Jump to content

Being Sued By A JDB In Minnesota.


Recommended Posts

Hello,

I apologize if I am going about this in the wrong manner but I am new to the forum and fairly ignorant of the legal system/court proceedings.

I'm pretty lost in the woods here and hoping that I may find some guidance.

 

I am being sued by Midland Credit Management Inc via Messerli & Kramer PA over an old credit card debt that they allegedly purchased.

Activity to date:

1. On 07/21/2020 a summons/complaint was left at my parents home by a member of the Anoka County Sheriffs Department while I was living out of town.

  • Process servers Certificate of Service states: Observed my father (verified DVS) in picture window. Knocked and received no answer. Knocked again and my father knocked on the picture window and showed that he was on the phone. My father then opened the far east window and asked "Can I help you?". The process server asked if I was home, my father said "No". The process server asked when I would be home, my father stated that he "did not know". The process server asked if he could leave papers with him to give to me, my father stated "No" and shut the window. Process server left the papers in the storm door jam."
  • My fathers statements of events closely matches that of the process server.  At approximately noon of 07/21/2021 while on a telephone call my father heard a knock at the front door which he disregarded due to the engagement in and nature of the telephone call. Upon hearing a second more persistent round of knocking at the front door my father approached the front living room picture widow and motioned that he was busy with a telephone call. After my father finished his phone call he slid open the far most eastern bedroom window and asked "Can I help you?". The process server asked if I was home, my father said "No". The process server asked when I would be home, my father stated that he "did not know". The process server asked if he could leave papers with him to give to me, my father stated "No" denying service, shut the window and left the room. The complaint/summons was found wedged in the front door the next evening.

2. On 08/05/2020 I served Midland Credit Management Inc via Messerli & Kramer PA the answer to the complaint/summons.

3. On 08/05/2020 I attempted to file with the court my Answer to the summons/complaint but was denied due to there being no case number assigned.

4. On 08/27/2020 I received a proposed Discovery Plan and letter stating to contact Messerli & Kramer PA within 14 days to work out a discovery plan, or if I did not wish to collaborate on a discovery plan attached was a proposed plan that they had formulated, if they didn't hear from me within 14 days they would assume that the proposed plan was acceptable and present it to the court. 

  • On 08/28/2020 I called Messerli & Kramer PA at the number provided within the letter to discuss amendments needed to the proposed discovery plan with the plaintiff's attorney. My phone call was answered by someone other than the plaintiffs attorney who asked for my SSN to bring up the account (which I denied). When I asked to speak with the plaintiffs attorney in regards to the discovery plan I was told that she wasn't available. When I asked the gentleman when she would be available he said he did not know. I then asked if he could please have the plaintiff's attorney contact me in regards to the proposed discovery plan and amendment there of and I was told that she doesn't "reach out" to people. He then informed me that he'd just noticed that the plaintiff's attorney had put a note in my file that they would be willing to discuss settling the debt for the full amount...  To which I again politely asked that the plaintiff's attorney contact me in regards to the proposed discovery plan at her earliest convenience. To date I've received no reply.

5. On 04/29/2021 I received a Notice of Case Filing and Assignment from the court administration.

6. On 04/30/2021 I filed my answer to complaint/summons along with an application for filing In Forma Pauperis at the courthouse.

7. On 05/05/2021 I received A Notice of Filing Order granting my application for filing In Forma Pauperis.

8. On 07/15/2021 I received a Scheduling Order letter from the court administration.

9. On 07/20/2021 I received a letter from Messerli & Kramer PA proposing mediation pursuant to the courts scheduling order and recommending an intermediary that "our office has used in the past". Unfortunately the fourteen days passed by too quickly and I missed the deadline as I was trying to find an impartial intermediary rather than their in house one.

10. On 09/23/2021 an envelope containing Opening Documents, Findings of Fact, Statement of Facts, an Affidavit from their"Legal Specialist" In Support Of Plaintiff's MSJ attesting to knowledge of records, and approximately 1 one year of credit card statements.

11. On 10/17/2021 I received a Notice of Remote Zoom Hearing letter from the court administration.

 

 

My main objections to their " Findings of Fact are:

1. "That on or about May 25, 2008, Defendant(s) entered into a consumer credit contract with Capital One Bank (USA) N.A., to purchase goods and services on a credit card account"

  • Deny. This is false, the issuer was World's Foremost Bank Cabela's Club Visa. I do not have nor could I find a copy of the agreement but I do have a couple statement listing the issuer as World's Foremost Bank Cabela's Club Visa.

2. "That Defendant(s) were issued a credit card account bearing account number XXXXXXXXXXXX1429 (Account)."

  • Deny. This is false, the account issued was XXXXXXXXXXXX0553. I still have an old card bearing this account number.

3. "That Defendant(s) used the account to purchase goods and services and made payments against the outstanding balance of Defendant('s') account."

  • Deny. I do not have enough information to form a belief as to the truth, and therefor deny the allegation.

4. "The Defendant(s) last made payment against the outstanding balance of Defendant(s) account on June 14, 2018."

  • Deny. This is false, per plaintiff's "evidence" the last payment on account was 07/16/2021.

5. "Defendant(s) failed to pay the installments due under the contract and that such a failure constitutes default."

  • Deny. Without a contract I do not have enough information to form a belief as to the truth, and therefor deny the allegation.

6. "There remains an outstanding account balance due of $4,393.50."

  • Deny. I do not have enough information to form a belief as to the truth, and therefor deny the allegation.

7. "Defendant(s) was/were duly served with the Summons and Complaint on July 21, 2020.

  • Deny. It's my belief that the complaint and summons were not served properly pursuant to rule 4 of Minnesota Court Rules of Civil Procedure.

 

Furthermore I dispute that I owe the plaintiff Midland Credit Management Inc. or Messerli & Kramer PA anything. I have never entered into contract, signed any agreement, purchased/traded any goods or services with either of the aforementioned parties. I also to the best of my knowledge do not beleive that any agreement was signed with the alleged OC Capital One (USA).  I have been provided with no evidence validating the alleged debt such as; a purchase agreement, bill of sale, assignment of contract, forward flow agreement, list of accounts, nor has the debt been validated.

As far as the only supposed "evidence" provided, the statements and affidavit of debt goes could that be objected to as hearsay?

 

 

I'm trying my darnedest to not let this wreak havoc on my physical, mental, and emotional health as it has in the past but it seems like I am spinning in circles trying to figure out where to go and what to do. Admittedly like I said I'm fairly ignorant when it comes to the legal system and court proceedings. I have attempted to find some form of template to write out a response to the plaintiffs MSJ and where to go next but as of yet haven't found anything that seems serviceable.

 

Any assistance, insight, or opinions would be most appreciated.

 

Thank you and have a wonderful day.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Just in case I didn't cover everything.

1. Who is the named plaintiff in the suit? Midland Credit Management, Inc.

2. What is the name of the law firm handling the suit? (should be listed at the top of the complaint.) Messerli & Kramer PA.

3. How much are you being sued for? $5126.50

4. Who is the original creditor? (if not the Plaintiff) Capital One Bank (USA).

5. How do you know you are being sued? (You were served, right?) Served complaint and summons on 07/21/2020

6. How were you served? (Mail, In person, Notice on door) Summons placed (wedged) in front door of parents home.

7. Was the service legal as required by your state? Unsure. I am unsure if "drop service" is allowed in MN or even legal if not face-to-face.

8. What was your correspondence (if any) with the people suing you before you think you were being sued? None, unrecognized sender unopened and discarded as junk mail.

9. What state and county do you live in? Minnesota, Anoka County.

10. When is the last time you paid on this account? (looking to establish if you are outside of the statute of limitations) 07/16/2018.

11. When did you open the account (looking to establish what card agreement may be applicable)? 2008.

12. What is the SOL on the debt? To find out: 6 years.

13. What is the status of your case? Case is listed as open. Plaintiff has filed for an MSJ.

14. Have you disputed the debt with the credit bureaus (both the original creditor and the collection agency?) No, I was unaware of this option.

15. Did you request debt validation before the suit was filed? No, I had no contact with the plaintiff prior to the complaint/summons.

16. How long do you have to respond to the suit? (This should be in your paperwork). I am unsure. Answer has been filed, I attempted to contact plaintiff about amending discovery agreement but was not answered, now paperwork and MSJ arrived from plaintiff recently.

17. What evidence did they send with the summons? Nothing with summons/complaint. I recently received on 09/23/2021 an envelope containing Opening Documents, Findings of Fact, Statement of Facts, an Affidavit from their"Legal Specialist" In Support Of Plaintiff's MSJ attesting to knowledge of records, and approximately 1 one year of credit card statements.

18.  How did you find out about this site? I came across this site while researching via DuckDuckGo.

 

Edited by BomberMN
Updated info.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that you called them and they refused to listen to your objections regarding the discovery plan. At that point, you should have put it in letter form and had your objections served in the same manner as your answer. The attorney would have had to listen to that.

At this point, since you did not participate in discovery, they might be able to get your answers to admissions deemed as admitted. However, you can state that you tried to contact the attorney's office on 28 August 2020 and show that you had objections to the plan that went unheeded by their office. Also, the 1 year of statements can be an issue. You also don't know who the real bank was behind the credit card. It could have been very well be Capital One.

In any case, you have a limited about of time now to file a motion to oppose summary judgement where you state that there are material facts that need the judge to decide. You file that with the court and send a copy to the plaintiff. I am sure you can find the form online.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, BomberMN said:

4. On 08/27/2020 I received a proposed Discovery Plan and letter stating to contact Messerli & Kramer PA within 14 days to work out a discovery plan, or if I did not wish to collaborate on a discovery plan attached was a proposed plan that they had formulated, if they didn't hear from me within 14 days they would assume that the proposed plan was acceptable and present it to the court. 

  • On 08/28/2020 I called Messerli & Kramer PA at the number provided within the letter to discuss amendments needed to the proposed discovery plan with the plaintiff's attorney. My phone call was answered by someone other than the plaintiffs attorney who asked for my SSN to bring up the account (which I denied). When I asked to speak with the plaintiffs attorney in regards to the discovery plan I was told that she wasn't available. When I asked the gentleman when she would be available he said he did not know. I then asked if he could please have the plaintiff's attorney contact me in regards to the proposed discovery plan and amendment there of and I was told that she doesn't "reach out" to people. He then informed me that he'd just noticed that the plaintiff's attorney had put a note in my file that they would be willing to discuss settling the debt for the full amount...  To which I again politely asked that the plaintiff's attorney contact me in regards to the proposed discovery plan at her earliest convenience. To date I've received no reply.

 

 

Never call a JDB (or their attorney's office) for any reason and do not answer your phone if they call you.

Also ignore any letters from them. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, texasrocker said:

Never call a JDB (or their attorney's office) for any reason and do not answer your phone if they call you.

Also ignore any letters from them. 

Ummmm, he has been sued by the JDB and they have gotten to the stage in Minnesota where a case has been filed in court and the JDB is now looking for a summary judgement. The OP cannot simply ignore letters at this point. I agree with not talking to them on the phone but the courts require at least some communication between the OP and the JDB Attorneys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to work out a discovery plan

9 hours ago, WhoCares1000 said:

Ummmm, he has been sued by the JDB and they have gotten to the stage in Minnesota where a case has been filed in court and the JDB is now looking for a summary judgement. The OP cannot simply ignore letters at this point. I agree with not talking to them on the phone but the courts require at least some communication between the OP and the JDB Attorneys.

Unless there is a rule specific to Minnesota the only time written communication is needed would be a "meet and confer" letter strategically sent in the discovery process to show the court in a motion to compel answers to discovery that you have exhausted every option and they still have not answered discovery.  

The summary judgment procedure is handled in the court with the defendant now filing a response to the MSJ and then a hearing.

Unless it is specified in the rules I would never advise to answer any of their letters especially to someone as gullible as this OP was to fall for "to work out a discovery plan."

What is  "Ummmm"? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under the Pocket Docket Process, once an answer is filed, the parties are required to work out a discovery plan and perform discovery out of court. It is expected that the parties will meet and confer during this process. You cannot simply ignore the discovery process, even if the case has not been filed in court yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 2:11 PM, WhoCares1000 said:

Under the Pocket Docket Process, once an answer is filed, the parties are required to work out a discovery plan and perform discovery out of court. It is expected that the parties will meet and confer during this process. You cannot simply ignore the discovery process, even if the case has not been filed in court yet.

 Discovery is typically performed out of court anyway but as I said unless your state's rules require it there is not any meet and confer involved.  Obviously if you receive a list of discovery items sent via certified mail that they want the defendant to answer it must be answered. 

I was referring to the "spam" type of letters JDB's typically bombard with threats and offers to settle etc.  These should go straight to the proverbial circular file.

This OP screwed up royally by allowing eight months to transpire sitting and waiting for the other party to make the next move.  He/she could have gained the upper hand by sending the JDB discovery on 08/28/2020.  Of course the next move of a halfway decent attorney is going to be a MSJ sprung before they get slammed with want of prosecution.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The OP might be able to fix this but time is of the importance. He needs to oppose their MSJ and try to find proof that he attempted to contact the law office with his discovery objections and they refused to listen to them.

What messed you up is Minnesota' unique pocket docket rules. The dates look messed up because discovery was done before the court filing. In Minnesota, that is standard practice. In fact, after the 2008 Star Tribune expose on the practice, the legislature changed some of the rules and one of the rule changes is that if the defendant properly files an answer, the case MUST be filed in court within 1 year of the date of service or the case is dismissed WITH prejudice. That is why they filed in April and and now doing the MSJ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, WhoCares1000 said:

The OP might be able to fix this but time is of the importance. He needs to oppose their MSJ and try to find proof that he attempted to contact the law office with his discovery objections and they refused to listen to them...
 

Sounds to me like he needs to hire a good attorney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Bulldoger said:

good advice all going to wind maybe he will be back.

 BomberMN

JOINED

Wednesday at 12:40 AM

LAST VISITED

Wednesday at 04:18 AM

No, it's not going to the wind by any means. :)

I've been out of town since Friday evening but had been monitoring the forum daily up until then. There's really no reason for me to sign in unless I'm updating my post or responding to new replies on it.

I appreciate all of the opinions and insights. I'm aware that I need to file an affidavit and response in opposition to the MSJ however as I stated I'm not a lawyer by any means, and I'm struggling with the formatting/layout and the case law that I need to site on both.

I also agree with the statement that I should/should've hired a good lawyer and in a perfect world I would have but financially it's just not an option for me and that's why I asked for help on here.

There was a letter waiting in the mailbox from the court administration waiting for me when I got home today stating that a hearing for the MSJ via zoom has been set for Nov 18. Unfortunately I have to contact the courthouse tommorow and see if other arrangements can be made as I don't own a computer, cell phone, or internet service. When I need to print or research anything I go to the local library but I don't think that's really anywhere to have a Zoom hearing.

Thanks again for your input, it is appreciated. Right now I'm just trying to figure out how to put together the affidavit and responding motion to the MSJ.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/15/2021 at 6:26 PM, WhoCares1000 said:

The OP might be able to fix this but time is of the importance. He needs to oppose their MSJ and try to find proof that he attempted to contact the law office with his discovery objections and they refused to listen to them.

What messed you up is Minnesota' unique pocket docket rules. The dates look messed up because discovery was done before the court filing. In Minnesota, that is standard practice. In fact, after the 2008 Star Tribune expose on the practice, the legislature changed some of the rules and one of the rule changes is that if the defendant properly files an answer, the case MUST be filed in court within 1 year of the date of service or the case is dismissed WITH prejudice. That is why they filed in April and and now doing the MSJ.

I'm not sure how to provide proof on the phone calls. The only info that I have is from my end with the date/time of the call and the name that I was given by the person who answered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 2:23 PM, texasrocker said:

to work out a discovery plan

Unless there is a rule specific to Minnesota the only time written communication is needed would be a "meet and confer" letter strategically sent in the discovery process to show the court in a motion to compel answers to discovery that you have exhausted every option and they still have not answered discovery.  

The summary judgment procedure is handled in the court with the defendant now filing a response to the MSJ and then a hearing.

Unless it is specified in the rules I would never advise to answer any of their letters especially to someone as gullible as this OP was to fall for "to work out a discovery plan."

What is  "Ummmm"? 

Gullible? Apparently that's how it works here in Minnessota as Iwas adviced by the court to call the JDBs attorney to start discovery. When I advised the court clerk of my issues contacting the JDBs attorney over the response given by the JDBs attorney's office I was provided with the same number and told to contact them.

Up until I was advised by the court to do so I had absolutely zero contact with the JDB or their attorneys. As I stated initially all mailings prior to being served the complaint/summons were perceived as junk mail an went straight into the shredder. 

As I said, I'm not a lawyer. If I were a lawyer or had any previous experience with this sort of thing I would know the proper procedure and wouldn't be here publicly airing my BS to ask for help as a last resort. ;)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BomberMN said:

 hearing for the MSJ via zoom has been set for Nov 18. 

I don't know how MSJ work in MN but in most states you would have to have filed your opposition to the motion for summary judgment so many days before the hearing it should also include a statement of facts showing the dispute and supporting documents. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bulldoger said:

I don't know how MSJ work in MN but in most states you would have to have filed your opposition to the motion for summary judgment so many days before the hearing it should also include a statement of facts showing the dispute and supporting documents. 

Hello and thanks for the response.

According to the paperwork that I've received, as I understand it in MN a response to an MSJ has to be filed with the court and served to opposing counsel at least 14 days prior to the hearing date. So I have to get all my ducks in a row and file the response/opposition no later than November 4th.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, BomberMN said:

Gullible? Apparently that's how it works here in Minnessota as Iwas adviced by the court to call the JDBs attorney to start discovery. When I advised the court clerk of my issues contacting the JDBs attorney over the response given by the JDBs attorney's office I was provided with the same number and told to contact them.

Up until I was advised by the court to do so I had absolutely zero contact with the JDB or their attorneys. As I stated initially all mailings prior to being served the complaint/summons were perceived as junk mail an went straight into the shredder. 

As I said, I'm not a lawyer. If I were a lawyer or had any previous experience with this sort of thing I would know the proper procedure and wouldn't be here publicly airing my BS to ask for help as a last resort. ;)

 

 

I apologize for calling you gullible if you were indeed following a court order.  What I understood from your post was the JDB attorney advised you to call them and sure enough when you did so they tried to talk you into settling with no intention of discussing anything regarding  a "discovery plan."

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, BomberMN said:

I'm not sure how to provide proof on the phone calls. The only info that I have is from my end with the date/time of the call and the name that I was given by the person who answered.

To do this, you fill out an affidavit stating the facts and signing that under perjury in front of a notary (usually the court clerk) and attach that. If you used a pay phone (or a friend's phone), state that fact too.

As for the forms, you can get those here: https://www.mncourts.gov/GetForms.aspx?c=7&p=103

As for case law, you have to find that yourself. Basically, you need to prove that the other side did not give you a proper chance to perform discovery because they refused to listen to your objections to their discovery plan and that there are questions of facts that need to be dealt with by a judge. I know it is hard to type it up in legalese but you need to do that ASAP.

Now, as for the Zoom hearing, unfortunately if the library is the only place you can attend the hearing, you will have to do that. I would talk to the court clerk though and as for options. They might have a room in the courthouse designed for situations like this. It almost sounds like you are homeless (or very close to). If so, discuss that with the PRA attorney. One of the good things about Minnesota Civil Law is that in order to renew a judgement, a new case has to be filed before the 10 year period is up and with the cost of MN courts, most don't bother to chase good money after bad. Although MN makes it easy to levy or garnish, there are some good exemptions to that and you should research those exemptions too. It might be possible that you are collection proof and if so, PRA just spent a ton of money in court for month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, texasrocker said:

I apologize for calling you gullible if you were indeed following a court order.  What I understood from your post was the JDB attorney advised you to call them and sure enough when you did so they tried to talk you into settling with no intention of discussing anything regarding  a "discovery plan."

 

It was not a court order per se (because when the call was made, there was no court case yet) but based on the information given by the clerk. Where the OP went wrong, and if they came to the board when initially served, would have been told to do this, was not sending a letter CMRRR to the attorney's office when it became clear that they would not listen on the phone. The OP might be able to show that to the judge but a letter would have cemented the fact that the attorney's office was trying to bully their process on the defendant.

The whole pocket docket process is strange to the rest of the country where everything is ran by the court from day one rather than waiting until a judge is needed to get the court involved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/18/2021 at 5:59 AM, WhoCares1000 said:

To do this, you fill out an affidavit stating the facts and signing that under perjury in front of a notary (usually the court clerk) and attach that. If you used a pay phone (or a friend's phone), state that fact too.

Would including something like this with my response be sufficient, or should it be filed separately?

 

                                                                                            CONSUMER CREDIT CONTRACT 

STATE OF MINNESOTA                                                                               DISTRICT COURT 

COUNTY OF                                                                                              JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

 

Midland Credit Management, Inc  

                                                                   Plaintiff, 

 

                                Vs. 

 

John Doe 

                                                                   Defendant. 

 

 

DECLARATION OF DEFENDANT 

 

Court File No. XX-XX-XX-XXXX 

 

 

I, the undersigned, state as follows: 

On August 27th 2020 I received a letter from Messerli & Kramer PA pertaining to a discovery plan. The letter included initial correspondence, a proposed discovery plan, and required initial disclosures.  

In the initial correspondence contained within the letter I was instructed to “Contact our firm within the next fourteen days to work out a discovery plan. An attorney can be reached by calling 844-841-0509;” 

On August 28th 2020 at approximately 12:15 PM I called Messerli & Kramer PA from my parents phone at the number provided by the instructions in the letter to discuss working out a discovery plan and amendments needed to the proposed discovery plan with the plaintiff's attorney listed as Axxxxx X. Wxxxxxxx.  

My phone call was answered by someone other than the plaintiff's attorney who introduced himself as “Dxxx Fxxxxx”. I introduced myself to Mr. Fxxxxxx explaining that I was calling in regards to a proposed discovery plan letter that I’d received and asked to speak to the plaintiff’s listed attorney Axxxxx X. Wxxxxxxx.   

Mr. Fxxxxxx then requested my SSN to “bring up the account” (which I refused). When I again asked Mr. Fxxxxxx to speak with the plaintiff's attorney Axxxxx X. Wxxxxxxx in regards to the discovery plan I was told that she wasn't available. When I asked Mr. Forester when she would be available, he said he did not know. I then asked if he could please have the plaintiff's attorney Axxxxx X. Wxxxxxxx contact me in regards to the proposed discovery plan and amendment thereof and I was told that she doesn't "reach out" to people. He then informed me that he'd just noticed that the plaintiff's attorney had put a note in my file that they would be willing to discuss settling the debt for the full amount listed.  To which I again politely asked that the plaintiff's attorney Axxxxx X. Wxxxxxxx contact me in regards to the proposed discovery plan at her earliest convenience.  

To date I've received no reply on the matter. 

In the state of Minnesota, county of, I declare under penalty of perjury that everything that I have stated in this document is true and correct. Minn. Stat. § 358.116. 

 

Dated:                                                                                                                                                 

Signed:           John Doe

 

On 10/18/2021 at 5:59 AM, WhoCares1000 said:

Now, as for the Zoom hearing, unfortunately if the library is the only place you can attend the hearing, you will have to do that. I would talk to the court clerk though and as for options. They might have a room in the courthouse designed for situations like this.

I called the court clerk and the Zoom meeting can be attended by phone or I can go to the courthouse and they'll provide me with a room and a tablet.

 

 

On 10/18/2021 at 5:59 AM, WhoCares1000 said:

It almost sounds like you are homeless (or very close to). If so, discuss that with the PRA attorney. One of the good things about Minnesota Civil Law is that in order to renew a judgement, a new case has to be filed before the 10 year period is up and with the cost of MN courts, most don't bother to chase good money after bad. Although MN makes it easy to levy or garnish, there are some good exemptions to that and you should research those exemptions too. It might be possible that you are collection proof and if so, PRA just spent a ton of money in court for month.

I'm not homeless per se (there are many folks who have it far worse) as I have a few places that I can go when I need it, but it's been a bit of a rough stretch. I'm currently unemployed, on MA, I  don't own a home of my own, a bank account, or any real property of value other than a car that seems to be broken down more often than not.

Pardon my ignorance but what is a PRA attorney? If that's the opposing counsel I had divulged my current situation to them in the cover letter to my answer but it didn't seem to matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm also working on my response to the SMJ. 

I'm not sure if I'm way off base or not though. Any pointers would be greatly appreciated.

 

                                                                                                             DISTRICT COURT 

STATE OF MINNESOTA                                                                  JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

                                                                         COURT FILE NUMBER: XX-XX-XX-XXXX 

COUNTY OF                                                               CONSUMER CREDIT CONTRACT 

 

Midland Credit Management, Inc  

                                                                   Plaintiff, 

 

                                Vs. 

 

JOHN DOE 

                                                                   Defendant. 

 

 

 

 

Affidavit in Support of  

Responsive Motion 

 

 

 

I JOHN DOE, being first duly sworn, deposes and says: 

My name is JOHN DOE, and I have personal knowledge of these facts: 

I submit this affidavit in opposition to the plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, for the purpose of showing that the Plaintiff has not presented facts essential for a Summary Judgement. 

I dispute that I owe any alleged debt to the plaintiff Midland Credit Management Inc. or Messerli & Kramer PA. There is an undisputable Lack of Privity as I have never entered into any sort of contractual or debtor/creditor arrangements with the Plaintiff. I have never entered into contract, signed any agreement, purchased/traded any goods or services, or borrowed any monies/credit with either of the aforementioned parties. Furthermore, no tangible evidence has been provided proving the plaintiff’s claim of ownership of the alleged debt such as; a purchase agreement, bill of sale, assignment of contract, forward flow agreement, list of accounts, nor has the debt been validated. 

 

Defendant’s response to the movants Findings of Fact: 

1. "That on or about May 25, 2008, Defendant(s) entered into a consumer credit contract with Capital One Bank (USA) N.A., to purchase goods and services on a credit card account" 

  • Dispute. That a Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided said contract signed by the defendant or any tangible evidence in support of this claim. 

2. "That Defendant(s) were issued a credit card account bearing account number XXXXXXXXXXXX1234 (Account)." 

  • Dispute. That a Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided any tangible evidence in support of this claim. 

3. "That Defendant(s) used the account to purchase goods and services and made payments against the outstanding balance of Defendant('s') account." 

  • Dispute. That a Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided any tangible evidence in support of this claim or ownership of the alleged debt. 

4. "the Defendant(s) last made payment against the outstanding balance of Defendant(s) account on June 14, 2018." 

  • Dispute. This claim is false.  Per the documents provided by the plaintiff a payment was made on 07/16/2021. 

5. "Defendent(s) failed to pay the installments due under the contract and that such a failure constitutes default." 

  • Dispute. That a Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided said contract signed by the defendant or any tangible evidence in support this claim. 

6. "There remains an outstanding account balance due of $4,393.50." 

  • Dispute. That a Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided any tangible evidence in support of this claim or ownership of the alleged debt. 

7. "Defendant(s) was/were duly served with the Summons and Complaint on July 21, 2020. 

  • Dispute. It's my belief that the complaint and summons were not duly served pursuant to rule 4 of Minnesota Court Rules of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff’s Summons and Complaint were not served “Upon an individual by delivering a copy to the individual personally or by leaving a copy at the individual's usual place of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein”. Per the Certificate of Service of Bxxxx J Pxxxxx and the Witness Statement of Jxxxx  Bxxxx, the Summons and Complaint were left unattended and without witness, folded up and placed in the gap of the front door of the defendant's parents' home. 

 

 The plaintiff has presented a case rife with unsubstantiated claims and has provided no tangible evidence in support of proving its claims. Thus, it is humbly requested that the court deny the plaintiff’s motion for Summary Judgement and consider dismissing the plaintiff’s case with prejudice for lack of evidence. 

 

 

In the state of Minnesota, county of Anoka, I declare under penalty of perjury that everything that I have stated in this document is true and correct. Minn. Stat. § 358.116. 

 

Dated: 

Signed: John Doe                                                                                                                                                                                                 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, the affidavit in support of responsive motion should only list the facts. The actual for to use to respond to their motion is Responsive Notice of Motion and Motion which is also on the MN Court forms website. You use that to respond to their motion with the affidavit and declaration to back that up. As for the relief, don't ask for too much. What I would put in is that the court denies the plaintiff's motion and require the plaintiff to do discovery and actually be willing to discuss this with you over the phone. You can (and should put in) that you pray for any other relief deemed appropriate by the court. If you use the MN court forms (and you should), that last line is already there. That way, if the court believes that dismissing the case is appropriate, they can do that. The rest look fine to me but others can respond.

As to PRA, I thought PRA was the JDB, not Midland. My bad.

Finally, if you are on MA, then the next question is, during the next 10 years, will you be leaving Minnesota and/or getting a job? If you expect to have issues still, then this is going to be a waste of their time. They cannot collect from anyone receiving government assistance and for 6 months after such assistance has ended under Minnesota Law. Minnesota is also one of the few states which does not allow for the easy renewal of judgements. If you lose, they can keep sending you financial depositions but if you situation is the same each time and you fill it out and inform them of that fact, there is nothing they can do. They will send them however to try to trip you up to get you arrested for contempt of court. At least for today, it sounds like you are collection proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, WhoCares1000 said:

First off, the affidavit in support of responsive motion should only list the facts. The actual for to use to respond to their motion is Responsive Notice of Motion and Motion which is also on the MN Court forms website. You use that to respond to their motion with the affidavit and declaration to back that up. As for the relief, don't ask for too much. What I would put in is that the court denies the plaintiff's motion and require the plaintiff to do discovery and actually be willing to discuss this with you over the phone. You can (and should put in) that you pray for any other relief deemed appropriate by the court. If you use the MN court forms (and you should), that last line is already there. That way, if the court believes that dismissing the case is appropriate, they can do that. The rest look fine to me but others can respond.

As to PRA, I thought PRA was the JDB, not Midland. My bad.

Finally, if you are on MA, then the next question is, during the next 10 years, will you be leaving Minnesota and/or getting a job? If you expect to have issues still, then this is going to be a waste of their time. They cannot collect from anyone receiving government assistance and for 6 months after such assistance has ended under Minnesota Law. Minnesota is also one of the few states which does not allow for the easy renewal of judgements. If you lose, they can keep sending you financial depositions but if you situation is the same each time and you fill it out and inform them of that fact, there is nothing they can do. They will send them however to try to trip you up to get you arrested for contempt of court. At least for today, it sounds like you are collection proof.

Good morning and thank you for your reply,

I currently have the forms from mncourts.gov;

[PACKET]Civil Responsive Motion
CIV701 Instructions - Responsive Generic Civil Motion and Affidavit
CIV702 Responsive Notice of Motion and Motion
CIV703 Affidavit in Support of Responsive Motion

I know it may sound silly to those who are familiar with these forms and processes but I am just struggling a bit with figuring out what information to put on which form. I will be at the library for a good portion of the day trying to get all my ducks in a row and these forms ready to be filed/served.

As far as being "collection proof", shortly after I received the complaint and summons I contacted a non-profit group in my area that provides free legal representation in non-criminal matters to low income residents. They were very nice people and I'm glad that I contacted them and although they weren't currently able offer representation in my case they did patiently answer some questions that I had on the matter. They too had informed me that I might currently be "judgement proof". I was also told that although they could not currently offer representation on my case that they could help me with bankruptcy if I needed. So I guess if all else fails that may also be an option.

 

Although I have dropped the ball in several regards with this case I just want to try and do everything that I can on my end in the process. I have looked through hundreds of JDB cases in the MN court records system in an effort to try and find some references of what to do. All of the cases that I have seen so far have had no legal representation and have ended in either default or summary judgement (predominantly for the defendants failure to respond/appear). I did not want that to be me, so here I am stumbling along through the process.

 

Thank you for your assistance and patience, it is much appreciated. I apologize if some of the questions seems silly but this is all a bit out of my wheelhouse.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okeydokey. Thank you@WhoCares1000, I think that I may be getting a little better grasp on things.

Here are the mock ups of what I have so far combining MNCIV702 and MNCIV703 with my info.

I'm also curious if I should motion to strike Midland's "Legal Specialist"'s affidavit in support of the plaintiff's motion for summary judgement as hearsay as she has no personal knowledge of Capital One's business practices or record keeping, only claimed knowledge of Midland's records and business practice.

Please let me know if I'm still way off track.

Thank you kindly. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Responsive notice of motion and motion.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                                                     DISTRICT COURT 

                                                                                                JUDICIAL DIDTRICT 

STATE OF MINNESOTA                                COURT FILE NUMBER: xx-xx-xx-xxxx 

COUNTY OF                                                        CONSUMER CREDIT CONTRACT 

 

Midland Credit Management, Inc  

                                                                   Plaintiff, 

 

                                Vs. 

 

John Doe

                                                              Defendant. 

 

 

 

  

Responsive Notice of 

Motion and Motion 

 

 

 

TO: 

JDB Lawyer 

1234 Fake Street 

Anytown, MN 12345 

 

Notice 

I will ask the court for an Order at a hearing scheduled as follows: 

Date:__________________________________________  Time: ___________________________ a.m./p.m. 

Courthouse address: ____________________________________________________________________________ 

Telephone: ___________________________________________________________________________________ 

Note: Please contact the court with your current phone number and mailing address in case they need to notify you of any location or date/time change. 

 

Motion 

I am asking the court for an Order as follows: 

1.[X] Denying the other party’s request for: Summary Judgement. 

  • The plaintiff has motioned the court to issue a summary judgement on the case, claiming that there is “no remaining issue of genuine fact”. However, the defendant greatly disagrees with this statement and would argue that there indeed does remain many issues of genuine fact. 

2. Compel the plaintiff to participate with the defendant in discovery. 

  • The plaintiff through it's actions have denied the defendants participation in the discovery process.

3. Extend the time period allowed for discovery. 

4. For any other relief the court feels is fair and equitable.  

Use another sheet of paper if you need more room.  

 

Acknowledgment  

By presenting this form to the court, I certify that to the best of my knowledge, information, and belief, the following statements are true. I understand that if a statement is not true, the court can order a penalty against me (such as to pay money to the other party, pay court costs, and/or other penalties).  

1. The information I included in this form is based on facts and supported by existing law.  

2. I am not presenting this form for any improper purpose. I am not using this form to:  

a. Harass anyone;  

b. Cause unnecessary delay in the case; or  

c. Needlessly increase the cost of litigation.  

3. No judicial officer has said I am a frivolous litigant.  

4. There is no court order saying I cannot serve or file this form.  

5. This form does not contain any "restricted identifiers" or confidential information as defined in Rule 11 of the General Rules of Practice (https://www.revisor.mn.gov/ CIV702 State ENG Rev 1/21 www.mncourts.gov/forms Page 3 of 3 Responsive Civil Motion court_rules/gp/id/11/) or the Rules of Public Access to Records of the Judicial Branch (https://www.revisor.mn.gov/court_rules/rule/ra-toh/).  

6. If I need to file "restricted identifiers," confidential information, or a confidential document, I will use Form 11.1 and/or Form 11.2, as required by Rule 11.  

Dated:______________________________________  __________________________________________ 

                                                                                                      Signature  

Name: ____________________________________ 

Address: ___________________________________ 

City/State/Zip_______________________________ 

Telephone: _________________________________ 

E-mail address: _____________________________ 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Affidavit In support of Responsive Motion.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------                                                                                                            DISTRICT COURT 

                                                                                          TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 

STATE OF MINNESOTA                                      COURT FILE NUMBER: xx-xx-xx-xxxx

COUNTY OF                                                             CONSUMER CREDIT CONTRACT 

 

Midland Credit Management, Inc  

                                                                   Plaintiff, 

 

                                Vs. 

 

John Doe 

                                                                   Defendant. 

 

 

 

 

Affidavit in Support of  

Responsive Motion 

 

 

 

My name is John Doe.  

The following facts support my responsive motion: 

 

On Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgement 

The plaintiff has motioned the court to issue a summary judgement on the case, claiming that there is “no remaining issue of genuine fact”. However, I greatly disagree with this statement and would argue that there indeed does remain many issues of genuine fact.  

The plaintiff being bound to the burden of proof and preponderance of evidence has presented a case rife with unsubstantiated claims and has provided no tangible evidence in support of proving its claims. 

 I dispute that I owe any alleged debt to the plaintiff Midland Credit Management Inc. or Messerli & Kramer PA. There is an indisputable Lack of Privity as I have never entered into any sort of contractual or debtor/creditor arrangements with the Plaintiff. I have never entered into contract, signed any agreement, purchased/traded any goods or services, or borrowed any monies/credit with either of the aforementioned parties. Furthermore, no tangible evidence has been provided proving the plaintiff’s claim of ownership of the alleged debt such as; a purchase agreement, bill of sale, assignment of contract, forward flow agreement, list of accounts, nor has the debt been validated. 

 

 Defendant’s response to the movants Findings of Fact: 

1. "That on or about May 25, 2008, Defendant(s) entered into a consumer credit contract with Capital One Bank (USA) N.A., to purchase goods and services on a credit card account" 

  • Dispute. That Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided said contract signed by the defendant or any tangible evidence in support of this claim. 

2. "That Defendant(s) were issued a credit card account bearing account number XXXXXXXXXXXX1234 (Account)." 

  • Dispute. That Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided any tangible evidence in support of this claim. 

3. "That Defendant(s) used the account to purchase goods and services and made payments against the outstanding balance of Defendant('s') account." 

  • Dispute. That Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided any tangible evidence in support of this claim or ownership of the alleged debt. 

4. "The Defendant(s) last made payment against the outstanding balance of Defendant(s) account on June 14, 2018." 

  • Dispute. This claim is false.  Per the documents provided by the plaintiff a payment was made on 07/16/2021. 

5. "Defendant(s) failed to pay the installments due under the contract and that such a failure constitutes default." 

  • Dispute. That Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided said contract signed by the defendant or any tangible evidence in support this claim. 

6. "There remains an outstanding account balance due of $4,393.50." 

  • Dispute. That Fact Is Not Supported by any Admissible Evidence. The plaintiff has not provided any tangible evidence in support of this claim or ownership of the alleged debt. 

7. "Defendant(s) was/were duly served with the Summons and Complaint on July 21, 2020. 

  • Dispute. It's my belief that the complaint and summons were not duly served pursuant to rule 4 of Minnesota Court Rules of Civil Procedure. The plaintiff’s Summons and Complaint were not served “Upon an individual by delivering a copy to the individual personally or by leaving a copy at the individual's usual place of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein”. Per the Certificate of Service of John J Process Server and the Witness Statement of John Doe Sr, the Summons and Complaint were left unattended and without witness, folded up and placed in the gap of the front door of the defendant's parents' home. 

 

On Defendant’s request to compel plaintiff’s participation in discovery and extend the time frame granted for discovery. 

On August 27th 2020 I received a letter from Messerli & Kramer PA pertaining to a discovery plan. The letter included initial correspondence, a proposed discovery plan, and required initial disclosures.  

In the initial correspondence contained within the letter I was instructed to “Contact our firm within the next fourteen days to work out a discovery plan. An attorney can be reached by calling 844-841-0509;” 

On August 28th 2020 at approximately 12:15 PM from a phone at my parents home I called Messerli & Kramer PA at the number provided by the instructions in the letter to discuss working out a discovery plan and amendments needed to the proposed discovery plan with the plaintiff's attorney listed as Jane J Attorney.  

My phone call was answered by someone other than the plaintiff's attorney who introduced himself as “D.F.”. I introduced myself to Mr. F explaining that I was calling in regards to a proposed discovery plan letter that I’d received and asked to speak to the plaintiff’s listed attorney Jane J Attorney.   

Mr. F requested my SSN to “bring up the account” (which I refused). Mr F. then asked for the file number on the paperwork, which I provided. When I again asked Mr. F to speak with the plaintiff's attorney Jane J Attorney in regards to the discovery plan I was told that she wasn't available. When I asked Mr. F when she would be available, he said he did not know. I then asked if he could please have the plaintiff's attorney Jane J Attorney contact me in regards to the proposed discovery plan and amendment thereof and I was told that she doesn't "reach out" to people. He then informed me that he'd just noticed that the plaintiff's attorney had put a note in my file that they would be willing to discuss settling the debt for the full amount listed. To which I again politely asked that the plaintiff's attorney Jane J Attorney contact me in regards to the proposed discovery plan at her earliest convenience.  

To date I've received no reply on the matter. 

 

In the state of Minnesota, county of , I declare under penalty of perjury that everything that I have stated in this document is true and correct. Minn. Stat. § 358.116. 

 

Dated:______________________________________                       __________________________________________ 

                                                                                                                          Signature  

           ___________________________________________             Name: ____________________________________ 

          County and State where signed                                Address: ___________________________________ 

                                                                                                City/State/Zip_______________________________ 

                                                                                                Telephone: _________________________________ 

                                                                                                E-mail address: _____________________________ 

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.