seniorjudge
Senior Member
Leinalani said:
I think what OP is saying is that the first case was dismissed for whatever reason.
The second case was re-filed and she never knew about it.
OP, did you move and not leave a forwarding address?
-
FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.
I'm totally worried
- Thread starter mattyndavidsmom
- Start date
Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills Please click a topic or scroll down for more.
I think what OP is saying is that the first case was dismissed for whatever reason.
The second case was re-filed and she never knew about it.
OP, did you move and not leave a forwarding address?
badapple40
Senior Member
Most states allow you to set aside judgments on these grounds. Sounds to me like you need to hire an attorney.
And, what ties, if any, do you have to the original state where this was filed?
And, what ties, if any, do you have to the original state where this was filed?
mattyndavidsmom
Member
no hearing
See, they never served me. I don't know about this judgement or how it came about. This has been my whole question...WHY didn't I know about this...WHY was there never a hearing...and HOW did they get a judgement without me knowing? Nobody has been trying to collect from me, I do not know of any hearing...nothing. My oldest son passed away and I have been out of town because of that for an extended period of time. But this is the first I have heard of the judgement, the first summons I have gotten. There has been nothing since it was thrown out by the judge two years ago. This is what I don't understand. They can get a judgement behind my back? Without notifying me? What if they tried to deliver a summons while I was out of state? Can they rule then and say I ignored them? If they can't deliver the summons, wouldn't they put something in the mail to me?
See, they never served me. I don't know about this judgement or how it came about. This has been my whole question...WHY didn't I know about this...WHY was there never a hearing...and HOW did they get a judgement without me knowing? Nobody has been trying to collect from me, I do not know of any hearing...nothing. My oldest son passed away and I have been out of town because of that for an extended period of time. But this is the first I have heard of the judgement, the first summons I have gotten. There has been nothing since it was thrown out by the judge two years ago. This is what I don't understand. They can get a judgement behind my back? Without notifying me? What if they tried to deliver a summons while I was out of state? Can they rule then and say I ignored them? If they can't deliver the summons, wouldn't they put something in the mail to me?
mattyndavidsmom
Member
Utah
This happened in Utah. I live there but have been out of state for an extended period of time...My mother died in an airplane accident, then my cousin died from a wrong prescription prescribed to him, then my son died of an anyeurism. It has been a terrible time in my life and I have been gone. Yes, what they said earlier was right. It was dismissed...then somehow got reopened and they got a judgement. This reopening and the judgement was all done without my knowledge. This is my main problem with the whole thing. I thought I should have been notified and at least been able to defend myself.
This happened in Utah. I live there but have been out of state for an extended period of time...My mother died in an airplane accident, then my cousin died from a wrong prescription prescribed to him, then my son died of an anyeurism. It has been a terrible time in my life and I have been gone. Yes, what they said earlier was right. It was dismissed...then somehow got reopened and they got a judgement. This reopening and the judgement was all done without my knowledge. This is my main problem with the whole thing. I thought I should have been notified and at least been able to defend myself.
mattyndavidsmom
Member
attorney
I don't really have an attorney right now...I have pre paid legal and they do very little I've learned.
I don't really have an attorney right now...I have pre paid legal and they do very little I've learned.
mattyndavidsmom said:
Improper notification of the defendant is common in these debt disputes. I'm not saying it's right, just common. I'm not sure what your state's legal service process is but it seems that they've already gone and gotten a judgement against you.
You really should consider getting an attorney if you want to appeal this decision.
mattyndavidsmom
Member
Right
That's what the folks at pre paid legal said. They said that if it was improper that I can have the judgement removed. I was not notified AT ALL and there is a judgement. According to the clerk they have a judgement. So you are saying, that I should have been notified before the judgement right? That's my biggest beef is that I wasn't notified...kind of got blind sighted. In all my grief...and now this.
That's what the folks at pre paid legal said. They said that if it was improper that I can have the judgement removed. I was not notified AT ALL and there is a judgement. According to the clerk they have a judgement. So you are saying, that I should have been notified before the judgement right? That's my biggest beef is that I wasn't notified...kind of got blind sighted. In all my grief...and now this.
mattyndavidsmom said:That's what the folks at pre paid legal said. They said that if it was improper that I can have the judgement removed. I was not notified AT ALL and there is a judgement. According to the clerk they have a judgement. So you are saying, that I should have been notified before the judgement right? That's my biggest beef is that I wasn't notified...kind of got blind sighted. In all my grief...and now this.
Were you actually out of state when this judgement was made? Do you have a court date for the day the judgement was made?
And yes, every person has to be notified of a court hearing by a summons. It is part of the procedure that the plaintiff has to follow when filing a complaint. Now, what you and your lawyer have to do is prove that they didn't serve you properly. But, in order for the judge to make a ruling without you there, they would have to show that they did serve you.
And another thing you should know. In the case that you do take this to court and you win, that doesn't mean that they automatically can not file another suit against you for whatever monies you owe or they say you owe. What you're ultimately fighting is that you weren't served right, so the judgement has to be dismissed. Not that they have no right to sue you for the money their asking for or can never come back and sue you again after.
After this dispute, they will probably come back and sue you for what's owed. At which point you can dispute.
mattyndavidsmom
Member
Okayt
Yes, they must have served me but I got nothing. That's my whole grief..they are being shady just like they were 2 years ago. I didn't know of this summons for the judgement. I know that they couldn't have done everything by procedure or I would have gotten the original summons that must have been sent out before the judgement. What is expensive to appeal it? Couldn't be the 14k they want for sure. Seems it would have to cost less then that. Any ideas and yes I will keep you informed.
Yes, they must have served me but I got nothing. That's my whole grief..they are being shady just like they were 2 years ago. I didn't know of this summons for the judgement. I know that they couldn't have done everything by procedure or I would have gotten the original summons that must have been sent out before the judgement. What is expensive to appeal it? Couldn't be the 14k they want for sure. Seems it would have to cost less then that. Any ideas and yes I will keep you informed.
mattyndavidsmom
Member
attorney
It was dismissed due to the fact that the attys did not follow procedure. I just talked to an attorney and he said that they "mailed" me the papers. However, I did not get these papers. So now I have to do a motion to set aside based on the fact that this was all done behind my back and they will have to prove that they mailed me the papers. Which they won't be able to do as I DID NOT receive anything. Will it be a he said she said thing if they say they mailed me yet I didn't get it? Or will they have to somehow prove they mailed me something ...like show the certification that I recieved it??? Will the judge just rule in their favor because they "claim" they notified me by mail?
It was dismissed due to the fact that the attys did not follow procedure. I just talked to an attorney and he said that they "mailed" me the papers. However, I did not get these papers. So now I have to do a motion to set aside based on the fact that this was all done behind my back and they will have to prove that they mailed me the papers. Which they won't be able to do as I DID NOT receive anything. Will it be a he said she said thing if they say they mailed me yet I didn't get it? Or will they have to somehow prove they mailed me something ...like show the certification that I recieved it??? Will the judge just rule in their favor because they "claim" they notified me by mail?
OP - I'd agree with seniorjudge and badapple40 that you should have representation, if you're going to be trying to vacate a judgment. If you can't afford counsel, get the most information that you can from legal aid, but also ask legal aid about the possibility of "pro bono" (free) representation or assistance through the State Bar.
One thing to understand about vacating a judgment is that "the whole process" also normally entails going back to square one and litigating plaintiff's claim. Vacating the judgment doesn't mean walking away and never looking back. It means re-starting the litigation. So you still have to think about the credit card debt.
In an early post, you said "The credit card in dispute was removed from my credit as I showed it wasn't mine." That makes me curious as to how there could be any judgment, not because of the service issue, which has been discussed at length, but because of that implied statement of non-liability. If you can prove that you're not culpable, even if you were properly served, you certainly need to find some way to get representation, even if counsel must agree to accept payments over time or after the sale of the house.
And while you've repeatedly stated that you know or were told that there's an existing judgment against you, is there any possibility that judgment was only taken against your ex for a card on which you both were jointly liable? Utah permits a non-served joint defendant to be brought into a case and bound post-judgment.
"Utah Court Rule 71B. Proceedings where parties not summoned.
(a) Effect of failure to serve all defendants. Where the action is against two or more defendants and the summons is served on one or more, but not all of them, the plaintiff may proceed against the defendants served in the same manner as if they were the only defendants.
(b) Proceedings after judgment against parties not originally served. When a judgment has been recovered against one or more, but not all, of several persons jointly indebted upon an obligation, the plaintiff may require any person not originally served with the summons to appear and show cause why he should not be bound by the judgment in the same manner as though he had been originally served with process."
There's more to the Rule, which I won't bother to cite if it's not applicable, but I wondered if it might not be be worth noting. The way the judgment creditor "requires [a person] to appear and show cause" is by serving a summons. It doesn't make complete sense that they're tring to serve a summons on you if there's already a judgment against you, but that's repeated throughout this thread.
If, however, there is a judgment, then they probably are trying to compel you into court for an asset exam. It wouldn't be appropriate to tell you to ignore such an order, if it is served, so I didn't tell you that. On the other hand, unless Leinalani absolutely knows that Utah jails litigants for civil contempt, I personally think that it's rather irresponsible to say that you "could face jail time". I do find that Utah confers that discretionary power, but all states do and "discretionary" is the operative word. The likelihood of it happening to a disabled single parent is too remote for me to contemplate.
One thing to understand about vacating a judgment is that "the whole process" also normally entails going back to square one and litigating plaintiff's claim. Vacating the judgment doesn't mean walking away and never looking back. It means re-starting the litigation. So you still have to think about the credit card debt.
In an early post, you said "The credit card in dispute was removed from my credit as I showed it wasn't mine." That makes me curious as to how there could be any judgment, not because of the service issue, which has been discussed at length, but because of that implied statement of non-liability. If you can prove that you're not culpable, even if you were properly served, you certainly need to find some way to get representation, even if counsel must agree to accept payments over time or after the sale of the house.
And while you've repeatedly stated that you know or were told that there's an existing judgment against you, is there any possibility that judgment was only taken against your ex for a card on which you both were jointly liable? Utah permits a non-served joint defendant to be brought into a case and bound post-judgment.
"Utah Court Rule 71B. Proceedings where parties not summoned.
(a) Effect of failure to serve all defendants. Where the action is against two or more defendants and the summons is served on one or more, but not all of them, the plaintiff may proceed against the defendants served in the same manner as if they were the only defendants.
(b) Proceedings after judgment against parties not originally served. When a judgment has been recovered against one or more, but not all, of several persons jointly indebted upon an obligation, the plaintiff may require any person not originally served with the summons to appear and show cause why he should not be bound by the judgment in the same manner as though he had been originally served with process."
There's more to the Rule, which I won't bother to cite if it's not applicable, but I wondered if it might not be be worth noting. The way the judgment creditor "requires [a person] to appear and show cause" is by serving a summons. It doesn't make complete sense that they're tring to serve a summons on you if there's already a judgment against you, but that's repeated throughout this thread.
If, however, there is a judgment, then they probably are trying to compel you into court for an asset exam. It wouldn't be appropriate to tell you to ignore such an order, if it is served, so I didn't tell you that. On the other hand, unless Leinalani absolutely knows that Utah jails litigants for civil contempt, I personally think that it's rather irresponsible to say that you "could face jail time". I do find that Utah confers that discretionary power, but all states do and "discretionary" is the operative word. The likelihood of it happening to a disabled single parent is too remote for me to contemplate.