Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Court Hearing 11/3 - SOL This was his response. "Reviewed what you sent me. You clearly transacted business in the Commonwealth. Now I am confused. I transacted business with them in 1996. The above was his online email response.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Court Hearing 11/3 - SOL I think you need a second legal opinion. The amount at stake here is $700 - how much can the attorney's fee be? You seem to be getting the bare minimum attention (meaning NONE).
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Court Hearing 11/3 - SOL i have already invested $500 in this guy already and these one line respnses i get from him are not helpful. i dont know what to do at this point
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Court Hearing 11/3 - SOL i have already invested $500 in this guy already and these one line responses i get from him are not helpful. i dont know what to do at this point
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Court Hearing 11/3 - SOL Dont you think this law is vague. Does not say anything about doing bysiness in Mass today or in the past. Leaves it up for interpretation don't ya think. This is obviously the one liner he focused on and I get a one liner back. See A: below: thought ?? "Chapter 223A: Section 3 Transactions or conduct for personal jurisdiction Section 3. A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person, who acts directly or by an agent, as to a cause of action in law or equity arising from the person's (a) transacting any business in this commonwealth;
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Court Hearing 11/3 - SOL Just spoke with a law professor friend of mine and he concurs with Flyingifr . . . time to look around for another legal opinion. Prefacing his response with the fact that he only had the bare minimum of facts as I could relay them from these postings, and he did not have the MA statutes in front of him . . . Tolling doesn't really apply here (or, at least, could be strongly argued against). This principle is generally used when a plantiff cannot be found (tolling statutes were written in the 1800's, when there were no provisions for out-of-state service), when the circumstances of a crime could not have been discovered (through fraud, etc.), when a victim is under the age of 18, etc. In other words, it is generally used in more extenuating circumstances. He also indicated that in most states, you must assert the SOL. That is, you can be sued on something that is out of the SOL, it is up to you to proactively assert that the account is post-SOL. If you do not bring it up, the case will go forward. It seems odd that your attorney is not pursuing a SOL defense -- in my experience, it is up to the Plantiff to shoot holes in your defense, not your own attorney. You have a defense that can, at the very least, be strongly argued. I would expect that a good attorney could argue it successfully. You might consider drafting a motion to dismiss based upon the SOL. Not sure you need your attorney for this.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Court Hearing 11/3 - SOL In the hearing recently ( which was purpose of moving out of small claims to court with Jury) decision pending/ he did mention the SOL but this hearing was NOT for a defense to dismiss ( dont believe it was the forum for that). Anyway, he does plan on using the SOL as a defense but has also indicated he felt it was weak. Your input is invaluable. Thanks Will keep you posted once court decision is made to move out of small claims court. I do not feel comfortable in courtroom setting which is the only reason I have brought in attorney to handle despite the costs involved. I am NOT a fan of the judicial system and do NOT trust any of it. Thanks
Hi snuffles, so how did it work out I am also a NH resident who moved from MA in August of 2001. My last utility bills for gas and electric were from June 2001. I left them a forwarding address when I moved which is my current address. I just found the tradelines on my credit reports dated January 05, when I applied for a loan. These were placed after the NH SOL had run out. So how did the SOL thing play out? I read the whole thread and now I was wondering did the NH SOL win out over the MA SOL? I called the AG offices for NH and MA and they were of no help. I just sent my DV letters and dispute letters based on the SOL to the OC and CA. So I want to be prepared if they say they want to go by the MA SOL. I am going to link this thread to creditboards.com becuase this has been the most detail on this topic i have found. Please let me know the outcome. Thank you
