If they require mediation, they will let you know. I do not know anyone who has been happy with mediation. They are usually idiots who don't know a damn thing about the law and are only interested in keeping the case out of the courtroom. It doesn't mean that you can't mediate. Just don't compromise if you feel you are right. Mediation is not like arbitration where the decision is binding. You can mediate all day and not budge from your position.
Cable, Thank you for shedding some light on mediation for me. One other question. If you decide to go the mediation route does that mean once you accept mediation you no longer can go before the judge? even if there is no agreement made in the process. Please bare with me because this confusing me a little. I'm just tyring to understand that aspect of the process just in case my niece says she wants mediation. I want to be able to tell her the advantages and disadvantages of it.
if you go through mediation you will still have your chance in front of the judge IF the mediation doesn't work (i.e. you don't agree). good luck!
Pae, Thank you so much for your reply. I think that answers my questions. so far. I'm sure there will be more to come as we get closer to the court date. kathy
Kathy- I *think* it might also depend on which court you filed in, when I filed we have no set "small claims court" we just do all that in District Court. When we went in the clerk asked if anyone wanted to try and work it out beforehand. No mention of mediation, just one on one with the "other side". Good luck to you and your neice definately keep us posted. Like PAE said, not too many chose mediation.
No. You don't have to come to an agreement in mediation. You are confusing it with arbitration. You may have to go through the exercise, but it doesn't mean you have to agree to anything. With medication, the mediator's job is to get the two parties to talk, and hopefully come to an agreement. With arbitration, the arbitrator listens to the facts, and the decision of the arbitrator is usually binding. They act like a judge, but without all the rules and protocol, and adherence to the law. For example, if you have an HMO, a clause of your HMO contract is that you agree to binding arbitration. That means that you have waived your right to sue in a court of law and must accept their arbitrator and whatever decision he/she decides. This is good for the HMO. They don't have to defend themselves in front of a ticked-off jury. They claim it is good for you by giving you swift and fair justice. Its more like a swift kick in the ass for you. Guess who gets to pick and pay for the arbitrator? Not you Guess who doesn't get a chance to appeal a decision they don't like. Even an obiously flawed decision can not be appealed. Courts are loath to interfere in such contracts or overrule arbitators. It is a bloody crime I'm telling you.
Cable, Thank you so much for the reply. I actually had to go back into the search feature in order to respond to you. for some strange reason when I clicked on the post to bring it up it was giving me some kind of error. I never seen that do that before. anyway, I talked to my neice in length regarding the mediation. She's feels that is would be a complete waste of her time. Because she is firm on what she wants out of the situation. and she feels that if they could not resolve the problem and come to a resolution within the last few month of going back and fourth then mediation is not going to make a difference in their minds. Your right I was confusing it with arbitration. thank you for clarifing. kathy
NEED SOME HELP!! Any Legal minds out there! Well, We are going to court Wednesday. But I need to get some advice on a particular situation. We are trying to get everything together along with any possible questions that may arise. My niece and I were discussing a slight problem that could happen. In her lease, there is a statement that says that they are bound by PA statute, but she is sueing in NJ. Now when I talked to the court clerk in NJ they stated that she would have to go by NJ statute, but now we are wondering how this is going to play out in court. If her lease is stating PA statute and the clerk is saying NJ statute, won't the judge throw out anything that would pertain to PA? This sounds very tricky to me. because the Apartment building is in PA and the owners are in NJ, who are the one's who are holding the monies. Would'nt the judge have to go by what the lease is saying ?? Any Advice or suggestions would be greatly appreciated. kathy
I don't have the paperwork in front of me right now. I can only tell you from memory. that it stated that they are bound to PA statute. I'm sorry I don't remember the exact wording, without having it in front of me. kathy
I work for a company to owns apts across the southeast. Our office is in TN, but they have apts in other states. For instance, in VA if they charge you for damaged carpet they have to depreciate the carpet when charging you. That is VA's law, but not TN. The manager has to go by VA's law. However if a person had to sue in Memphis, I would think they would still be bound by VA law. You man want to check your state's law regarding this also.
Kathy, I am a landlord, and I too have a property in PA, but reside in NJ. I know from experience if my tentant wanted to sue me they would have to file in PA. State laws states you have to file either where you reside or have a business relationship in a given state. In your situation, the business is located in PA and your cousin resides in PA. The lease should be written with PA state laws in mind, not NJ. I would bet that the judge would indicate that they do not have proper jurisdiction over this matter. I could be wrong. Best of luck.
Wealth, thanks so much for some insight. The only thing that confuses us is that all the paperwork for this apartment complex reads the apartment complex name with the new jersey address. All the checks were made out to the corporate ofc's name. Now when we spoke to the court cleark in PA she stated that we could in fact sue in PA but if she won the case they could not really enforce the judgement, because the are based in NJ. The only way for her to get the judgement enforced would be to sue in NJ. As stated above in one of the post's, if she should sue in PA and win she could put a lien against the property, but who knows how long it would be before she gets her money. So, thinking if she sued in NJ and won she could then proceed to the sheriff ofc and get a writ of execution issued. I have to say I would agree with what you had stated in your post concerning the jurisdiction issue, that's what is worrying me. I also read recently that if she wins in NJ she could go to PA and get the courts to approve the judgement as a foriegn judgement. Is this true, would anyone have an opinion on that? kathy
If you win in PA you can still enforce the judgement, the NJ legal system will help you enforce the judgement. for example, if I have a citibank credit card that I default on and I live in Tennesse and citibank is in NY and they get a judgement on me in NY they can still collect the money, right... sorry if I'm not making sense, I've had a long day's work...
