represented Defendant, present

 

Ms. Dob informs the Court she is submitting on the CCP 98 declaration filed with the court.  Defendant objects to the Court considering this declaration

Matter submitted to the Court with argument

 

944 defendant is sworn and testifies

 

Cross exam of defendant commences by Dob on behalf of Plaintiff Midland Funding LLC

 

The Court finds/orders:

The Court takes this matter under submission as of 11/10/2014

 

I liked seeing the words, so thought I'd share.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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, 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes. But why would MIDLAND'S records show any dispute if it were made?  A dispute would have been made to the OC.  Midland can't usually produce account statements.  How on earth would it get a dispute letter?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. But why would MIDLAND'S records show any dispute if it were made?  A dispute would have been made to the OC.  Midland can't usually produce account statements.  How on earth would it get a dispute letter?

You are quite correct!  I did say that I can't dispute what I've never received.   In cross she asked if we ever had issues with the mail, I said yes, she asked what issues?  I said we've had mail stolen and mail go missing without ever finding out why.   She said "did you bring a police report to show this?" I said "No, although I do have one, did you bring proof of service?"   She never mentioned any dispute.    I hope the case is decided soon.   This waiting is irritating.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any record of your making a dispute either but that is just as irrelevant as Midland not having one.

 

Sounds like your judge is smart enough to understand this stuff.  And it sounds like you made all the right arguments about the CCP 98.  There are some judges who, notwithstanding the law, will just overrule your objection on the spot.  If your judge takes the time to read Target or Rodgers, I think you will be looking pretty good.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Superior Court of California

date 12/19 time 245PM

Event Type:   Ruling on Submitted Matter

 

Appearances:

 

The Court having previously taken the Court Trial under submission, now rules as follows:

 

Judgment for DEFENDANT

 

Clerk to give notice.

 

Thank you everyone who helped me with this.

@Seadragon@calawyer@Anon Amos@RyanEX@string  If I missed anyone I'm sorry!   

  • Like 4

Share this post


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.