In this case the Plaintiff's Attorney is a law partner of the Owner of the Plaintiff. There is also a reasonable question that Plaintiff Attorney has an ownership interest in the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff and law firm have the same address down to the suite #.

However, the Plaintiff's Attorney has gone out of his way to hide the fact that he is a law partner of the Plaintiff. Rather than use his firm's name in the filings, he has used his personal PC. In addition he is using his home address for correspondence rather his law office address, which is the same address as the Plaintiff. A check with the GA Sec of State shows that the Attorney PC has offices at the same address as the Plaintiff and not at the home address he is using. However, the phone numbers he uses all go back to the real office. Additionally, he has no business license at this home address.

I was never served a First Request for Admissions. The only evidence that the Plaintiff's Attorney mailed the doc is his Certificate of Service. Does all the intertwined relatioships offer any hope that the court will ignore his Cert of Service? The only evidence the Plaintiff has to show that I am personally liable for the debt of the corporation is "my failure to answers the Request" and therefore the assumption that my failure constitutes an admission of liability.

So far the Court has held that the service was adequate but questioned the attorney's wording in the Request. I'm looking for an argument that since the Plaintiff, Plaintiff Ownership, Law Partnership and the obscuring of those relationship should cause the Judge to require a higher level of performance on the part of the Plaintiff and Attorney and therefore deny Plaintiff's claim that I admitted to liability by default.

Sorry it took so long to explain

Thanks!

My first questioj back to you is: do you have attorney? This is beyond small claims, and so you really need professoinal advice.

However, it really doesn't matter if the plaintiff and his lawyer are "intertwined," so to speak. There's no law that says your attorney can't have an interest in the outcome. The plaintiff and his attorney could be marred to each other and it wouldn't matter. It becomes a conflict of interest if an attorney has an interest in the opposition side.

Obviously you want to focus on never having received the initual Request for Answers. What evidence does the plaitiff have that you received them (e.g. return receipt, or perhaps they were hand delivered to you)? I assume that you now have them - have you responded?