 |
My Son Was Attack At School And He Was Awarded Over 30,000.00 A Year Has Pass And The Probation Dept And Recovery Dept Has Not Helped Me To Try To Colletwhat They Owe Me I Know That They Have Homes I Am Dealing With Two Familys They Refuse To Pay. What Can I Do? Court Has Order Them To Pay. And I Don't Have The Money To Hire A Laywer Let Alone Pay All The Medcial Bills. How Do I Lien There Home And What Else Can I Do To Get What Is Owed To Me??
Hello 7:
Write a letter to the judge. It's HIS order that is not being obeyed. He'll probably be interested in that.
excon
PS > You should have started your own thread. You'll get more answers that way. Maybe somebody will come along and do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
Excon is right - write a letter to the Judge saying exactly what you have said here, enclose a copy of the Order, ask how to proceed.
Come back and let us know how you make out -
Moved this to its own thread,
Educate me... is this like Small Claims court, where being awarded the judgement is the easy part, collecting it is hard, or do the rules change when you get to the higher level courts?
The rules don't change, the players do. When you get to the higher levels of the court system, you get attorneys representing nearly every party. These attorneys do their homework ahead of time sue people who have insurance (easy to collect from ) or sufficient assets to execute on.Quote:
Originally Posted by froggy7
Quote:
Originally Posted by sideoutshu
Are you saying that in your area Attorneys don't sue unless potential Defendants have insurance or sufficient assets to pay? Or am I misunderstanding - ?
No, I am saying that it is like that in every area where attorneys are working on contingency. One third of nothing is still nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
Quote:
Originally Posted by sideoutshu
I'm not seeing that in my area of NYS so I'm not sure that is true in every area where Attorneys work on contingency.
I see Attorneys taking cases based on "some day the Defendant may/will/should have money." Judgments are taken and renewed with the hope that someday there will be funds available to pay, particularly when children are involved.
I track assets all the time for Attorneys.
You can't get blood from a stone. If they don't have the means to pay then how are you supposed to collect what is owed. Maybe some kind of payment system?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Altenweg
You hope the stone will eventually get a job or a bank account or fall into some money. You get a judgment, you sit on it, perhaps renew it - and wait and track and wait and track. You file liens and check on motor vehicle registrations.
I would be interested to know what types of cases you are talking about, and how these attorneys are getting paid for all this "taking", "renewing", etc. it does a law firm no good to take a judgment against an individual with no assets or insurance. While it may seem like a great idea to hold a judgment over someone's head their whole life, it simply isn't practical.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
If I take a judgment against an insolvent defendant, what is my best case scenario as an attorney? Garnishing the wages of someone who didn't make enough to have any assets in the first place? So now my law firm is going to chase around Joe Schmoe defendant for 10% of his minimum wage for the next 20 years... I don't think so.
Most lawyers worth their salt don't take cases and work countless hours obtaining a judgment based upon a pipe dream of someone one day "coming into money". Your average personal injury case takes a minimum of 50-100 attorney hours to get to a point where you can obtain a judgment. Then throw another 40-50 hours for the most basic 3 day trial + selection; and add two deposition trascripts ($1,000); an index number ($210); RJI Fee ($95 now?) Note of Issue fee ($125 ish); expert witness testimony ($3500 for half a day). That isn't something attorneys undertake for a "maybe" in most circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
So, the law works well and helps citizens! If the pay scales of lawyers and teachers was reversed...
Quote:
Originally Posted by sideoutshu
I must work for firms that aren't worth their salt because I see them taking on these cases - as far as disbursements, if the client doesn't have the money for the basic disbursements, well, then there's no representation by that particular firm.
I think it's out of line to state that Attorneys who don't operate the same way you do "aren't worth their salt." Maybe it's a different area, maybe it's a different mind set, I don't know. Also, not all cases go to trial so those figures aren't necessarily correct, nor do all cases require expert witnesses.
I understand your point but believe you are using inflated figures.
I also do liability investigations pro bono on occasion - so I guess I'm also not worth my salt.
Perhaps every Attorney doesn't think having the defendant obtain employment, purchase property some time in the future, is a pipe dream.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simoneaugie
This is why if one law firm says, "no," ask someone else! Everyone has a very different opinon, very different ways of evaluating cases. Some Lawyers really are crusaders - they'll never be rich but they sleep pretty well at night.
And in some states there is help for attorneys that do so many cases free for low income, the state helps them with malpractice insurance.
Also in many states there is legal aid societies. And again, some will bill you and work out payments to them.
Like I said, I would be interested to know what types of cases you are talking about. It isn't personal injury cases. If you are talking collection firms, you may be right. But that is because doing collection work as an attorney is for the most part a mindless undertaking that requires little effort.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
I have never seen a Plaintiff's firm that doesn't front the money for disbursements. If a Plaintiff thought they had to invest two grand to start a case, many wouldn't bother.
Good attorneys prepare EVERY case as if it were going to trial. If they are not doing so, they are shortchanging their clients, and therefor, aren't worth their salt. 99% of injury cases in New York State require expert testimony. If you can tell me of a way to get admissible evidence on damages to a jury without expert testimony, please tell me, it would help a lot. Unfortunately, I don't know many jurors who can read an MRI film on their own.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
The figures I quoted are standard court fees for NY. The deposition fees were low, considering the assumption that only two woul dbe taken (the bare minimum).
Liability investigations for what? Why would you need to do something pro bono if there is a recovery in the future? This emphasizes my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
It doesn't matter what they think in that regard. The simple fact is that it is not economically viable for a law firm to put a lien on property (you only get money if they sell it) or garnish wages (just not worth it).Quote:
Originally Posted by JudyKayTee
We're just playing chase your tail here so let me just respond to your questions and then I think the subject is dead.
I'm an independent liability investigator and work for more than a few law firms so, yes, I'm talking liability "cases." You asked if I'm talking collection cases - I own a process service company and we most definitely do not work pro bono.
You are incorrect when you say, "It isn't personal injury cases." I most definitely work on liability cases of all kinds from dog bites to motor vehicle accidents.
Perhaps you have never seen a law firm that doesn't front the money for disbursements - I most definitely have. Obviously it is different in your part of the Country. In some instances, yes, the law firm fronts the expenses; in others it does not. I don't think there's an "always" and "never" here.
I'd be curious where you get your statistic that 99% of injury cases in NYS require expert testimony - again, I do not see that. Perhaps you are only representing people in high end cases. I see a lot of cases where the medical evidence is brought in by stipulation.
Your "if you can tell me a way to get admissible evidence on damages to a jury without expert testimony, please tell me, it would help alot {sic}; I don't know many jurors who can read an MRI film on their own" is an unnecessary comment - I thought this was a discussion of experiences, not a slamfest.
I said I work pro bono on some of these cases - I never said the law firm was working pro bono - please don't misread what I say to "emphasize your point." But, yes, some of the firms do work pro bono, particularly when it's cases involving children, dog bites and scarring.
Your post concerns me because there are people with Judgments who will read your words and decide they cannot and will not collect and they will drop the matter or there are people with potential lawsuits who will make that same decision and in so doing shortchange themselves and the injured party.
What I don't understand about this entire case is why was the school NOT brought into this lawsuit in the first place if the attack happened at school? Am really mystified that the attorney did not go after the "deep pockets" of the school and went after the parents instead? It really makes no sense to me... or did the attorney go after the school and you got some sort of a settlement from the school and are now trying to get the rest of the settlement from the parents?
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:37 AM. |