Received 'NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE'

[GoingDown]

JimKutkowski has not posted anything to support that conclusion. In fact, it is very easy to discover it is not true. But, so what if he was a debt collection attorney?

Just pointing out that this person might be at least sympathetic to the debt collector's side of an argument. It is good to know what perspective people have when they post on this forum. I can sniff them out quite well at this point, since I have a lot of experience in these matters by this point. I am not saying they can't post on here, just that people may want to know what perspective they are coming from.

Creditors have a right to sue and get judgements when debtors default and there is nothing wrong with attorneys taking their cases, even if the debtor is currently collection proof. If a credtors' attorney wanted to post here and answer questions from a creditor's perspective, he/she would be welcome as long as he/she was respectful and followed forum rules.


In a lawsuit, the plantiff is often required to personally serve the defendant. If the defendant is an individual, their home is the first logical place to try to serve them.


If the kids ask questions, all that needs to be said is that the person was there to deliver some important documents. Or, if the children were of appropriate age and the parent cared to be a little more open about the situation, they could take the opportunity to teach their children about debt and the legal process. Your friend should not be hiding his financial difficulties from his wife.

What I am saying is that isn't it funny how it is fine to send a process server to the debtor's home, but it is somehow horrible to send a letter to the attorney's home?

Animal Farm is an allegorical and dystopian novel by George Orwell, .... a single phrase: "All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

The attorney did not send a process server to your friend's home to rattle his cage. He sent him there as part of standard legal procedure.

Of course it would creep them out. You took a normal business and legal transaction and made it personal. There was no reason to contact the attorney at home.

So, you think it is okay to scare an attorney into withdrawing from a case?

Yes, it did creep them out, and yes, it did get them to drop the lawsuit against my friend.

So, I would say it worked quite well.

[frogger]

addressed to the attorney and the attorney's wife.

While I don't agree with sending it to the attorney's home at all, the statement above is what would bring about war if it was done to me.

Go after me for anything at all. I'm a big boy and I can and will deal with it.

You bring my wife or family into a situation that they are not involved in, and game on..........

[LadyInTheRed]

Just pointing out that this person might be at least sympathetic to the debt collector's side of an argument. It is good to know what perspective people have when they post on this forum. I can sniff them out quite well at this point, since I have a lot of experience in these matters by this point. I am not saying they can't post on here, just that people may want to know what perspective they are coming from.

Your sniffer is off this time. If you really want to know where this particular person is coming from, you can find his blog with a quick Google search. It is a very pro-debtor blog. His position that you shouldn't contact an attorney at home, is neither pro-debtor nor pro-creditor. It's pro letting people keep their business lives separate from their personal lives.

What I am saying is that isn't it funny how it is fine to send a process server to the debtor's home, but it is somehow horrible to send a letter to the attorney's home?

The law requires a defendant to be personally served. Most people use their home address when doing business with their creditors. It is logical for creditors to use that address when they have to serve them. It is not logical for a defendant who is served with papers containing an attorney's business address to locate the attorney's home address and contact him there.

Yes, it did creep them out, and yes, it did get them to drop the lawsuit against my friend.

So, I would say it worked quite well.

That doesn't make it right.

[AngelinaCat]

The law requires a defendant to be personally served.

I respectfully wish to make a few clarifications regarding this statement. This is true in part, but also false in part.

At least this is true in Florida regarding civil suits. And yes, I would not go after an opposing attorney's family and home address. But if you had to put up with what 'Hub and I have had to for NINE years with an Enemy that enjoyed slapping you with serial frivolous lawsuits designed to break you financially, then you might be tempted... 'Nuf about that.

Lawsuit #1. We received a notice in the mail that there was paperwork for us to pick up at the Sheriff's office. So, like a dutiful law-abiding citizen--and a total dufus--I went and picked it up.

Our good attorney, asked: "why the h*** did you do that? Do NOT go and pick up any of that. You let THEM serve you. Do NOT make their jobs easier. AND you do NOT HAVE to accept service for anyone other than yourself.

Point understood.

Lawsuit #2. Two process servers presented themselves at my place of employment. I was asked who I was--which they already knew because I had to be called from another office on another floor. So I got my summons, which I had to accept because it was obvious that it was me.

They ask: "Will you accept this summons for AngelinaCatHub?"
Me: "No, I will not."
Them: "Will you call him and tell him to open that big a** f***ing gate that is out there?"
Me: "No, I will not."
Them: "Then how are we going to serve him?"
Me: "You take your chances. Catch as catch can."
Them: "I will let the judge know about this."
Me: "Good! Do so! Let us get this over with."

The process servers actually tried to leave the summons under the windshield wiper on my car. That did not fly legally at all.

There are many more chapters to this adventure, but this is enough for now.

Suffice it to say: In a civil case, which all of these were, If you are approached, and you are truly you, you MUST take the summons. However, a family member, or another person living in the household--even though of legal age--may refuse the summons if that person is not the named defendant in the lawsuit. Yes, it may be legal service, but your family and friends do NOT have to accept it. And if the item is left with someone else, there may be no proof that the defendant actually got it.

Federal cases are totally different. The actual person named in the suit, must be the one served. No surrogate will do, and it must be handed to the person, or stuffed in a shirt pocket.

Eventually you will have to accept it, but like our attorney said, "make THEM work for it."