"Washington state's House of Representatives voted unanamously in March to require debt collection companies to provide proof that borrowers had been notified about lawsuits before judges could issue an arrest warrant. " ~ That's a start.
Yeah, except that "we put it in the mail" is all the "proof" required. It's legally impossible to prove that somebody received a notice, since they can just say they didn't. So the legal standard of proof of notification is whether the creditor claims they sense one.
The much more worrying part isn't the creditors, it's the apparent rash of people being arrested because they missed a court summons they didn't know about. I've had that one myself before, and that's the kind of thing that'll make you into a paranoid revolutionary. Because you know who's in charge of making sure the courthouse follows the rules? Nobody. You know what recourse you have to prove you didn't receive a summons? None. None at all.
A.) It's still a start. The worst abusers of this process don't even send anything out, at all.
B.) It doesn't have to be that way. I make it a point to attach the regular mail receipt, the certified mail receipt, the process server's affidavit and the picture of the guy I have the process server take with his cell phone before I do this. The process server takes the picture to verify that he both actually has the right person and that he actually handed it to that person. It COULD be done ethically for a reasonable cost.
C.) Actually, under rule 60(B), there is a defense to not getting service that can void the entire judgment. I've done it:
I have all the research for Ohio too, but damn it if I'm not breaking the 40 K limit on this thing again.... [grumble grumble mumble]
Disclaimer: Do not attempt to use this as legal advice: a.) It only speaks to Ohio Law, b.) There are lots of ways to screw up a legal matter if you don't know EXACTLY what you're doing. If you need legal help, please seek out an attorney licensed in your area.
1.) Concerning Judgment validity in re Service and Due Process:
The obligation to perfect service of process is placed only on the plaintiff, and the lack of jurisdiction arising from want of, or defects in, process or in the service thereof is ground for reversal. LaNeve v. Atlas Recycling, Inc., 119 Ohio St. 3d 324, 2008-Ohio-3921, 894 N.E.2d 25 (2008). An appellate court cannot allow a judgment rendered in the absence of jurisdiction to stand merely for the sake of convenience or efficiency. Burkart v. Burkart, 2010-Ohio-5363, 945 N.E.2d 557 (Ohio Ct. App. 10th Dist. Franklin County 2010), appeal not allowed, 128 Ohio St. 3d 1426, 2011-Ohio-1049, 943 N.E.2d 573 (2011). A judgment can be void not only for lack of jurisdiction, but also where the court acts in a manner contrary to due process. Plant Equip., Inc. v. Nationwide Control Serv., Inc., 155 Ohio App. 3d 46, 2003 -Ohio- 5395, 798 N.E.2d 1202 (1st Dist. Hamilton County 2003).
There are some requirements of law for the service of process noncompliance that would render any judgment obtained in the absence of a general appearance void, Reynolds v. Reynolds, 12 Ohio App. 63, 1919 WL 1204 (1st Dist. Hamilton County 1919). while the result of other defects is merely to make the judgment voidable but not void. Fahs v. Taylor, 10 Ohio 104, 1840 WL 20 (1840); Norris v. Frowine, 19 Ohio App. 127, 1925 WL 3575 (4th Dist. Lawrence County 1925); Gifford v. Morrison, 4 Ohio Dec. Rep. 153, 1 Cleve. Law Rep. 77, 1878 WL 7160 (Ohio Dist. Ct. 1878), aff'd, 37 Ohio St. 502, 1882 WL 13 (1882). Norris v. Frowine, 19 Ohio App. 127, 1925 WL 3575 (4th Dist. Lawrence County 1925). A judgment is void where the record shows a defect in service in that a necessary step was omitted in service by publication. Lincoln Tavern, Inc. v. Snader, 165 Ohio St. 61, 59 Ohio Op. 74, 133 N.E.2d 606 (1956).
The real problem is, it took me hours to look all that crap up and no one is going to pay a lawyer to do this for them. This is another reason why I'd like to do that thing I mentioned where I just represent people like an insurance policy for a small monthly fee one day. This sort of challenge is too expensive to pay for a la carte. I personally would love to kick the shit out of people who abuse this process, but it isn't monetarily feasible to do it in the traditional fee pay structure for attorneys.
Author
Topic: Occupying Wallstreet (Read 296559 times)