A Texas man has developed a lucrative sideline in suing debt collectors who come after him. [Kimberly Thorpe, Dallas Observer]
{ 6 comments }
Chronicling the high cost of our legal system
Posts tagged as:
A Texas man has developed a lucrative sideline in suing debt collectors who come after him. [Kimberly Thorpe, Dallas Observer]
{ 6 comments }
The New York Times reports on allegations (earlier here, h/t Patrick) that some process servers falsely claimed to have served papers on defendants who subsequently lost default judgments. Per one law encyclopedia:
The tricks of serving process papers can, however, reach a point that the courts will not tolerate because they subvert the purpose of service or threaten to disrupt the administration of justice. The most intolerable abuse is called sewer service. It is not really service at all but is so named on the theory that the server tossed the papers into the sewer and did not attempt to deliver them to the proper party. Sewer service is a fraud on the court, and an attorney who knowingly participates in such a scheme can be disbarred.
{ 5 comments }
When the wrong defendant is named in a civil complaint — wrong in the sense of being “different guy with the same name” — you might think it would be relatively routine to order the complainant to compensate the bewildered target. But it’s actually unusual enough to rate news coverage. [Jim Dwyer, "Hello, Collections? The Worm Has Turned," New York Times]
{ 10 comments }
Surely it would have been possible to line up a lead plaintiff who did not himself turn out to run a competing collection agency [ABA Journal]
{ 1 comment }
A number of states have what are sometimes known as filial responsibility laws which obligate adult children to pay for their parents’ medical and nursing-home care. In Pennsylvania, nursing home lawyers have been known to pursue lawsuits against out-of-state children who are estranged from the parents in question. (Monica Yant Kinney, “If mom can’t pay, adult child must”, Philadelphia Inquirer, Jul. 12).
More on these laws: Jane Gross, NYT; Everyday Simplicity; Do Ask Do Tell.
{ 2 comments }
Larry Ribstein has some pertinent comments about the rolling reinvention of debtor-creditor law going on as the Administration redistributes bankruptcy priorities away from traditional creditors and toward the UAW. And Mickey Kaus credits me with perhaps more prescience than I actually possess about the union role (not that I always venture the cynical prediction…)(cross-posted from Point of Law). More: Michael Barone, Ken Silber.
P.S. Joe Weisenthal is reminded of an episode of lawlessness that I wrote about a few months back: “Before The Chrysler Mess, There Was Republic Windows”. Incidentally, those who wonder what sort of signals the incoming Administration was sending last December about the illegal Chicago plant occupation may be interested to learn that late last month Vice President Joe Biden and Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin paid a visit to the reopened Republic Windows plant, a visit which from a news account sounds as if it might fairly be described as “triumphal” in tone.
{ 1 comment }
If allegations by New York attorney general Andrew Cuomo are true, one of the most fundamental elements of due process for civil defendants — notice of a pending legal action through service of process — simply gets ignored in thousands of instances. “Sewer service” was a major concern of court reformers in the 1960s; it sounds as if the problem may never actually have gone away. [Newsday, Popehat]
{ 3 comments }
A legal hazard you might not have expected.
{ 6 comments }
Readers may remember Cyrus Sanai as the litigant with the big grudge against Ninth Circuit Chief Judge Alex Kozinski who proceeded to launch a campaign trying to destroy Kozinski’s career (with some help from the Los Angeles Times). Now a California appeals court has issued the latest ruling in Sanai’s decade-long dispute with the owner of a Newport Beach apartment he once rented. Shaun Martin at California Appellate Report has details on the ruling, which sends the fight back to the lower courts. Martin calls it “a tale of litigation run amok. A tale that explains, in part, why some people hate lawyers; and, in particular, engaging in transactions with them.”
P.S. Sanai, in our comments section, says we’re wrong: for one thing, we described him as having sued the owner of the apartment he once rented when in fact “the complaint at issue is against UDR’s successor in interest, First Advantage Corporation, and UDR’s owner, Harvey Saltz”.
{ 1 comment }
David Giacalone provides extensive reason to question what strapped consumers are getting in exchange for the high fees many such attorneys charge (Jul. 21; see also Greenfield, Jul. 22, and ZipDebt, Jul. 25, via, Greenfield again, Blawg Review #170).
{ 2 comments }