Frivolous Lawsuit - Business Self Representation?

[Tania123]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Ohio

My company is a one member LLC, and I am being sued on a baseless lawsuit, that even my attorney agrees is frivolous.

I am in IL, but I am being sued in Ohio for sending an alledged junk fax. The attorney and plaintiff file 100s of these a month, and its well known in their county court what a scumbag attorney the plaintiff is, and he typically goes for default judgements.

I hired an attorney in Ohio, and plaintiff did not show up for the first hearing, he was warned the case would get dismissed, but then he showed for the second, which they laid out a schedule of discovery due dates, expert witness due dates, etc.

I know for a fact that the attorney on the other side, has NOTHING, but since he showed up, my attorney is now asking me for a $15,000 retainer. I only make $30K a year.

She told me to let the matter go, as its not a cost benefit situation. But that would mean a default judgement on my company, which has serious issues for me down the line.

Not to mention, that this yahoo is asking for class action status, (a baseless claim) but if I do nto litigate they will get a default judgement.

I wanted to defend myself, by I was told that as an LLC, I could not.

Does anyone know of any court cases or exceptions to this rule? After all, I am a one member LLC, which is the same as a sole proprietor.

Another possibility was me just showing up anyway. Its obvious that this court does not follow any kind of civil procedure, as the opposing attorney has already violated many of them.

If I try the case myself, I can afford to go after him, counter claiming frivolousness, and sanctions. He is known for clogging up the the system with these frivolous lawsuits, but I suspect that the business owners, like me, can not afford to litigate.

Any suggestions on this matter would be greatly appreciated.What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)?

 

[tranquility]

After all, I am a one member LLC, which is the same as a sole proprietor.

A single member LLC is a disregarded entity solely for tax purposes.

If I try the case myself, I can afford to go after him, counter claiming frivolousness, and sanctions. He is known for clogging up the the system with these frivolous lawsuits, but I suspect that the business owners, like me, can not afford to litigate.

Why do I believe there is some reason why you were targeted? Perhaps a fax sent to a person who is not already in a business relationship with you?

Are you being sued in small claims court or in regular court?

 

[Tania123]

I am being sued in regular court. If you type in the attorney's name in google, +extortionist, his name comes up as a case study for frivolous lawsuits.

I understand the one member thing, is just a tax entity classification, but was hoping for some type of exception where I can litigate this without having to pay an attorney a $15K fee. Having trouble finding a free one, which typically focuses on immigration, landlord, bankruptcy, etc.. not frivolous lawsuits.

Yes, I was targeted, do not know why, or how. the plaintiff, is the same plaintiff in 1000s of cases. My husband thinks its my business address.

Its funny, because I got some junk mail from this guy, he sent me three extortion letters, and I just laughed at him. I thought it was a joke.

Then, I did a background check on him, and found out this is how he operates. Sanctions are my only counter claim.

 

[tranquility]

I think you need an attorney. Sorry.

Additionally, the federal law is quite encompassing. You have not described the actions which targeted you, but I bet you, by the basis of what is or is not true, have brought the suit down upon yourself based on illegal activity. Should it *be* illegal activity? No.

But, it is.

Good luck with your suit. My disagreement with the minutiae of the federal governmental operatives deciding things not their business is complete. On a side note, I HATE rubbish faxes. Hate them. If you send junk faxes, I sincerely hope you lose your suit and are less likely to send them in the future.

Interesting, the dichotomy between what I want and what I think "fair".

 

[Tania123]

Thats the thing.. I did not send the fax.... This guy is claiming that I did, and he has done this to thousands of small businesses. Its baseless, and frivolous.

But that is the law. You can accuse someone of anything, and they still have to investigate it. My roommate in college lied and said someone raped her, when she fabricated the whole thing. The poor guy went through the hell.

But thats OK. I did talk to a few attornies, and this guy will never be able to collect. There is no money, and the judgement is state specific.

If it were a federal law, then I would be in luck. I could move the case to my venue.

But since its a state law, I cant. I am goign to let this go, and then go after him in my own venue and sue him for damages, defamation, etc..As a person I do not need an attorney to do this, and my case would not be frivolous, since I have proof, and its not baseless. I doubt I will do that though, because I would never be able to collect even if I did win. Thats what a lot of attornies are saying about this guy. They say, "people like that, unless you are dealing with an ATT, etc.. typically you will never collect anyway, so its not worth it.

Thats the case with me. This guy makes a living going after businesses, with baseless claims, just to extort money out of them.

Thanks for listening. Just writing this all out and thinking about it, has made me feel better.

 

[Rexlan]

I agree with Tranquility.

Additionally you apparently wanted to hide behind and enjoy the protections of an LLC and now complain because that has come full circle.

You will need an attorney and I suspect that the plaintiff is aware of this.

Why would any attorney want to work for you free?

 

[Mass_Shyster]

I am being sued in regular court. If you type in the attorney's name in google, +extortionist, his name comes up as a case study for frivolous lawsuits.

I understand the one member thing, is just a tax entity classification, but was hoping for some type of exception where I can litigate this without having to pay an attorney a $15K fee. Having trouble finding a free one, which typically focuses on immigration, landlord, bankruptcy, etc.. not frivolous lawsuits.

Yes, I was targeted, do not know why, or how. the plaintiff, is the same plaintiff in 1000s of cases. My husband thinks its my business address.

Its funny, because I got some junk mail from this guy, he sent me three extortion letters, and I just laughed at him. I thought it was a joke.

Then, I did a background check on him, and found out this is how he operates. Sanctions are my only counter claim.

If he's files thousands of these cases, you can probably locate an attorney who had defended hundreds of these cases. He or she may be willing to take a smaller retainer.

 

[Tania123]

rex whatever,
"Additionally you apparently wanted to hide behind and enjoy the protections of an LLC and now complain because that has come full circle"

This statement is just idiotic. LLC or corporation status, is just the difference between personal and business, nothing more or less.. Your statement is idiotic, and just plane senseless.

Senior,
Yes, thanks for your post, very encouraging. the more I dig, the more information I find, and there are attorneys that want to help the cause. (thank goodness). People like this guy, give their profession a bad name, and since this case is so blatant, (I mean, really, you can google his extortion letters and bam, their they are) they see an easy win. How do you get hard evidence like that? I did a background check on him, and apparently he is worth suing, but I doubt I will put the time effort into it.

I have a real career, family, etcl that mean more to me. This guy, this is all he does, and all he has, and its not even worth it. Seems stupid to me.

I've come grips with is, and I am just going to let it go. the whole jurisdiction issue should get the case dismissed, and even if he tries to collect, I have no assets in his state. This whole thing is a joke and mokery of our legal system.

 

[Zigner]

rex whatever,
"Additionally you apparently wanted to hide behind and enjoy the protections of an LLC and now complain because that has come full circle"

You chose the LLC to avoid personal exposure. The down side is that you cannot defend the LLC. The statement was dead-on accurate.

 

[justalayman]

Gee, I wonder if the plaintiff/bad guy can have the judgment domesticated into OP's home state and take actions to collect.

HHmm, things to think about.


tania, if the plaintiff has NO case, he wouldn't survive the initial review. Have you filed for summary judgment based on your claims of absolutely no support for the case? It would seem that if this is based on a junk fax, unless he has a fax from you, he has no case and since you said you did not send a fax, he obviously cannot have one to base his case on.

Not to mention, that this yahoo is asking for class action status,

for this to even be considered, you would have had to send crapfax's to multiple people so if you did not send any crapfax's, there is no possibility of this happening.
Your expression of your concerns is a bit telling about how you got into this position.

 

[BOR]

tania, if the plaintiff has NO case, he wouldn't survive the initial review. Have you filed for summary judgment based on your claims of absolutely no support for the case? It would seem that if this is based on a junk fax, unless he has a fax from you, he has no case and since you said you did not send a fax, he obviously cannot have one to base his case on.

Initially, that would be a 12 (b) (6) motion, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Unless the law has changed, I did not look, regular/municipal court has a jurisdiction limit of 15 tho and has subject matter juridsdiction over any case that Common Pleas court would have.

The Rules of Civil Procedure apply, SJ may come later?

 

[justalayman]

Initially, that would be a 12 (b) (6) motion, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

this is from 12(b)

When a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted presents matters outside the pleading and such matters are not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as a motion for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 56.

 

[BOR]

this is from 12(b)

I am aware of that, BUT, a rule 56 motion is not filed first, it shall only be treated as such, facts present. IOW, there is no further action by the court after a grant of SJ. After a 12 b 6 is denied, then there is further litigation by the moving party.

IF a SJ motion is granted, either under authority of 12 or 56, that is it.

A SJ motion can be denied or granted. If denied, just as a 12 b 6, litigation continues.

 

[justalayman]

not arguing, trying to learn

(B) For defending party. A party against whom a claim, counterclaim, or cross-claim is asserted or a declaratory judgment is sought may, at any time, move with or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in the party’s favor as to all or any part of the claim, counterclaim, cross-claim, or declaratory judgment action. If the action has been set for pretrial or trial, a motion for summary judgment may be made only with leave of court.

does that not imply that a motion for SJ can be made anytime prior to pretrial? and once pretrial etc. has been set, the court can still allow such a motion?

and if so, cannot the same facts used to support a 12(b)(6) motion be used to support such a motion for SJ?

 

[BOR]

not arguing, trying to learn



does that not imply that a motion for SJ can be made anytime prior to pretrial? and once pretrial etc. has been set, the court can still allow such a motion?

and if so, cannot the same facts used to support a 12(b)(6) motion be used to support such a motion for SJ?

Yes, you can file a SJ motion before any 12 b 6, or Answer, I did not mean to imply you could not, it is just not done too often from my experience.

A SJ motion, if I remember the wording from case law means that there is "no genuine issue of material fact that can be litigated".

This is such a direct pleading it means that even if the allegations are taken as true, it supports no basis in law to proceed further.

SJ support usually comes out after the facts are more revealed through depositions/interrogatories, investigations, etc., that were not present on thier face.