Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Rule 8((2): A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the allegation. What, exactly, does that mean? What do they mean by "substance," and how do they define "fairly?"
  2. Well, yes and no. Sure, you technically might have a cause of action, but you should pick your battles. You owe him that money. Do you deny owing him the money? One way or another, you'll have to pay it off. Now, granted, you could probably sue him for the DIFFERENCE (e.g. if he was supposed to take out $200 and he instead took out $1,000, you could sue him for $1,000), but keep in mind that, if he sues you, sure, he won't be ALLOWED to take out any more than 10% of your income (because you're married; singles get 25% withheld), but, at the same time, you'll suffer a judgment interest. I understand that, in 2007, the interest rate was 4%, but that was three years ago. One way or another, you owe him the money. One way or another, you're going to HAVE to pay it off. Best get it out of the way ASAP.
  3. There are a few, narrowly defined exceptions to sovereign immunity. If I can use one and sue a government entity, it is highly unlikely that the entity has actually filed to be an LLC or to have any kind of limited liability. So, that being said, if I can get sovereign immunity waived, could I go to the central government itself to pay the judgment? E.g. if I sue the state police for misconduct, and sovereign immunity, for one reason or another, does not help them, can I go to the state, itself, to pay the judgment? Or, do I have to stick JUST to the entity that committed the tort against me?
  4. This post has been removed for violations of the Community Guidelines. Per our Community Guidelines, you must keep conversations on the Answers forums respectful and civil. Constructive criticism is welcome but personal attacks will be deleted, and repeated violations can lead to suspension from the boards. Thanks for using FindLaw Answers.
  5. The rules specifically say that the parties must confer as soon as practicable! *** [This post has been edited for violations of the Community Guidelines . Please remember to respect the opinions of other members. Discussion is encouraged as long it stays respectful. Thanks. -Moderator]
  6. By the way, keep in mind that 26(f)(1) EXPLICITLY states that the parties must confer as soon as practicable. So, would refusal to confer ASAP be considered an "unnecessary" delay?
  7. The defendants in my case are refusing to cooperate with my attempts to have a Rule 26(f) conference. Now, granted, I do not know if they have received the initial complaint. I d**** sure haven't heard back from them. But, they know that I am suing them. I've made no bones about it. In fact, it was DURING my attempts to schedule a 26(f) conference that they flat-out said, point blank, "No action is required by [us], including, for example, participating in any conferences." Is that true? It is my understanding that parties are not allowed to unnecessarily extend the litigation time. To attempt to "filibuster" the case, for lack of a better word, would subject them to sanctions. Now, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not define "unnecessary," so, therefore, the definition should be reserved to the common law doctrine of "the reasonable person." Would a reasonable person think that such delay is unnecessary. So, are they unnecessarily delaying the 26(f) conference? [This post has been edited for language -Moderator]
  8. Regarding discovery, what's the difference between a written deposition and an interrogatory?
  9. "A defendant could, for example, argue that no use of material protected by copyright occurred and also argue that if such a use did occur, it was fair use." Ok, but if they don't try and do that, would it THEN be assumed that copyrighted material was used? If they don't state a defense, is it presumed that they don't want to use it?
  10. So, will the conference simultaneously be a request for admissions in its own right? Like, if the defendant plans to use an affirmative defense, would announcing that signify his acceptance that everything that I would initially need to prove is admitted? For example, "This copyright infringement was a matter of fair use." Would that, simultaneously, cause the defendant to admit to actually using the copyrighted material in the first place? No request for admissions needed?
  11. What if they haven't yet responded to the original complaint? Can I still give them the request for admissions?
  12. "You may serve it by e-mail only if the other party has consented to service by that means. Again, see FRCP 5(." What about snail mail? Are they legally required to accept snail mail? If, after thirty days of the date the tracking number says that they received the letter, I haven't heard back from them on the admissions, and I file for summary judgment, claiming that rule 36 a 3 says that they have admitted to every fact that is needed to give me a winning case, and they respond saying that they never agreed to do this via snail mail, that they only wanted in person service, is that just tough for them? Would that defense to summary judgment hold water?
  13. Does a request for admissions HAVE to be served IN PERSON by a designated server? Or, can I simply email it to the lawyer, and that will count? Or, rather, can I take the facts that I want the opposing party to admit or deny, send them to a security guard at the company, and, if he agrees to give it to the lawyer, that would count as service?
  14. Do governments have limited liability? For example, in the off chance that I can get a state or local government's sovereign immunity waived, could I go to their parent company - the state itself - to collect on the debt? Like, if the state police commit racial profiling, which isn't protected by sovereign immunity (for details, see 42 U.S.C. 2000d-7), could I go to the state itself to make them pay, or do I have to stick to the state police?
  • Create New...