Speculative Damages in Small Claims

[tranquility]

1. Small claims doesn't allow attorney's fees in Nevada.
2. You don't always have to be in privity to have a cause of action
3. $500 (claiming more in lost profits which is possible to be damages)
4. Fraudulent misrepresentation

1. But, frivolous lawsuits are actionable and all damages for defending them can be compensated for.
2. You do in contract with some exceptions. Those exceptions don't apply to your issues.
3. Not in tort in the way you're thinking of.
4. That is where the lack of consideration kills your argument. You could not reasonably rely the bank would continue to agree because of the pre-existing duty of the seller to pay his lien off.

 

[justalayman]

mo42186;3092889]1. Small claims doesn't allow attorney's fees in Nevada.

what makes you think this will remain in small claims court?

2. You don't always have to be in privity to have a cause of action

true but you are arguing a right under a contract that privity would be required to give you standing

3. $500 (claiming more in lost profits which is possible to be damages)

Where does that come from? It smells a bit so I can guess.

4. Fraudulent misrepresentation

still trying to figure out what they misrepresented. You are still trying to place the obligation of the seller on the lender.

 

[mo42186]

1. But, frivolous lawsuits are actionable and all damages for defending them can be compensated for.
2. You do in contract with some exceptions. Those exceptions don't apply to your issues.
3. Not in tort in the way you're thinking of.
4. That is where the lack of consideration kills your argument. You could not reasonably rely the bank would continue to agree because of the pre-existing duty of the seller to pay his lien off.

If it's frivolous, the judge will throw out that portion of the claim.

 

[justalayman]

If it's frivolous, the judge will throw out that portion of the claim.

you be sure to let us know how this all turns out for ya.

 

[tranquility]

You don't think attorneys prepare for court? I don't get your point.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

If it's frivolous, the judge will throw out that portion of the claim.

You really need to familiarize yourself with the Rules of Civil Procedure, particularly Rule 11.

I suspect the bank's attorney (who is on salary, so doesn't cost the bank anything extra) will:

• Remove the case to the trial level
• File for sanctions under Rule 11.
• File for a dismissal under Rule 12(b)(5) [What did they do with 3?]

 

[tranquility]

While I doubt this suit will rise to federal court, the state will have similar provisions. However, as to:

I suspect the bank's attorney (who is on salary, so doesn't cost the bank anything extra)

"Extra" is not what the court would apportion. For example (not precidential) WEINRAUB v. GLEN RAUCH SECURITIES (http://ny.findacase.com/research/wfrmDocViewer.aspx/xq/fac.20051209_0001587.SNY.htm/qx):

b. Arbitrator Defendants

Although Rule 11 does not require an award of full attorneys' fees incurred in defending the action, I find this to be the proper sanction, considering the extent of the Rule 11 violation. Any lesser sanction would not advance the goals of Rule 11, especially in light of the efforts by the Arbitrator Defendants and the Court to dissuade counsel from pursuing these claims.*fn77

The Arbitrator Defendants were represented throughout this litigation by attorneys from the NASD's general counsel's office.*fn78 These attorneys do not bill by the hour.*fn79 Nevertheless, the NASD has estimated that this litigation cost it $7,200.65 in attorney time and expenses.*fn80 This figure derives from the following elements: 1) a "conservative estimate" of 42.5 hours that two of its attorneys devoted to this litigation; 2) an estimated hourly rate of $156.25, derived from the average NASD attorney salary, and the value of each attorney's benefits; and $560.02 in expenses, chiefly consisting of the airfare for two attorneys to fly from Washington D.C. to New York for a conference on June 23.*fn81 Having carefully reviewed the NASD's figures, I find that an award of $7,200.65 is warranted. In particular, the hourly rate claimed by the NASD attorneys is much lower than what would have been charged by New York counsel.

 

[OHRoadwarrior]

Ohhhh, bump to trial level for sanctions to be implemented. I like it.

 

[mo42186]

You really need to familiarize yourself with the Rules of Civil Procedure, particularly Rule 11.

I suspect the bank's attorney (who is on salary, so doesn't cost the bank anything extra) will:

• Remove the case to the trial level
• File for sanctions under Rule 11.
• File for a dismissal under Rule 12(b)(5) [What did they do with 3?]

why would FRCP apply to small claims?

 

[mo42186]

Ohhhh, bump to trial level for sanctions to be implemented. I like it.

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/courtrules/JCRCP.html

(j) Transfer of Action to District Court.  When any counterclaim or other pleading raises any issue or claim which may not be adjudicated in a justice court, the justice may separate the issues or claims and adjudicate those over which the court has jurisdiction and require the other issues or claims to be filed in district court or the justice may order the entire matter transferred for adjudication in district court. Where justice requires that the matters be heard together, the justice shall order the entire matter transferred for adjudication in district court.

A valid point. By the way. What kind of online community tries to **** on a new member trying to get help? I would think people are rooting for the individuals. This isn't some text book law argument. This has been a huge waste of my time and money dealing with these clowns at BoA. It's clear that you want me to lose to validate your own intelligence. That's pretty cold blooded.

 

[justalayman]

. By the way. What kind of online community tries to **** on a new member trying to get help? I would think people are rooting for the individuals. This isn't some text book law argument. This has been a huge waste of my time and money dealing with these clowns at BoA. It's clear that you want me to lose to validate your own intelligence. That's pretty cold blooded.

You apparently misunderstand the purpose of this forum. It isn't here to "root for the little guy" and "punish the man". It is to give some direction as to the legal aspects of your situation.

It's just that nobody agrees with your position here, nothing more.

 

[mo42186]

You apparently misunderstand the purpose of this forum. It isn't here to "root for the little guy" and "punish the man". It is to give some direction as to the legal aspects of your situation.

It's just that nobody agrees with your position here, nothing more.

Right, so sarcasm, snarky comments, and insults are really constructive.

 

[justalayman]

Right, so sarcasm, snarky comments, and insults are really constructive.

that comes with the Free part. If you wish to limit the remarks, I would suggest hiring a lawyer who you can fire if you do not like the tenor of their message.

 

[Mass_Shyster]

why would FRCP apply to small claims?

They wouldn't. That's why I quoted the Nevada Rules.

 

[mo42186]

They wouldn't. That's why I quoted the Nevada Rules.

my bad - i thought i saw the word federal in there.