waiting for summary judgment results

Have you considered just going over to the court and looking? This stuff isn't some huge secret, you know.

 

The outcome of a court case is generally public record. How this is made available will depend on the court. It might be online, available to anyone who knows the case number or even just knows a litigant's name. But certainly it will be available if you go to the court itself and ask them how you can view the case file.

Since you made no response, and it's a simple consumer debt case, Dumb Bob would guess that the summary judgment was granted. You'll likely want to know the terms of the judgment, such as the amount, how that was arrived at, were legal fees added in, and especially if and what the interest rate is on the debt post judgment.

Dumb Bob believes that it's a good idea to show up for these hearings because he believes it's better to lose well than to lose badly. That means, sure, you are going to lose the case, but how did you lose it, were you charged legal fees, what is the interest rate, did they have a valid contract? If you can cut any of these legs out from them, ultimately you should end up paying them less money.

The post judgment interest rate one is vital if you CAN'T pay right away because even a relatively low rate over time will almost surely spin out of control. Dumb Bob knows that it's difficult to go before a judge, but if you learn how to do it, if you learn that you can do it, it will help make you a stronger person for the rest of your life. That's always a good thing.

 

1) The ONLY notice you get of an impending lawsuit/judgement is the delivery of the summons and complaint by a process server. Once you have been served, it is up to you to appear in court and raise whatever defense(s) you can.

2) Although I am not an attorney, and this is not legal advice, I would say that it is worth going to court to fight if the plaintiff is a collection agency or junk debt buyer. If it is the original creditor, it is probably an exercise in futility, though you probably don't have anything to lose (other than an appearance fee, if required) if you go. In some jurisdictions, if you are poor and cannot afford the appearance fee, you can file a form called an "affidavit of indigency" and the fee can be waived or reduced. I used that option last year when I needed to defend against a frivolous lawsuit filed by a customer of my former employer naming me and the company as co-defendants.

3) If you go to court (for the initial appearance), you can deny/contest the plaintiff's allegations (eg. the amount and validity of the alleged debt). They will need to obtain documentation to support their position and prove that the amount is correct and they are entitled to collect this debt. If the plaintiff is the original creditor, such a defense will not work because they would have all the necessary documents. However, if it is an old debt and you are being sued by a collection agency or junk debt buyer that bought the debt, they may not have all of the necessary documentation. It may then be possible to have the case dismissed, or for the plaintiff to offer a generous settlement offer, which you should take advantage of.

4) If you did not go to court, then whatever allegations are made in the complaint are taken as gospel truth. The judge will not require proof such as invoices/statements, chain of custody of the account, etc. The judgement will simply be granted, and high collection and attorney's fees may be added as well.

5) If a judgement was granted, the first "notice" you will likely receive is when your debit card is declined or your rent/mortgage check bounces because the creditor levied your bank account. Although sometimes defendants are called into court for a separate asset hearing (for the creditor to find out what assets you have that can be attached/garnished/seized), this does not always happen, and they can begin garnishment as soon as the judgement is granted. You will not be served again with a copy of the judgement and a notice to appeal, if that is what you are expecting.

6) Depending on the size of the judgement, and the other debts that you have, bankruptcy can be a good idea.

 

IMO it's whomever gets the judgement first and gets to your accounts first.

 

They didn't know how to respond to Complain either, until they read about what to do.

The problem is, the appeal probably has to be based on an argument used in your response to the summary judgment or at the hearing. If you didn't respond or show up, it's difficult to see what that might be.

Dumb Bob thinks you'll get something in the mail, but still doesn't understand why you don't just ask the court itself.

A notice of appeal can't be that hard to file correctly. Maybe even "I APPEAL" scrawled ketchup on a napkin from McDonald's and turned into the right people would do it.

 

Dumb Bob appears to be in the wrong room.

The point that Dumb Bob was so inelegantly making is that today it is often the substance of the response and not the form that matters. Various requirements might exist that can't be violated, such as appeals often have strict time limits. But exact form is often not the key issue, check your court's rules:

"An appeal must not be dismissed for informality of form or title of the notice of appeal", Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Rule 3. Appeal as of Rightâ??When Taken(c)(4), Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure

Your comments, that a pro se shouldn't even bother to appeal because it's impossible are what Dumb Bob was responding to. Saying that simply discourages others and that isn't good.