Wolproff & Abromson Dismiss Lawsuit!!!

jaylon · #1 09-07-2005, 08:19 PM

A buddy of mine contacted me regarding a suit that wolproff & abromson filed against him and his court date was in about a week from the date he called me. I gave him some instructions on what to do, using a simple dispute letter and a disclosure statement and here is the result:

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
THE PHILADELPHIA MUNICIPAL COURT
34 SOUTH 11TH STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107

RE: MAY COMPANY / NICHOLI H. CARDWELL
W & A CASE NUMBER 119608967
DOCKET # SC-04-11-01-0039

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

AS YOUR RECORDS MAY REFLECT, THIS OFFICE REPRESENTS THE PLAINTIFF IN THE ABOVE-REFERENCED MATTER. KINDLY ALLOW THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO SERVE AS A REQUEST TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN THE CASE LISTED ABOVE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANTICIPATED PROFESSIONAL COOPERATION. SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER IN GREATER DETAIL, PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CONTACT THE UNDERSIGNED.

SINCERELY,

WOLPOFF & ABRAMSON, L.L.P.

#2 09-07-2005, 11:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaylon

A buddy of mine contacted me regarding a suit that wolproff & abromson filed against him and his court date was in about a week from the date he called me. I gave him some instructions on what to do, using a simple dispute letter and a disclosure statement and here is the result:

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
THE PHILADELPHIA MUNICIPAL COURT
34 SOUTH 11TH STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107

RE: MAY COMPANY / NICHOLI H. CARDWELL
W & A CASE NUMBER 119608967
DOCKET # SC-04-11-01-0039

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

AS YOUR RECORDS MAY REFLECT, THIS OFFICE REPRESENTS THE PLAINTIFF IN THE ABOVE-REFERENCED MATTER. KINDLY ALLOW THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO SERVE AS A REQUEST TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN THE CASE LISTED ABOVE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANTICIPATED PROFESSIONAL COOPERATION. SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER IN GREATER DETAIL, PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CONTACT THE UNDERSIGNED.

SINCERELY,

WOLPOFF & ABRAMSON, L.L.P.

WHAT DISCLOSURE STATEMENT ARE YOU REFERING TO?

Judge Roy Bean · #3 09-08-2005, 08:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaylon

A buddy of mine contacted me regarding a suit that wolproff & abromson filed against him and his court date was in about a week from the date he called me. I gave him some instructions on what to do, using a simple dispute letter and a disclosure statement and here is the result:

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
THE PHILADELPHIA MUNICIPAL COURT
34 SOUTH 11TH STREET
PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107

RE: MAY COMPANY / NICHOLI H. CARDWELL
W & A CASE NUMBER 119608967
DOCKET # SC-04-11-01-0039

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:

AS YOUR RECORDS MAY REFLECT, THIS OFFICE REPRESENTS THE PLAINTIFF IN THE ABOVE-REFERENCED MATTER. KINDLY ALLOW THIS CORRESPONDENCE TO SERVE AS A REQUEST TO DISMISS WITHOUT PREJUDICE IN THE CASE LISTED ABOVE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ANTICIPATED PROFESSIONAL COOPERATION. SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER IN GREATER DETAIL, PLEASE DO NOT HESITATE TO CONTACT THE UNDERSIGNED.

SINCERELY,

WOLPOFF & ABRAMSON, L.L.P.

I think you're buddy is confused - there is no such thing as a request to dismiss a case. They have to file a motion to the court and the court will issue the dismissal order if the defense doesn't object.

truth4all · #4 09-08-2005, 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judge Roy Bean

I think you're buddy is confused - there is no such thing as a request to dismiss a case. They have to file a motion to the court and the court will issue the dismissal order if the defense doesn't object.

No. Obviously Bean, it is YOU that is confused !
(Or you're getting terribly desperate or mislead/misinform)

This is clearly a LETTER to the Defendant from WOLPOFF AND ABRAMSON.
They can word it anyway they want to word it in their letter.
If Wolpoff and Abramson filed a Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice, they DO NOT HAVE TO CALL IT A MOTION in a letter they write to the Defendant,
and this letter was PROBABLY written by some paralegal that doesn't know his Motions from his........Requests. (to be polite)
If the Defendant wants a copy of the MOTION, filed with the court, all he has to do is go to the court and REQUEST a copy of it. !
Heck, YOU could probably find it online with the information given in the POST and post the whole case along with the MOTION (or lack of one) for all to see !
How about it BEAN? Why don't you PROVE he's confused?
I had one DISMISSED and never got notice of it from ANYONE, not the court NOR the attorney !
I found it online, went and paid for my copy of it at the court !
If WOLPOFF and ABRAMSON HAVEN'T "Motioned To Dismiss Without Prejudice" as stated in their letter, then this Defendant has some pretty powerful ammo of FURTHER fraud by W & A and should file his OWN Motion To Dismiss based soley on that letter !!! INVHO !!!

I think you REALLY need some fishing time, Bean.
You are already "out to lunch", and the fish aren't taking to your bait around here !

Judge Roy Bean · #5 09-08-2005, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by truth4all

This is clearly a LETTER to the Defendant from WOLPOFF AND ABRAMSON.
They can word it anyway they want to word it in their letter.

And it is meaningless if they haven't actually filed a motion to dismiss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by truth4all

If Wolpoff and Abramson filed a Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice, they DO NOT HAVE TO CALL IT A MOTION in a letter they write to the Defendant,
and this letter was PROBABLY written by some paralegal that doesn't know his Motions from his........Requests. (to be polite)
If the Defendant wants a copy of the MOTION, filed with the court, all he has to do is go to the court and REQUEST a copy of it. !

He shouldn't have to. Depending on local rules, copies of motions are supposed to be served.

Quote:

Originally Posted by truth4all

Heck, YOU could probably find it online with the information given in the POST and post the whole case along with the MOTION (or lack of one) for all to see !
How about it BEAN? Why don't you PROVE he's confused?
I had one DISMISSED and never got notice of it from ANYONE, not the court NOR the attorney !
I found it online, went and paid for my copy of it at the court !
If WOLPOFF and ABRAMSON HAVEN'T "Motioned To Dismiss Without Prejudice" as stated in their letter, then this Defendant has some pretty powerful ammo of FURTHER fraud by W & A and should file his OWN Motion To Dismiss based soley on that letter !!! INVHO !!!

They aren't allowed to assume he has access via the 'net, let alone that it serves as an equivalent to service, and IMHO he should do exactly that just to make sure the court orders the dismissal and he has a copy of the order. That letter won't stand the scrutiny of a mortgage underwriter or CRA, they'll want to see a copy of the court's dismissal order.

Quote:

Originally Posted by truth4all

I think you REALLY need some fishing time, Bean.
You are already "out to lunch", and the fish aren't taking to your bait around here !

Sure. Leave him out there ASSUMING a firm like W&A has their act together, let alone acts honorably on behalf of their opponents. I'd be willing to bet a margarita (on the rocks, with salt, thank you) they haven't actually filed it yet.

truth4all · #6 09-08-2005, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judge Roy Bean

And it is meaningless if they haven't actually filed a motion to dismiss.

He shouldn't have to. Depending on local rules, copies of motions are supposed to be served.

They aren't allowed to assume he has access via the 'net, let alone that it serves as an equivalent to service, and IMHO he should do exactly that just to make sure the court orders the dismissal and he has a copy of the order. That letter won't stand the scrutiny of a mortgage underwriter or CRA, they'll want to see a copy of the court's dismissal order.

Sure. Leave him out there ASSUMING a firm like W&A has their act together, let alone acts honorably on behalf of their opponents. I'd be willing to bet a margarita (on the rocks, with salt, thank you) they haven't actually filed it yet.

You lose !

09/02/2005 Disposition - Withdrawn without Prejudice Louis J. Presenza NICHOLI H CARDWELL (D1)

and DEFENDANT was smart enough to file the letter with the court where WOLPOFF and ABRAMSON stated DISMISSSED without Prejudice.
http://claims.courtapps.com/servlet/...cketID=1835751

Go fishing !

Freedomless · #7 09-08-2005, 03:31 PM

truth4all, that's a good one. Thanks for posting.

Livefire · #8 09-08-2005, 05:59 PM

JRB is right about one thing.....when it comes to what he terms squaliformes....cover your "six" and make sure they perform, otherwise it can come back to bite you.

Congrats on the victory truth4all!

iamfreeru2 · #9 09-08-2005, 07:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Livefire

JRB is right about one thing.....when it comes to what he terms squaliformes....cover your "six" and make sure they perform, otherwise it can come back to bite you.

Congrats on the victory truth4all!

Actually it's congrats for Jaylon's friend. Truth is just posting the proof. Be careful, however, because a dismissal without prejudice can rear its ugly head in the future and can leave a nasty bite. Tell your friend congrats for me Jaylon and to watch his backside.

charlesa6 · #10 09-08-2005, 07:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iamfreeru2

Actually it's congrats for Jaylon's friend. Truth is just posting the proof. Be careful, however, because a dismissal without prejudice can rear its ugly head in the future and can leave a nasty bite. Tell your friend congrats for me Jaylon and to watch his backside.

I agree with you on that, Iamfreeru2. You need dismissal with prejudice, which close the case forever, and ever.