On Cell Phone Forums - help with your mobile device
Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 76
  1. #1
    Jonathan Kamens
    Guest
    I'm going to small claims court tomorrow to sue Sprint Nextel
    for failing to refund the cost of a cell phone I returned to
    them within the 30-day guarantee period (indeed, I returned
    it the day I received it, without even opening it).

    I've prepared the following summary of my case. I intend to
    give a copy to the clerk magistrate and to the defendant (if
    they show up) and to use it as my outline when presenting my
    case if I am asked to do so (the clerk magistrate may not
    depend a full presentation if Sprint doesn't show up). Any
    suggestions would be appreciated.

    I've elided certain details, such as my salary :-), from the
    summary.

    Trial Court of Massachusetts
    Small Claims Session
    X District Court
    Docket Number X SC X
    Trial Date: August 22, 2007

    Summary of Plaintiff's Case

    Plaintiff ordered cellular phone and service through Sprint Web site January
    30, 2007.

    Plaintiff decided after ordering phone, but before it arrived, that Sprint
    phone and service were no longer desired.

    Defendant has "30-Day Risk-Free Guarantee" promising full refund for service
    canceled within 30 days of initiation. (evidence: copy of policy from
    defendant's Web site)

    Plaintiff called Sprint to ask how to cancel order, and was told to refuse
    delivery of package from UPS, after which package would be returned to Sprint
    and full refund would be issued.

    Plaintiff refused package February 5. Package was returned to Sprint February
    7. (evidence: tracking information from UPS Web site)

    Over six months later, defendant still has not refunded cost of phone, $262.49,
    to defendant.

    Defendant sent plaintiff letter asking for plaintiff to call defendant about
    service cancelation. Purpose of this call was only to give defendant
    opportunity to try to convince plaintiff not to cancel service (defendant's
    agent referred to this letter as "retention letter" in subsequent phone
    conversation). Plaintiff sent back letter with notation demanding that account
    be canceled and refund issued without wasting any more of plaintiff's time.

    Defendant sent plaintiff four bills. Plaintiff sent back first two bills with
    notation demanding that account be closed and refund issued. Plaintiff refused
    delivery of third and fourth bills without opening them.

    Plaintiff spent hours on phone with various Sprint representatives, attempting
    to get refund. Refund was promised by several different Sprint employees but
    never delivered.

    Plaintiff disputed credit card charge with card issuer on March 15. Card
    issuer rejected dispute after contacting defendant, because defendant refused
    to confirm that phone had been returned. (evidence: copies of credit card
    statements with temporary credit and reversal highlighted)

    Plaintiff sent defendant's CEO complaint office letter on May 1, detailing all
    problems encountered by plaintiff and demanding full refund. (evidence: copy of
    letter)

    Plaintiff received voicemail message from defendant on May 14. Caller
    identified himself as Tyrone, referenced case number X and telephone number
    866-398-4606, and falsely claimed that plaintiff's credit card had never been
    charged any money by defendant. (evidence: scratch paper on which this message
    was written down)

    Defendant failed to follow its own published refund policies; failed to keep
    multiple promises to issue refund; forced plaintiff to spend hours on phone
    unsuccessfully attempting to obtain refund; failed to initiate proper
    investigation to confirm return of phone when contacted by credit card issuer;
    and failed to initiate proper investigation and issue refund in response to
    plaintiff's letter to CEO. Together, these failures are sufficiently egregious
    to constitute violation of MGL Chapter 93A. Plaintiff therefore demands
    damages as follows:

    262.49 cost of phone
    1.17 postage for letters and bills from plaintiff to defendant
    XXX.XX lost wages to appear in court (*)
    --------
    sub. XXX.XX
    XXX.XX trebled damages under MGL 93A
    --------
    sub. X,XXX.XX
    XX.XX 12% statutory interest (**)
    --------
    sub. X,XXX.XX
    40.00 filing fee
    --------
    TOTAL X,XXX.XX

    (*) Plaintiff earns $X annual salary and must use paid or unpaid vacation hours
    to cover absence while appearing in court. Annual salary is equivalent to $X
    per hour, or $X for estimated two hours necessary to appear in court.

    (**) Statutory interest is 12% per annum, calculated from date of breach, as
    per MGL Chapter 231 Section 6C. Date of tort is February 7, 2007, when phone
    was returned to defendant and defendant should have issued refund but didn't.
    196 days elapsed between date of tort and trial date. $X,XXX.XX x 196 / 365.25
    x 0.12 = $XX.XX.



    See More: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint;any suggestions?



  2. #2
    trader4@optonline.net
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?

    On Aug 21, 9:39 am, j...@kamens.brookline.ma.us (Jonathan Kamens)
    wrote:
    > I'm going to small claims court tomorrow to sue Sprint Nextel
    > for failing to refund the cost of a cell phone I returned to
    > them within the 30-day guarantee period (indeed, I returned
    > it the day I received it, without even opening it).
    >
    > I've prepared the following summary of my case. I intend to
    > give a copy to the clerk magistrate and to the defendant (if
    > they show up) and to use it as my outline when presenting my
    > case if I am asked to do so (the clerk magistrate may not
    > depend a full presentation if Sprint doesn't show up). Any
    > suggestions would be appreciated.
    >
    > I've elided certain details, such as my salary :-), from the
    > summary.
    >
    > Trial Court of Massachusetts
    > Small Claims Session
    > X District Court
    > Docket Number X SC X
    > Trial Date: August 22, 2007
    >
    > Summary of Plaintiff's Case
    >
    > Plaintiff ordered cellular phone and service through Sprint Web site January
    > 30, 2007.
    >
    > Plaintiff decided after ordering phone, but before it arrived, that Sprint
    > phone and service were no longer desired.
    >
    > Defendant has "30-Day Risk-Free Guarantee" promising full refund for service
    > canceled within 30 days of initiation. (evidence: copy of policy from
    > defendant's Web site)
    >
    > Plaintiff called Sprint to ask how to cancel order, and was told to refuse
    > delivery of package from UPS, after which package would be returned to Sprint
    > and full refund would be issued.
    >
    > Plaintiff refused package February 5. Package was returned to Sprint February
    > 7. (evidence: tracking information from UPS Web site)
    >
    > Over six months later, defendant still has not refunded cost of phone, $262.49,
    > to defendant.
    >
    > Defendant sent plaintiff letter asking for plaintiff to call defendant about
    > service cancelation. Purpose of this call was only to give defendant
    > opportunity to try to convince plaintiff not to cancel service (defendant's
    > agent referred to this letter as "retention letter" in subsequent phone
    > conversation). Plaintiff sent back letter with notation demanding that account
    > be canceled and refund issued without wasting any more of plaintiff's time.
    >
    > Defendant sent plaintiff four bills. Plaintiff sent back first two bills with
    > notation demanding that account be closed and refund issued. Plaintiff refused
    > delivery of third and fourth bills without opening them.
    >
    > Plaintiff spent hours on phone with various Sprint representatives, attempting
    > to get refund. Refund was promised by several different Sprint employees but
    > never delivered.
    >
    > Plaintiff disputed credit card charge with card issuer on March 15. Card
    > issuer rejected dispute after contacting defendant, because defendant refused
    > to confirm that phone had been returned. (evidence: copies of credit card
    > statements with temporary credit and reversal highlighted)
    >
    > Plaintiff sent defendant's CEO complaint office letter on May 1, detailing all
    > problems encountered by plaintiff and demanding full refund. (evidence: copy of
    > letter)
    >
    > Plaintiff received voicemail message from defendant on May 14. Caller
    > identified himself as Tyrone, referenced case number X and telephone number
    > 866-398-4606, and falsely claimed that plaintiff's credit card had never been
    > charged any money by defendant. (evidence: scratch paper on which this message
    > was written down)
    >
    > Defendant failed to follow its own published refund policies; failed to keep
    > multiple promises to issue refund; forced plaintiff to spend hours on phone
    > unsuccessfully attempting to obtain refund; failed to initiate proper
    > investigation to confirm return of phone when contacted by credit card issuer;
    > and failed to initiate proper investigation and issue refund in response to
    > plaintiff's letter to CEO. Together, these failures are sufficiently egregious
    > to constitute violation of MGL Chapter 93A. Plaintiff therefore demands
    > damages as follows:
    >
    > 262.49 cost of phone
    > 1.17 postage for letters and bills from plaintiff to defendant
    > XXX.XX lost wages to appear in court (*)
    > --------
    > sub. XXX.XX
    > XXX.XX trebled damages under MGL 93A
    > --------
    > sub. X,XXX.XX
    > XX.XX 12% statutory interest (**)
    > --------
    > sub. X,XXX.XX
    > 40.00 filing fee
    > --------
    > TOTAL X,XXX.XX
    >
    > (*) Plaintiff earns $X annual salary and must use paid or unpaid vacation hours
    > to cover absence while appearing in court. Annual salary is equivalent to $X
    > per hour, or $X for estimated two hours necessary to appear in court.
    >
    > (**) Statutory interest is 12% per annum, calculated from date of breach, as
    > per MGL Chapter 231 Section 6C. Date of tort is February 7, 2007, when phone
    > was returned to defendant and defendant should have issued refund but didn't.
    > 196 days elapsed between date of tort and trial date. $X,XXX.XX x 196 / 365.25
    > x 0.12 = $XX.XX.



    I seriously doubt you'll get lost wages for appearing in court as
    courts don't want to get involved in this and don't consider it an
    expense you can recover. If you had to take a 1/2 day off to meet
    with Sprint because of all their screwing around, that probably would
    be considered.

    I'd make sure you are well versed in the law that covers 3X damages,
    as that is your chance for coming out ahead. Looks like you've done
    a good job of documenting/preparing. Let us know how it goes.




  3. #3
    Daniel Ganek
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?

    Jonathan Kamens wrote:
    > I'm going to small claims court tomorrow to sue Sprint Nextel
    > for failing to refund the cost of a cell phone I returned to
    > them within the 30-day guarantee period (indeed, I returned
    > it the day I received it, without even opening it).
    >
    > I've prepared the following summary of my case. I intend to
    > give a copy to the clerk magistrate and to the defendant (if
    > they show up) and to use it as my outline when presenting my
    > case if I am asked to do so (the clerk magistrate may not
    > depend a full presentation if Sprint doesn't show up). Any
    > suggestions would be appreciated.
    >
    > I've elided certain details, such as my salary :-), from the
    > summary.
    >
    > Trial Court of Massachusetts
    > Small Claims Session
    > X District Court
    > Docket Number X SC X
    > Trial Date: August 22, 2007
    >
    > Summary of Plaintiff's Case
    >
    > Plaintiff ordered cellular phone and service through Sprint Web site January
    > 30, 2007.
    >
    > Plaintiff decided after ordering phone, but before it arrived, that Sprint
    > phone and service were no longer desired.
    >
    > Defendant has "30-Day Risk-Free Guarantee" promising full refund for service
    > canceled within 30 days of initiation. (evidence: copy of policy from
    > defendant's Web site)
    >
    > Plaintiff called Sprint to ask how to cancel order, and was told to refuse
    > delivery of package from UPS, after which package would be returned to Sprint
    > and full refund would be issued.
    >
    > Plaintiff refused package February 5. Package was returned to Sprint February
    > 7. (evidence: tracking information from UPS Web site)
    >
    > Over six months later, defendant still has not refunded cost of phone, $262.49,
    > to defendant.
    >
    > Defendant sent plaintiff letter asking for plaintiff to call defendant about
    > service cancelation. Purpose of this call was only to give defendant
    > opportunity to try to convince plaintiff not to cancel service (defendant's
    > agent referred to this letter as "retention letter" in subsequent phone
    > conversation). Plaintiff sent back letter with notation demanding that account
    > be canceled and refund issued without wasting any more of plaintiff's time.
    >
    > Defendant sent plaintiff four bills. Plaintiff sent back first two bills with
    > notation demanding that account be closed and refund issued. Plaintiff refused
    > delivery of third and fourth bills without opening them.
    >
    > Plaintiff spent hours on phone with various Sprint representatives, attempting
    > to get refund. Refund was promised by several different Sprint employees but
    > never delivered.
    >
    > Plaintiff disputed credit card charge with card issuer on March 15. Card
    > issuer rejected dispute after contacting defendant, because defendant refused
    > to confirm that phone had been returned. (evidence: copies of credit card
    > statements with temporary credit and reversal highlighted)
    >
    > Plaintiff sent defendant's CEO complaint office letter on May 1, detailing all
    > problems encountered by plaintiff and demanding full refund. (evidence: copy of
    > letter)
    >
    > Plaintiff received voicemail message from defendant on May 14. Caller
    > identified himself as Tyrone, referenced case number X and telephone number
    > 866-398-4606, and falsely claimed that plaintiff's credit card had never been
    > charged any money by defendant. (evidence: scratch paper on which this message
    > was written down)
    >
    > Defendant failed to follow its own published refund policies; failed to keep
    > multiple promises to issue refund; forced plaintiff to spend hours on phone
    > unsuccessfully attempting to obtain refund; failed to initiate proper
    > investigation to confirm return of phone when contacted by credit card issuer;
    > and failed to initiate proper investigation and issue refund in response to
    > plaintiff's letter to CEO. Together, these failures are sufficiently egregious
    > to constitute violation of MGL Chapter 93A. Plaintiff therefore demands
    > damages as follows:
    >
    > 262.49 cost of phone
    > 1.17 postage for letters and bills from plaintiff to defendant
    > XXX.XX lost wages to appear in court (*)
    > --------
    > sub. XXX.XX
    > XXX.XX trebled damages under MGL 93A
    > --------
    > sub. X,XXX.XX
    > XX.XX 12% statutory interest (**)
    > --------
    > sub. X,XXX.XX
    > 40.00 filing fee
    > --------
    > TOTAL X,XXX.XX
    >
    > (*) Plaintiff earns $X annual salary and must use paid or unpaid vacation hours
    > to cover absence while appearing in court. Annual salary is equivalent to $X
    > per hour, or $X for estimated two hours necessary to appear in court.
    >
    > (**) Statutory interest is 12% per annum, calculated from date of breach, as
    > per MGL Chapter 231 Section 6C. Date of tort is February 7, 2007, when phone
    > was returned to defendant and defendant should have issued refund but didn't.
    > 196 days elapsed between date of tort and trial date. $X,XXX.XX x 196 / 365.25
    > x 0.12 = $XX.XX.


    MGL 93A requires that you send them a demand letter and wait 30 days.

    Did you do that?

    /dan



  4. #4
    trader4@optonline.net
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?

    On Aug 21, 12:34 pm, j...@kamens.brookline.ma.us (Jonathan Kamens)
    wrote:
    > Abe <no...@nowhere.com> writes:
    > >Agreed. Good preparation. Reimbursement for lost wages for court
    > >appearance won't happen.

    >
    > So should I leave it in my claim or remove it? I.e., I
    > concede that I probably won't get it, but does it hurt to ask
    > for it?
    >
    > --
    > Help stop the genocide in Darfur!http://www.genocideintervention.net/


    Personally, I'd take out the lost wages for appearance as I don't
    think any court will award it and I think leaving it in could be a
    small negative, in the sense that it could make it look like you're
    piling on to make the amount bigger. If you do leave it in, I don't
    think it's a big negative, which would be asking for something like
    pain and suffering. LOL




  5. #5
    Zippy P
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?

    take it out, makes you look greedy and like you know little about law.





  6. #6
    Jonathan Kamens
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?

    I'm actually sort of hoping they don't show up tomorrow. If
    I win by default and then they refuse to pay, I can hire a
    bailiff to walk into any Sprint-owned store in the area and
    confiscate property to auction off to pay the judgment plus
    the bailiff's fee. I think that would be sort of fun.

    --
    Help stop the genocide in Darfur!
    http://www.genocideintervention.net/



  7. #7
    Zen Cohen
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?

    Just wanna say good luck to you. Sprint has a good network but its customer
    service is a nightmare to deal with. BTW, I'd go ahead and claim lost wages
    if you follow whatever statute or case law says you need to prove it up. But
    if you can't prove your case on this issue, I wouldn't raise it because it
    will dilute the merits of your othr more viable issues. Also, has Sprint
    claimed that the state's consumer protection laws are preempted by federal
    laws/regs?


    "Jonathan Kamens" <jik@kamens.brookline.ma.us> wrote in message
    news:faetfg$7d7$1@jik2.kamens.brookline.ma.us...
    > I'm going to small claims court tomorrow to sue Sprint Nextel
    > for failing to refund the cost of a cell phone I returned to
    > them within the 30-day guarantee period (indeed, I returned
    > it the day I received it, without even opening it).
    >
    > I've prepared the following summary of my case. I intend to
    > give a copy to the clerk magistrate and to the defendant (if
    > they show up) and to use it as my outline when presenting my
    > case if I am asked to do so (the clerk magistrate may not
    > depend a full presentation if Sprint doesn't show up). Any
    > suggestions would be appreciated.
    >
    > I've elided certain details, such as my salary :-), from the
    > summary.
    >
    > Trial Court of Massachusetts
    > Small Claims Session
    > X District Court
    > Docket Number X SC X
    > Trial Date: August 22, 2007
    >
    > Summary of Plaintiff's Case
    >
    > Plaintiff ordered cellular phone and service through Sprint Web site
    > January
    > 30, 2007.
    >
    > Plaintiff decided after ordering phone, but before it arrived, that Sprint
    > phone and service were no longer desired.
    >
    > Defendant has "30-Day Risk-Free Guarantee" promising full refund for
    > service
    > canceled within 30 days of initiation. (evidence: copy of policy from
    > defendant's Web site)
    >
    > Plaintiff called Sprint to ask how to cancel order, and was told to refuse
    > delivery of package from UPS, after which package would be returned to
    > Sprint
    > and full refund would be issued.
    >
    > Plaintiff refused package February 5. Package was returned to Sprint
    > February
    > 7. (evidence: tracking information from UPS Web site)
    >
    > Over six months later, defendant still has not refunded cost of phone,
    > $262.49,
    > to defendant.
    >
    > Defendant sent plaintiff letter asking for plaintiff to call defendant
    > about
    > service cancelation. Purpose of this call was only to give defendant
    > opportunity to try to convince plaintiff not to cancel service
    > (defendant's
    > agent referred to this letter as "retention letter" in subsequent phone
    > conversation). Plaintiff sent back letter with notation demanding that
    > account
    > be canceled and refund issued without wasting any more of plaintiff's
    > time.
    >
    > Defendant sent plaintiff four bills. Plaintiff sent back first two bills
    > with
    > notation demanding that account be closed and refund issued. Plaintiff
    > refused
    > delivery of third and fourth bills without opening them.
    >
    > Plaintiff spent hours on phone with various Sprint representatives,
    > attempting
    > to get refund. Refund was promised by several different Sprint employees
    > but
    > never delivered.
    >
    > Plaintiff disputed credit card charge with card issuer on March 15. Card
    > issuer rejected dispute after contacting defendant, because defendant
    > refused
    > to confirm that phone had been returned. (evidence: copies of credit card
    > statements with temporary credit and reversal highlighted)
    >
    > Plaintiff sent defendant's CEO complaint office letter on May 1, detailing
    > all
    > problems encountered by plaintiff and demanding full refund. (evidence:
    > copy of
    > letter)
    >
    > Plaintiff received voicemail message from defendant on May 14. Caller
    > identified himself as Tyrone, referenced case number X and telephone
    > number
    > 866-398-4606, and falsely claimed that plaintiff's credit card had never
    > been
    > charged any money by defendant. (evidence: scratch paper on which this
    > message
    > was written down)
    >
    > Defendant failed to follow its own published refund policies; failed to
    > keep
    > multiple promises to issue refund; forced plaintiff to spend hours on
    > phone
    > unsuccessfully attempting to obtain refund; failed to initiate proper
    > investigation to confirm return of phone when contacted by credit card
    > issuer;
    > and failed to initiate proper investigation and issue refund in response
    > to
    > plaintiff's letter to CEO. Together, these failures are sufficiently
    > egregious
    > to constitute violation of MGL Chapter 93A. Plaintiff therefore demands
    > damages as follows:
    >
    > 262.49 cost of phone
    > 1.17 postage for letters and bills from plaintiff to defendant
    > XXX.XX lost wages to appear in court (*)
    > --------
    > sub. XXX.XX
    > XXX.XX trebled damages under MGL 93A
    > --------
    > sub. X,XXX.XX
    > XX.XX 12% statutory interest (**)
    > --------
    > sub. X,XXX.XX
    > 40.00 filing fee
    > --------
    > TOTAL X,XXX.XX
    >
    > (*) Plaintiff earns $X annual salary and must use paid or unpaid vacation
    > hours
    > to cover absence while appearing in court. Annual salary is equivalent to
    > $X
    > per hour, or $X for estimated two hours necessary to appear in court.
    >
    > (**) Statutory interest is 12% per annum, calculated from date of breach,
    > as
    > per MGL Chapter 231 Section 6C. Date of tort is February 7, 2007, when
    > phone
    > was returned to defendant and defendant should have issued refund but
    > didn't.
    > 196 days elapsed between date of tort and trial date. $X,XXX.XX x 196 /
    > 365.25
    > x 0.12 = $XX.XX.






  8. #8
    Zen Cohen
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?


    "Jonathan Kamens" <jik@kamens.brookline.ma.us> wrote in message
    news:fafnpe$eem$1@jik2.kamens.brookline.ma.us...
    > "Zen Cohen" <aturny@hotmail.com> writes:


    .....

    >>BTW, I'd go ahead and claim lost wages
    >>if you follow whatever statute or case law says you need to prove it up.
    >>But
    >>if you can't prove your case on this issue, I wouldn't raise it because it
    >>will dilute the merits of your othr more viable issues.

    >
    > I think the advice given here not to try to claim lost wages
    > for the court appearance is good, and I'm going to follow it.
    > The little research I did on the topic confirmed that lost
    > wages resulting from appearing in court are generally not
    > recoverable.


    One thing that might demonstrate/establish your credibility with the court
    is to let it know that you are abandoning that claim because it appears that
    the law doesn't support it. Judges usually appreciate it when litigants are
    forthright with them. The downside is that your opponent could try arguing
    you raised a frivolous issue. In any case, conceding a non-material issue is
    a gambit that often works if it's done right.

    >>Also, has Sprint
    >>claimed that the state's consumer protection laws are preempted by federal
    >>laws/regs?

    >
    > Sprint hasn't claimed anything. They haven't contacted me
    > since I filed suit. They would be fools to make a claim
    > anything like the one you postulate above; there's no legal
    > basis for such a claim.


    I have no idea if federal laws have any application here, but I know that
    some consumer-protection statutes are preempted by federal law for common
    carriers like fedex. (I know because one of my first cases as a lawyer was
    to sue fedex and it was a nightmare learning the applicable federal law.)
    Was curious to know if there was any similar sort of scheme protecting cell
    companies. They likely would have claimed this as a defense in their answer,
    though. They did answer, right?





  9. #9
    Donald Newcomb
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?

    "Jonathan Kamens" <jik@kamens.brookline.ma.us> wrote in message
    news:fafkh3$dd4$1@jik2.kamens.brookline.ma.us...
    > I'm actually sort of hoping they don't show up tomorrow. If
    > I win by default and then they refuse to pay, I can hire a
    > bailiff to walk into any Sprint-owned store in the area and
    > confiscate property to auction off to pay the judgment plus
    > the bailiff's fee. I think that would be sort of fun.


    Many years ago I read of a small claims case where a tenant sued his
    landlord over something. Landlord ignored the suit and lost. Tennant had
    sheriff sell the apartment building to pay the debt. No one else showed up
    for the sale. Tennant bought the apartment building for petty cash. Ended up
    evicting the landlord. Who knows, you could end up owning Sprint.

    --
    Donald R. Newcomb
    DRNewcomb (at) attglobal (dot) net





  10. #10
    Jonathan Kamens
    Guest

    Re: Going to small claims court tomorrow against Sprint; any suggestions?

    "Zen Cohen" <aturny@hotmail.com> writes:
    >They did answer, right?


    No. You do understand that this is a small-claims case,
    right?

    The plaintiff who initiates a small-claims case rarely
    provides a filing that is detailed enough for the defendant to
    answer before trial. The plaintiff fills out a very simple
    form, and the section of the form in which the cause for
    action is documented is hardly large enough to provide any
    detail.

    The defendant in a small-claims case is notified about the
    trial in advance and is provided with contact information for
    the plaintiff. The defendant can contact the plaintiff if
    s/he wishes to attempt to negotiate a settlement before the
    trial. As I said before, Sprint did not contact me.

    --
    Help stop the genocide in Darfur!
    http://www.genocideintervention.net/



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast