Re: CAMCO and CR insertions -- pl, Marcy, LadynRed, are you out there??

Posted by poor lawyer (24.199.187.22) on August 21, 2002 at 14:36:18:

In Reply to: CAMCO and CR insertions -- pl, Marcy, LadynRed, are you out there?? posted by lucy on August 21, 2002 at 06:38:50:

Concerning the SOL for filing suit:

The SOL defense is an "affirmative defense." You must assert it in your answer (or pre-answer motion to dismiss). The burden is on the one asserting it to prove that the cause of action accrued a longer time ago than the SOL.

The SOL defense is not an "absolute defense." It can be waived. If not asserted, it is not in issue, and the court can't decide on its own that the SOL has passed. If not asserted in the answer, then it is considered waived.

I think we can pretty much assume that the Complaints that CAMCO and other CAs file in court don't include the date the cause of action accrued. It won't be apparent from the Complaint. If they use the "ancient address" service technique, and then move for default judgment, the judge will not have any clue or indication that the case is beyond the SOL. And besides, since there is no answer, the SOL defense hasn't been raised. So thats how they can get judgments that are past the SOL.

However, attornies and plaintiffs who file a suit knowing that it is past the SOL can be subject to a suit for filing a frivilous suit. The attorney can also face attorney disciplinary actions if they are making "misrepresentations" to the court.

If you want to sue CAMCO, or make sure they get a letter, send it registered or certified mail, RRR, to their registered agent. I'm going to research them real quick and find that information and post it elsewhere.

poor lawyer, esq.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup