Duty to Sue Correct Person - Damages?

State: NJ

I had a summary judgment entered against me for debts of my then girlfriend. I appealed and judgment was reversed. My issue now is that this judgment was on my credit report for months and I had to pay an extra deposit for my home rental and was turned down for other credit. I wanted to sue the original business that filed the suit against me initially as they had no standing to sue me. My name was listed as the Emergency Contact on my girlfriend's form which is where they got my name. She could have put George Bush on that form...so they would have sued him as well?? No way joint and several liability applies to person on Contact form...who didn't even agree to be listed there.

1. Where can I go (online preferably) to find any case law or statutes to support the above for NJ? I think original person had a duty to sue correct person. They sued both of us. (I had moved so was never served correctly is why it got to summary judgment)

2. Is there an approved method for determining damages when it's something like "denied credit" and "pay extra deposit"? The judgment is STILL on some of my credit reports as they've been slow to remove. Entered in April '07 initially.

Thanks!

When you say the judgement was "reversed" on appeal, what do you mean. If this was just a reversal of a default judgment, you still have to go to court and win on the original charges (or get them dropped by the plaintiff) before you have a cause of action.

There is no "duty" to sue the proper person in a legal sense. This is not a negligence tort. This is abuse of process or malicious prosecution tort. To illustrate the difference (although not precisely correct), it would be better to say they have a "duty" to not intentionally file a meritless suit against a person. There is nothing in your post which indicates this as yet. (Unless the *sole* reason for filing is as emergency contact. Were you not ever living together? Did you benefit from the girl's debts or gain any property from thern? Did you have conversations or other acts indicating a joint ownership of the debts?) There are many ways to take the suit out of being maliciously filed.

As to damages if you overcome those hurdles, you have to prove them up. How much more did you have to pay? What was the cost of how things went with the credit companies? Then, try for punitive damages in your filing. If you can prove the tort, you are close to proving out the conduct required for getting punitive damages.

Tranquility’s first statement gets to the heart of the matter.

If a judgment was entered against you, and the matter went to a trial de novo on an appeal and you prevailed, there is no longer a judgment against you. CRAs collect public record information (eg. judgments) directly from the source (eg. a court, for a judgment record). Depending on the size and location of a court, a reasonable time to expect a record update is 60-90 days to 6 months. If there is no longer a judgment against you, dispute it directly with the CRA(s). Include a copy of de novo decision, if you have it, and send it CRRR. You can still expect to wait 30-60 days to see it fall off.

Two of the three CRAs (Experian and Equifax) were hit with multi-million dollar fines and judgments last years for similar record errors, and you should get a fairly prompt response.

If Tranquility’s second statement is accurate – you vacated a default judgment and the original case still must be heard, you have to wait for a ruling. If it is against you, the CRAs will maintain the record but may eventually get the judgment date right. If a ruling on a vacated judgment is against you, the CRAs will keep the record (see above).

Given that the CRAs pick up public records from the source, I don’t see that you have a case against the plaintiff for any damages resulting from a judgment in that suit ending up on your CR. If you prevailed on appeal, you could try for malicious prosecution or abuse of process against the original plaintiff but, on the facts posted, I don’t think that you could prevail on either cause of action or anything similar.

My advice would be to get it off your CR, if you have a basis, and move on. Otherwise, you’re likely to become more frustrated than you are now and pay money to do it. If/when you fix the problem, go back and try to re-negotiate your rent deposit. Explain that the problem was not of your causing.

You “wanted to sue the original business”, but one infers that you didn’t. You apparently got served and either ignored it (because it was ridiculous), with a resulting default judgment, or went to trial and didn’t prevail. We haven’t seen what your girlfriend put on the form. Maybe, with more information, you have a cause of action against her. Where I depart from Tranquility is that I don’t see a basis for any damages, much less punitive, on the information that you’ve posted so far. If the original plaintiff was grossly negligent, explain and I’d re-think that.

Where I depart from Tranquility is that I don’t see a basis for any damages, much less punitive, on the information that you’ve posted so far. If the original plaintiff was grossly negligent, explain and I’d re-think that.

Click to expand...

We have no disagreement--I think. I also believe there is not a basis for a lawsuit against the original plaintiff from the facts posted. However, if the facts were to lead to the matter being actionable, I told the OP what he's going to have to do for damages. And, *if* it is actionable, and *if* a MP or AP is won by the OP, punitives are going to be appropriate in most instances because of the elements the OP would have to prove up for the torts would be much the same as he would have to prove up to collect punitives.

We have no disagreement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Hope you got your computer problem worked out. That kind of thing makes me crazy until I find the solution.)

I did get the computer problem worked out, thanks to following all of Chien's advice. I don't know what solved it, but I did all the steps and there is not a problem any longer. (Actually, I didn't follow *all* the advice. I did not restore my image. I had one, but didn't need to go there. I used to know things about these computin thingys [Back when we measured file communications in bauds.] and *always* stay backed-up. With these new disks you can fit in your pocket, I can do whole images with little effort and keep the image in a different location. Word to the wise--do the same.)

Word to the wise--do the same.

Click to expand...

I agree. So would Chien. We share space for our off-site back-ups and probably spend more time then we should tinkering with the computers. Part of the holidays went to installing new external drives and networked printers. Our offices are close enough that we could even store on each others machines, but then the building would burn down <g>.

Initial Suit Clarification

(Sorry, guess the original posting went up twice. Computer gave me an error first time and I didn't see posting. Anyway...)

As far as first suit, the doctor's office sued both of us for her not paying her bill. She's obviously a valid person to sue. My point is that I should not have been party to the suit. We did live together, but so what? It was a medical bill. Summary was entered because I moved long before suit was filed. Never got served. First I heard of it was when I went to rent an apt this year and landlord said I had a judgment on CR. The judgment was vacated against me and her for faulty service. She then paid bill before doctor's office could sue again. It was $79. (She would have obviously paid but also moved and wasn't served or realized it was outstanding.)

So yes, I am dealing with CR to remove judgment and they will eventually do so. Problem isn't really them. Not only did I have to go through time, etc. to appeal initial verdict, but had to pay landlord $1800 as extra rent deposit and was denied credit from a few others this summer due to poor rating. B/C judgment still there, I may still be denied as a result. Yes, I do get deposit back, but had to go into hock to come up with it to begin with. Guess my point is I think doctor's office was somewhat reckless suing both of us.

If I have no recourse, then can't I put your name down for my next appt, not pay bill, then you deal with consequences of my non payment? That's ok? The consensus does seem to be this may be a losing battle, but just doesn't seem right. What is to stop a creditor from listing everyone in phone book on a lawsuit then? Whatever sticks?

As far as first suit, the doctor's office sued both of us for her not paying her bill. She's obviously a valid person to sue. My point is that I should not have been party to the suit. We did live together, but so what? It was a medical bill. Summary was entered because I moved long before suit was filed. Never got served. First I heard of it was when I went to rent an apt this year and landlord said I had a judgment on CR. The judgment was vacated against me and her for faulty service. She then paid bill before doctor's office could sue again. It was $79. (She would have obviously paid but also moved and wasn't served or realized it was outstanding.)

Click to expand...

You have no valid suit against the plaintiff for two reasons. First, it is not malicious to include you in this suit based on the above. That does not mean you would be liable, but it does mean there is no malicious intent shown. Second, the suit was not decided in your favor. In fact, in a way, the plaintiff "won". You have no cause of action against the plaintiff.

As to the credit agencies, the process was covered by dcatz. I don't think you have a cause of action agains the CR agencies, but if they remain stubborn in removing the negative information, you might someday.

As you your opinion of "everyone in the phone book", the plaintiff didn't do that did they? They named a person who was listed as an emergency contact who lived in the same address as the person who created the debt. When asked about it in a legal manner, no one decided to answer. Sorry for your troubles. I truly am. But you weren't hurt in a legal way as yet.