Re: What Why Chat said about First Resolution..

Posted by JKelly (141.151.91.180) on May 27, 2004 at 20:16:46:

In Reply to: Re: What Why Chat said about First Resolution.. posted by GettinHip2it on May 27, 2004 at 19:49:02:

Yep.....www.naca.net. If this judgement is against your husband, only, then it should not be on your CR. You suffered damages because of it. Some attorneys will take this kind of case on a contingency. I sure would be making a lot of phone calls.
AND, since I probably would have won had I gone to court and defended, instead of filing bk, I now believe that they could not have gotten the judgement. I pulled that thing out today. Another thing I noticed, and I wrote it on my copy, is that the SOL in small claims is two years. So, they should not have been filing in small claims. But, if they had filed in a higher court, I would have showed up with an attorney. They were banking on one of two things. I would show up without an attorney, really not much choice in small claims, or I would not show up at all and they would get a default. I just didn't know a lot then, and my attorney said bk, and my husband wrote the check to the attorney and it solved the problem. I am now wondering if the judgement they have against your husband is even legal, and can you do anything about it, if you can prove they violated law.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup