Yep.
AND furthermore…
Again, what I sort-of know is only for CA Small Claims courts, from a Nolo book I read circa 25 years ago. If the case is decided by a summary judgement for the Plaintiff because Defendant didn’t show, then that is final, with no appeal by Defendant allowed.
If the case is decided for Defendant for any reason, that is final. Plaintiff has no right of appeal.
According to my lawyer, in the state of Indiana, if a SCC defendant loses by summary judgement do to being a no-show she has 30 days to request the judgement be set aside, in which case we can have a do-over.
However, a judge has to approve the defendant’s request. If you had a good reason - say, you were in the ER after a horrific accident and could not physically get to the court - that might happen. I’m guessing “I overslept 15 minutes” or whatever isn’t going to cut it.
Sometimes it is.
In Virginia, my state, the General District Court has original jurisdiction over civil claims of this nature. But an appeal to the county Circuit Court is heard de novo – it’s a new trial. A losing party that appeals may be required to post an appeal bond equal to the judgement awarded in the General District Court, but the appeal is a trial and is indeed a do-over. (Not my area of law, but this is pretty basic Virginia Civ Pro).
All of which highlights the value of knowing your own states’ Civ Pro rules – or, even better, retaining a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction. It’s their job to know this stuff inside out.
I meant that it sounds like they’ve been open since they originally shafted you. At that point (if I’m remembering right from that thread) it seemed likely that the shop was going to close down and that’s why you weren’t paid. Now it sounds like they’ve remained open all these months and probably could have settled up with you before court.
I learn something new every day. Thanks, Bricker!
Absolutely, which is why I initially approached a lawyer in the first place. One of my first objectives was just to get a run down on my state’s SCC rules, which was worth every penny. It also didn’t take that long, and thus did not cost that much. As it happened, I choose to employ him further and so far it’s been a mutually beneficial relationship although now that we’ve moved to the collections phase we’re both hoping we can get paid.
Due to state rules here regarding summary dismissal we can’t even start collections until December 9, but meanwhile we’ve drawn up a game plan so as soon as December 9 arrives we’ll get right to it.
I think they were able to make rent for a couple months because they didn’t pay their employees. They’ve been limping along in a pathetic manner all summer and fall.
I’m not sure they realize that we really have been given the authority to take company assets, we no longer have to wait for them to cough them up. Of course, we have procedures to follow, and we will adhere to the rules to the letter, but come December we won’t be asking politely anymore.
So…
How’s it going?
The collections plan went into action as scheduled on December 9. No money out of it, yet, but the lawyer has cautioned me all along that these things take time. First step is to try to get money out of the company accounts. If that is not successful we move to garnish the owner’s wages from her other job. That will require some paperwork and more time since it involves crossing state lines.
Meanwhile, yet another lawsuit has been filed against them, this time by a material supplier who is owned thousands on supplies delivered but not paid for. Their situation is even more dire, they can’t keep any employees due to their history of non-payment, and they’re definitely circling the drain.
Sounds like you may have to settle for getting paid in Schadenfreude.
Are there rules of precedence when multiple people are owed judgments but there isn’t enough money to pay all of them? Like, employees get paid first, then suppliers, and so on? Or is it first-come-first-served, shortest job first… er, smallest amount first, or what?
That has always been a risk. However, I have recovered $500 of what I was owed which, after lawyer costs and filing fees, means I’m still $350 ahead of where I would be if I had done nothing at all. Small potatoes indeed, but schadenfreude and a few dollars.
Probably. The rules are pretty convoluted, which is why I hired a lawyer. Certainly, being the first to get a legal judgement gives me some advantage though if there’s no money left there’s just no money left.
Realized I hadn’t updated this for a bit.
Well, after the potential appeal period ran out the lawyer and I started moving forward with our action plan. A couple weeks ago I started getting near-incoherent e-mails from the former employer ranting about what an evil, heartless person I am (um… the original text was a bit more, um, colorful) Didn’t I know how horrible it is to take away the money someone uses to support their family?
Hmm… why, yes, yes I DO know how horrible that is. ** That’s why I sued you.** Although no, I did not actually reply to her. Not at all. I did forward the e-mails to my lawyer.
It seems she went to pay some bills or purchase something and discovered the bank had frozen her accounts. Not just her business account - ALL her accounts. Seems she did her personal banking at the same place as her business banking and apparently the garnishment order covered all accounts at the institution to which they were submitted. Either that, or my lawyer filled out all necessary forms.
Surprise! Yes I CAN take your money!
There is a hearing scheduled because she’s claiming that no, we shouldn’t have all that money. Good luck with that, honey! She also said, multiple times, she was talking to a bankruptcy attorney. She was talking to a LOT of lawyers!
Um, sure, talk all you want - none of them will help you if you don’t pay the people you work for. In her case I’m assuming no lawyer will touch this without payment in advance. I also know that you have to PAY to file bankruptcy. This will be difficult with all her accounts frozen…
So, progress, and I sure as hell got her attention (again). Still waiting for results. Clearly, patience is required in any legal matter and this is no exception.
I love getting updates to old threads, i wish everyone was as studious about keeping us informed. Glad things have been going well, please let us know if you actually get any more money out of them!
Ooh the irony, it burns!
Here’s hoping she finally realises it will be cheaper to pay you. Here’s also hoping she has learned her lesson.
Oh, I doubt she has learned anything. She seems convinced she is the victim here. Also has repeatedly said she will not pay me. Mm… okay. Remember, the second half of the phrase “I fought the law” is “and the law won”.
Any news?
The hearing scheduled for the 21st went forward. It turned out there was $1,300 in the bank, but due to some irregularity with the paperwork/the bank we could not access it. For that, there will be another hearing on March 21, at which we hope to get $600-700 (apparently we’re not allowed to take all of it).
In addition, the court ordered her to pay $100/month towards what she owes me. This will take some time to pay off, all the while accruing interest. If that’s how she pays me off in the end she’ll be shelling out over $4,000. I will most likely get the first check the first week of March. Assuming she actually pays, but if she doesn’t it’s really freakin’ stupid because then she’s subject to arrest and further legal penalties.
It seems she truly is destitute or close to it, and there is at least one other legal judgement against her (found out during the financial disclosure). Cry me a river.
She told my lawyer she’s really, really, truly talking to a bankruptcy attorney. Which might even be true. She can talk to them all she wants, but bankruptcy lawyers don’t work for free, either - until she pays one she hasn’t filed. And since failure to pay people is how she wound up in this situation in the first place I’m not overly concerned. I’ll believe it when it becomes official.
I don’t recall ever hearing that one can be arrested for failure to pay a civil judgement. The horror stories one always reads are more along the lines of the parties jolting along until the plaintiff either gets some or all of the judgment or gives up in exasperation. Can she really be arrested? And charged with what? (Contempt?)
ETA: Also: About that court-ordered $100/month payment: Will this require defendant to “voluntarily” make a payment each month (good luck with that), or does this authorize/require the bank to make the payment out of her frozen accounts on her behalf?