williams4

Being sued Unifund

Recommended Posts

OK - that didn't make any sense. Can we refer to each case as something like AAA3K, COURT3K, AAA22K and COURT22K? My understanding is that AAA3K is currently open an active, COURT3K doesn't exist, COURT22K is open and active with an MTC for AAA22K that was never paid and was subsequently closed.

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Goody_Ouchless said:

OK - that didn't make any sense. Can we refer to each case as something like AAA3K, COURT3K, AAA22K and COURT22K? My understanding is that AAA3K is currently open an active, COURT3K doesn't exist, COURT22K is open and active with an MTC for AAA22K that was never paid and was subsequently closed.

 

Yes, this is correct. Great system!!

I couldn't figure out why the case management team was not responding to any emails.  (case management team handles questions on the case and where we send our documents to be submitted to the arbitrator then they upload to AAA webfile, which we can sign in and see all activity on the case) So I went through and this is what I came up with.

AAA3K: Unifund paid: business filing fees of $300, the expedited consumer clause review fee of $250 and its arbitrator's compensation deposit of $2,500

AAA letter closing AAA22K case stated: (these are the reasons I don't think AAA is administering)

"we must decline to administer this claim and any other claims between Unifund CCR, LLC and its consumers"   I didn't know if that included the AAA3K since the fees had been paid.  I emailed case management team asking if it effects the AAA3K case but no response.  No response on another question I sent as well.  

"In addition, Unifund CCR, LLC has not registered its consumer clause on the AAA's Consumer Clause Registry in accordance with R-12 of the Consumer Rules. Please note that submission of the expedited review fee on any particular matter does not satisfy the separate obligation to register the consumer clause."  Wasn't until today when I was combing through the AAA rules, I realized that Unifund was supposed to register its consumer clause ($500), even though they paid the $250 expedited consumer clause fee for the AAA3K.  AAA rules state "The AAA will decline to administer consumer arbitrations arising out of that arbitration agreement if the business declines to pay the review and Registry fee" 

"On a previously-filed consumer matter, Unifund CCR, LLC did not timely submit its share of the filing fees and/or failed to waive a provision in its consumer contract that the AAA identified as a material and substantial deviation from the Protocol. The AAA sent correspondence informing the business that it may decline to administer consumer arbitrations involving Unifund CCR, LLC and requested that the business remove the AAA from its consumer arbitration agreements so that there would be no confusion to the public." AAA sent a letter to Unifund after they paid the initial $3050 fees on AAA3K that stated that a $1400 case management fee will be assessed once arbitrator is selected.  I am almost certain Unifund did not pay this. 

This is where I am getting confused (even more). AAA3K arbitrator's compensation deposit has been paid.  AAA3K arbitrator's order (brief, reply, response to reply due dates) were already in before AAA declined to administer.  Both of my briefs were in as well.  AAA sent the AAA22K letter about not administering any claims two days after my TCPA claim was submitted.  AAA rules state " The arbitration may proceed even if any party or representative is absent, so long as proper notice was given and that party or representative fails to appear or obtain a postponement from the arbitrator. An award cannot be made only because of the default of a party. The arbitrator shall require the party who participates in the hearing to submit the evidence needed by the arbitrator to make an award."  I am trying to figure out if that means the arbitrator will still continue without AAA administering? My plan was to just send my reply to her response just in case.

BUT... I was trying to figure out if I needed to do anything extra because of these rules below.  I don't think I do since the arbitrator hasn't suspended?

Remedies for nonpayment 

(a) If arbitrator compensation or administrative charges have not been paid in full,
the AAA may inform the parties so that one of them may forward the required
payment.
(b) Once the AAA informs the parties that payments have not been received, a party
may request an order from the arbitrator directing what measures might be taken
in light of a party’s nonpayment.
Such measures may include limiting a party’s ability to assert or pursue its claim.
However, a party shall never be precluded from defending a claim or counterclaim.
The arbitrator must provide the party opposing a request for relief with the
opportunity to respond prior to making any determination. In the event that the
arbitrator grants any request for relief that limits any party’s participation in the
arbitration, the arbitrator will require the party who is making a claim and who has
made appropriate payments to submit the evidence required to make an award.
(c) Upon receipt of information from the AAA that full payments have not been
received, the arbitrator, on the arbitrator’s own initiative, may order the suspension
of the arbitration. If no arbitrator has yet been appointed, the AAA may suspend the proceedings.
(d) If arbitrator compensation or AAA administrative fees remain unpaid after a
determination to suspend an arbitration due to nonpayment, the arbitrator
has the authority to terminate the proceedings. Such an order shall be in writing
and signed by the arbitrator. The impact of the termination for nonpayment of
the Consumer Clause Registry fee is the removal from the “Registered” section of the registry.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are my thoughts on the previous post. I continue with the AAA3k like AAA is still administering and that the arbitrator is continuing the case.  I am going to respond to unifunds response and submit to case management team.  Since I have no clue what’s going on with the AAA3k case and  the case management team is no longer responding, the outcome would be either:

1. Case management never forwards my response to arbitrator and arbitrator makes a ruling on the things he has (which in webfile, the only documents files for  “hearing use” are my two briefs with exhibits)

2. If I was supposed to send something to the arbitrator requesting a direction to take due to non payment and didn’t and arbitrator decides to terminate the case, then the AAA3k is terminated. Which isn’t a big deal since my main focus is getting the COURT22k dismissed with prejudice. 

***When I asked unifund if the response was for the AAA3k case, even though she referenced the AAA22k case, her response was “We mailed a letter to the judge explaining the status of the case and mailed a copy to you as well. That letter should answer your questions along with the email sent from the arbitrator on April 16, 2019.”  So I WAS trying to wait for that letter she referred to before filing sanctions for the COURT22k since I was planning on sending my motion for sanctions with COURT22k and my response to AAA3k the same day. But now I am realize the letter she “mailed the judge” is actually just the AAA3k response she mailed aaa case management. (The confusing reply brief that Referenced AAA22k case number which also states in the closing of her response brief that she asks for her summary judgment be granted and to dismiss claimants claim).  Side note: the last update phone hearing for COURT22k, she told the judge that arbitrator is making a decision and that defendant was currently trying to add a claim on a different account number. Since our stories didn’t match  we were both supposed to send stuff to the judge.)  So now, I am thinking submit COURT22k sanctions Monday and wait to submit AAA3k response until my due date to have it in (July 1). Indiana rule gives her 21 days to respond to my motion for sanctions. I am thinking my best plan of attack is staggering my COURT22k sanctions and AAA3k response while she still doesn’t know what’s going on and still doesn’t realize AAA is not with the court, which I am fairly certain she still thinks it is. 

Edit: Nevermind, the more I think about the same day would probably be better. Both submitting BOTH this Monday. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I "think" I finally figured it out.  Back in February when Unifund paid the filing fee for AAA3K, we received a letter that outlined all the fees that have been paid up to that point and also stated:

"Thank you for choosing the American Arbitration Association (AAA) to assist you in resolving your dispute. This
case is being administered by the Pro Se Arbitration Administration Team. Please review the Pro Se
Arbitration Information Sheet and the Consumer Arbitration Reference Sheet, which will provide you with some
basic information about the AAA 's administration of this case."
 
Which at the bottom of this letter had the  PRO SE ARBITRATION ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION SHEET and stated:
"Also note that should either party not pay their fees in accordance with the Consumer Rules, the opposing
party has the option to do so, thereby allowing us to proceed with the administration of this case. That party
may then request that the arbitrator assess these costs in the award."
 
When the arbitrator was assigned back at the end of March, one of attachments was a Notice of Compensation Arrangements for XXX (arbitrators name) then goes on to notify (the arbitrator) he has $2500 deposit right now, if he exhausts that deposit it is the arbitrators duty to notify administration that more money needs to be billed and (the arbitrator) has the option to suspend the arbitration if party fails to pay.
 
***So since my brief on FDCPA and TCPA were both sent to the arbitrator (and also in Webfile) before Pro Se Arbitration Administration Team stopped administering, the only thing the arbitrator has are my briefs with no response from Unifund.  I don't think I even need to submit a reply since almost 100% sure it will never get to the arbitrator.  Or am I being crazy?? Should I just submit one JUST IN CASE??
 
Edit: Never mind.  I am being insanely stupid.  I made it this far and would be stupid not to submit my reply, Even though I am fairly certain the only thing the arbitrator will have in the end is my FDCPA and TCPA brief, which is nice! But again, I don't know why I asked if I should submit one JUST IN CASE.  It would be 100% absurd for me not to!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason it is getting confusing for others is because OP keeps going back to issues already resolved and irrelevant to the current standing on the cases.  At this point we are just rehashing the same 2 pages of this thread over and over.

On 6/22/2019 at 12:52 AM, williams4 said:

"we must decline to administer this claim and any other claims between Unifund CCR, LLC and its consumers"   I didn't know if that included the AAA3K since the fees had been paid.  I emailed case management team asking if it effects the AAA3K case but no response.  No response on another question I sent as well.  

You are sending way too many emails and talking to the administrators too much.  This letter has nothing to do with the AAA3K case. 

The only facts here that matter have not changed in weeks now.  The AAA22K is closed and the court should be notified of such. My preference is by way of a sanctions motion.

The AAA3K has a reply brief due.  File it on time with objections and refutes to their assertions along with asking for the award to find that their claims are frivolous by dragging in a separate irrelevant case.

And that's it.  Still the same course of action I have suggested a comically number of times now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@fisthardcheese I need help again! I made it this far and just want to make sure I don't screw anything up. 

Update on AAA3K: Arbitrator's order said the case will be considered closed on July 16 and he will make his decision.  She never asserted the 22K claim, only asked to dismiss my claim and grant judgement for her (22K).  Which my response of course stated all the striking and so forth.  So I am confident there is no possible way the arbitrator will give her judgement on the 22K since she never even submitted a brief or anything on this? 

Update on COURT22K:  After the hearing update that I said AAA closed the case and she argued it was still pending.  I said the AAA still pending is for a different account number and that the arbitrator told both parties at the initial conference hearing that he will only be making a decision for the AAA3K case.  The judge had us fax back up to our stories which we both did.  The papers she send said case is still pending and the case AAA closed was for 3K account.  I then filed my Motion for Sanctions with my evidence of AAA case being closed, her lying at the court update hearing, ect.  She then filed a Motion to Dismiss Defendants Motion for sanctions. She stated that she sent the judge the update on the current AAA case (which included the AAA demand for the 3K that shows was filed and my filing fee paid BEFORE the court order and the arbitrators order granting to add TCPA claim (which also clearly stated as long as it's for account ending (3K). Then goes on to attaching stuff on the 3K account and saying Defendant is using court order to argue a different account number and is not allowed and says how the court order is an "instant case"  Now judge ordered a hearing for Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Motion for Sanctions for August 12.  The judges order also stated both parties are ordered to appear in person.  Which before for hearings, the judge would allow her to phone in for the hearing since she lives about 6 hours away.

My question is, do I need to respond to her Motion to Dismiss or just show up for the hearing? My thinking is since she is saying AAA3K case is for this court case and she is asking to Dismiss my Sanctions, then that means the AAA3K award from the arbitrator will go in the COURT22K case and be done. Which shouldn't have a summary judgement for 22K since she never asserted her claim.  So either her Motion to Dismiss will get denied, meaning my Sanctions should get granted and case will be dismissed with prejudice or her Motion to Dismiss Defendants Motion for Sanctions will be granted and the arbitrators award for AAA3K case will be filed with the COURT22K and COURT22K will be closed.  I am also thinking, the court does not have jurisdiction so her argument about my AAA claim is irrelevant and the only concern for the court is 1. The court compelled HER claim that was filed in court get sorted out in arbitration  2. That HER claim gets settled in arbitration.  So since she is saying the AAA3K IS for this court case and the arbitrator doesn't grant 22K judgement, then the court case is closed? Or am I wrong in thinking this.  Like I said, I just don't want to screw anything up at this point!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this were me, I would file an "Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss Defendant's Motion for Sanctions".  In my response I would clearly spell out for the judge that the Plaintiff is intentionally conflating and combining a separate and distinct case in AAA with the case presented in the instant court case.  I would lay out very carefully, since this is already a huge confusing jumbled mess, that you filed a case against PRA in AAA on claims regarding an account ending in XXX on ### date.  That after this, PRA filed the instant case in This Court on an account ending in YYY, which was subsequently compelled to arbitration by The Court. I would then state that since the MTC was granted and ordered by this Court, the Plaintiff's council has continually combined and conflated the two separate cases in an intentional effort to confuse and distract not only the Defendant, but also the AAA Arbitrator and This Court in addition to further causing delay.  I would end by reiterating a prayer for sanctions against the Plaintiff and for the instant case to be dismissed with prejudice.

When you go to the hearing, I would have two separate file folders with me that are clearly labeled with the case numbers from the two cases from AAA.  I would put into those folders ALL of the documents from AAA to date (as well as all evidence and email correspondence regarding each case.  I would make 3 copies of everything in those folders and bind them with paper clips or clamps so that the judge can clearly see the fact that there are two separate cases pending in AAA and that the attorney is the one continually making a huge mess out of this.

I would be extremely cautious about going in to way too much detail as you have been doing here.  All the judge needs to know is that the attorney is mixing the cases and that the one which pertains to this court case has been closed by AAA due to her failure to follow the AAA rules and instructions.  That is the ONLY point that needs to be conveyed here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:
 

When you go to the hearing, I would have two separate file folders with me that are clearly labeled with the case numbers from the two cases from AAA.  I would put into those folders ALL of the documents from AAA to date (as well as all evidence and email correspondence regarding each case.  I would make 3 copies of everything in those folders and bind them with paper clips or clamps so that the judge can clearly see the fact that there are two separate cases pending in AAA and that the attorney is the one continually making a huge mess out of this.

 

Her argument in her MTD sanctions states

"It is our argument that the Defendant is confused in regards to which claim applies to which
Account owned by Plaintiff. As stated earlier, Defendant opened an account with original creditor
account number ending in 2457. That Account is the subject of the instant litigation and
arbitration. Defendant also opened another account issued by the original creditor CITIBANK,
NA, With an original creditor account number ending in 9813. This account (“Account B”) is also
owned by Plaintiff and has a current outstanding balance of $3509.93. Plaintiff sent Defendant
Notice Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act on December 10, 201 8, and January 2, 2019.
See Notices Under the Fair Debt Collection Practices, attached hereto as Exhibit “F,” regarding
Account B. However, Plaintiff has not commenced litigation against Defendant for the
outstanding balance for Account B. It is Plaintiff belief that the Defendant is attempting to use
this Court’s Order to Compel Arbitration to argue her claim for arbitration for communications
regarding Account B, which is not authorized. Defendant is confused as to which account this
Courts Order applies. Even so, Defendant cannot take an order from one case and agglx it to
an unrelated case even if the cases involve the same parties and involve similar facts. See
Defendant’s Arbitration Brief attached hereto as Exhibit “G.”

Which I have an email between myself, her and AAA case management from March 4 that says

"I do not have any legal memorandums or exhibits for Case# 01-19-0000-1521.  The account in this case was never in court.  This was filed and I paid the $200 filing fee on 1/15/19. I have another case# 01-18-0003-3861 (different credit card account) that I filed on September 5, 2018 and this account was in court and I was waiting for my Motion to Compel Arbitration to be granted before paying my filing fee. My motion to compel arbitration was granted on January 28, 2019.  I received s letter from AAA stating that they administratively closed this case and to reference the case number when I send the filing fee.  I sent an email inquiring about how to pay this $200 filing fee on this case and that I have papers from the courts that I need to send in but I have not heard anything back yet."

 

I feel like this email is very strong evidence that she clearly knew which case was which.  

 

2 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:
 

I would be extremely cautious about going in to way too much detail as you have been doing here.  All the judge needs to know is that the attorney is mixing the cases and that the one which pertains to this court case has been closed by AAA due to her failure to follow the AAA rules and instructions.  That is the ONLY point that needs to be conveyed here.

I agree.  I was extremely relieved when I saw he scheduled an in person hearing because it is so messed up and nearly impossible to explain everything in a response.  I will take your advice and keep it simple and all my evidence organized in separate folders as you suggested for the hearing.   Her story from the time of the update hearing (which she said the open case in AAA is for account 22K, the closed AAA case is for a different account number 3K, and said that defendant filed a motion to amend claims to add the TCPA for account 3K to the current case which is for the 22K)  Two weeks later she mailed the judge the stuff he asked for (which then the story was the case open is for 22K, arbitrator granted TCPA claim for Defendants to add to my original claim for the 22K account)  Then a week and a half later in MTD Sanctions the story changed to what I posted right above.  Which is exactly what I told the judge at the update hearing (that the case open has nothing to do with the account in this court case).  So the stories she has told the court literally made a full circle and is back to exactly what I said at  the update hearing.  Except now she is saying the Defendant is trying to argue a different account. 

 

Edit: I should add too, by the time we are at the hearing, the AAA3K will be decided (there is not a hearing in AAA for this since the amount is only $4200 so its a document only case) and I already sent the info on the AAA22K to the court in my Sanctions (showing my receipt paying, showing the letter from AAA saying "this is a court compelled case") and the letter showing they closed due to her not paying the fees)  So both cases will be over.  And I will have plenty of evidence that clearly shows me telling AAA that I need to pay my AAA fees for the court compelled case (which also shows she was in on this email too), the order from the arbitrator that states only for 3K account and the letter from AAA stating "this is a court ordered case".

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given what she said in her motion to the court, I would state in my Opposition that my other pending cases in AAA are irrelevant and that it is the Plaintiff, NOT the Defendant who has brought this other case up in their motion.  I would strongly state that Defendant has never mentioned anything other than the instant case stayed before this court and ordered to arbitration.  And because of the Plaintiff's insistence on bringing up another irrelevant and immaterial case along with the details from such case that is not before this court, and continues to do so in their motion, that this is the basis for Defendant's motion for Sanctions.

In fact, reading her motion, I wouldn't even detail your other case in AAA other than to point out that she is bringing up this other case seemingly out of no where.  I would only rely on the AAA documents showing you filed your case after the MTC was granted (hopefully that includes the copy of the MTC you sent AAA) and the subsequent emails showing they failed to comply and AAA closed the case.  This is all the evidence you need.  You can tell the court that all this nonsense about other cases is on HER.  SHE is the only one bringing them up and still has not abided by the court's order to arbitrate the case before the court.  This should be more simple than initially believed.  I would not even show the emails she sent the arbitrator in your AAA3K case.  They are irrelevant to the court case.  The court only needs to see that you filed, and AAA closed because they didn't comply.  End.   (In other words, I would be like "I don't even know why she is bringing up this other case, it has nothing to do with our current matter in this court.  We are here for AAA22K and that case was closed by AAA.  -- just play dumb on why she keeps bringing up the other AAA3k)

At the hearing, every time she makes reference to the AAA3K case, I would object and tell the judge she is referring to the irrelevant case no before this court.  I would just keep hammering the point that the AAA case filed as a result of the MTC and stay was closed due to their non compliance.  Just keep objecting to her referencing the AAA3k case (which hilariously she continue thinks somehow is the AAA22k case because she hasn't taken 2 minutes to read the full case file - but let the judge be the one to show her the fatal error she is making).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, fisthardcheese said:

 

I would only rely on the AAA documents showing you filed your case after the MTC was granted (hopefully that includes the copy of the MTC you sent AAA)

Yes it does.  And that was filed with AAA.  And the letter AAA sent for the AAA22K that states " We are in receipt of a court order compelling arbitration. Accordingly, we are proceeding on that basis." (that she actually attached as an exhibit to the judge's request for the documents) and stated that this was for 3K account and she did not pay and that this is the one that AAA closed.  Then goes on to say the AAA case for this court order is still pending (which she attaches the demand for arbitration on the 3K that has Unifund's date stamped received 1/21/19 (court order wasn't granted until 1/28/19). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, williams4 said:

Yes it does.  And that was filed with AAA.  And the letter AAA sent for the AAA22K that states " We are in receipt of a court order compelling arbitration. Accordingly, we are proceeding on that basis." (that she actually attached as an exhibit to the judge's request for the documents) and stated that this was for 3K account and she did not pay and that this is the one that AAA closed.  Then goes on to say the AAA case for this court order is still pending (which she attaches the demand for arbitration on the 3K that has Unifund's date stamped received 1/21/19 (court order wasn't granted until 1/28/19). 

Don't even bring up the AAA3K stuff.  Just show the judge all of the AAA correspondence regarding the AAA22K case number only.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, fisthardcheese said:

Don't even bring up the AAA3K stuff.  Just show the judge all of the AAA correspondence regarding the AAA22K case number only.

The frustrating part is at the conference hearing with the court she said arbitration is still going, the arbitrator is making his decision by June 20.  I said no, the case pending in arbitration is on a different credit card account that has nothing to do with this court case.  The AAA case for this court case was closed due to Plaintiff's failure to comply with AAA rules.  Then she said no, the pending case is for this court case and she didn't pay the other AAA case because she was waiting for the outcome of this case.  Then said that defendant is currently adding a TCPA claim for that other account number to the pending case.  This is why the judge said well, these are two totally different stories and had us each fax in our evidence.  So now, a month later, I am being accused by her for using a court order to argue a different account number.  I am thinking what the BLEEP! I clearly told the judge that the pending case has NOTHING to do with this court case and pertains to another credit card account. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, fisthardcheese said:

Don't even bring up the AAA3K stuff.  Just show the judge all of the AAA correspondence regarding the AAA22K case number only.

This is exactly what I laid out in my sanctions. I assume just lay it out again in opposition and that’s it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, williams4 said:

This is exactly what I laid out in my sanctions. I assume just lay it out again in opposition and that’s it?

No, only respond to what she brought up in her counter-motion.  Don't bring up everything, you only respond to what she said.  Which basically should be an objection to her including irrelevant cases.

25 minutes ago, williams4 said:

So now, a month later, I am being accused by her for using a court order to argue a different account number.  I am thinking what the BLEEP! I clearly told the judge that the pending case has NOTHING to do with this court case and pertains to another credit card account. 

This is why you bring the evidence showing they did not comply with AAA.  It doesn't matter what she said.  The evidence speaks for itself (with your help).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would expect Unifund's lawyer to do everything @fisthardcheese suggested, in terms of organizing everything into separate binders, at which point she'll be 😲 when she realizes she's got it all wrong.

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Goody_Ouchless said:

I would expect Unifund's lawyer to do everything @fisthardcheese suggested, in terms of organizing everything into separate binders, at which point she'll be 😲 when she realizes she's got it all wrong.

 

I don't know.  She hasn't done it yet, which is very odd and unprofessional to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:

I don't know.  She hasn't done it yet, which is very odd and unprofessional to me.

Honestly, I think she finally realized it when I submitted my reply to her response in AAA and filed sanctions in court. I think this is why her story in her MTD changed dramatically from what she said in court and what she faxed the judge🤷‍♀️.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, williams4 said:

Honestly, I think she finally realized it when I submitted my reply to her response in AAA and filed sanctions in court. I think this is why her story in her MTD changed dramatically from what she said in court and what she faxed the judge🤷‍♀️.  

Well, either way, she has done nothing to remedy it and continues to make the argument that Case X is Case Y, when clearly everyone can see the case numbers and dates and details of each case.  It's not like she can prevail in that argument once the case files are looks at in court.  I just wish I could be in that courtroom when this happens. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, fisthardcheese said:
 I just wish I could be in that courtroom when this happens. :)

I don’t even know if she will even show up. When I filed my MTC, the court set a hearing date. Then she sent discovery questions, which I objected saying I didn’t want to waive my right to arbitration. She failed to appear at the hearing so the judge reset the hearing date for my MTC then she filed MSJ saying there are no genuine issues. The court then changed the MTC hearing to a hearing to settle all open issues. And for that hearing she hired a sit in lawyer and she was phoned in. The sit in lawyer said he had no clue what’s going on in the case and that she hired him to just be in the courtroom so she can get the summary judgement. After the hearing was over the sit in lawyer shook his head and laughed. Then again said, like I said, I had no clue anything about this case. Since she lives 6 hours away and the court is not allowing her to phone in, I can’t imagine she would hire another sit in lawyer that knows nothing about the case to be able to argue. And I think she will know by that point she has nothing left to argue. I could be wrong though🤷‍♀️

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, williams4 said:

The judges order also stated both parties are ordered to appear in person.

If she doesn't show up, she would be, for a second time, refusing to abide by The Court's order.  I would remind the Judge that he ordered the parties to appear in person and state that this is the second time Plaintiff has failed to follow This Court's orders and ask that your Motion for Sanctions and Dismissal with prejudice be granted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, fisthardcheese said:

If she doesn't show up, she would be, for a second time, refusing to abide by The Court's order.  I would remind the Judge that he ordered the parties to appear in person and state that this is the second time Plaintiff has failed to follow This Court's orders and ask that your Motion for Sanctions and Dismissal with prejudice be granted.

I was so nervous at the first hearing because I had never even been in a court room except for jury duty once when I was 20.  I didn't realize until after that I should of just asked the judge to make a decision on the MTC that day.  But now I feel more confident and less nervous so I will definitely speak up! She does not seem to be a  very organized person (obviously).  But the first update phone conference in court after my MTC was granted, the court called her and it took her coworkers 15 minutes to track her down to get on the phone because she was on vacation.  I do feel like from this point out in this case, she will be more diligent, at least I would hope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:

No, only respond to what she brought up in her counter-motion.  Don't bring up everything, you only respond to what she said.  Which basically should be an objection to her including irrelevant cases.

 

When I object to this stuff, should I say something extra about her attaching my brief from AAA3K (which is pending matter in AAA).  She shouldn't be doing that, should she? Or does it not really matter? Just object to her bringing the irrelevant brief to this court case?

Edit: I thought stuff in arbitration, especially when it is still pending is confidential. She sent the arbitrators scheduling orders on an irrelevant account and now attached my brief. Or am I just going off track again, like I tend to do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, williams4 said:

When I object to this stuff, should I say something extra about her attaching my brief from AAA3K (which is pending matter in AAA).  She shouldn't be doing that, should she? Or does it not really matter? Just object to her bringing the irrelevant brief to this court case?

Edit: I thought stuff in arbitration, especially when it is still pending is confidential. She sent the arbitrators scheduling orders on an irrelevant account and now attached my brief. Or am I just going off track again, like I tend to do?

If she actually filed all the AAA3K documents as evidence, then yes, absolutely ask that they be stricken from the record as irrelevant.  If it were me I would even say something about her including a completely different and irrelevant case from AAA into her brief is further proof that she is the one attempting to co-mingle two distinct and separate cases intentionally in order to delay, confuse and obfuscate this case.

Also, I would save this for the hearing should she continue to bring up the AAA3K or pretend to be "confused" about the mixed up cases - but she is an attorney and there is no way she is this confused over handling 2 different cases at the same time.  This seems very intentional.  I would tell that to the judge in person should she continue this mess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, fisthardcheese said:

If she actually filed all the AAA3K documents as evidence, then yes, absolutely ask that they be stricken from the record as irrelevant. 

The brief she mentioned (referenced exhibit letter) is not on the court online case site.  I am still waiting to receive the hard copy.  I just happen to look at the online case file to see if anything new was happening.  The certificate of service says she mailed it first class, regular mail on the 9th.  Seems like I would of had it by now, but still waiting.  But most of the exhibits I can see online are for the 3K account.

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.