Debt Collection Suit Claims Law Firm’s Court Summons Contained Wrong Information
by Erin Shaak
Last Updated on May 8, 2018
Luci v. Overton, Russell, Doerr And Donovan, Llp et al
Filed: March 25, 2018 ◆§ 6:18cv360
Overton, Russell, Doerr, and Donovan, LLP and three of the firm’s attorneys are facing a proposed class action filed by a New York consumer.
Overton, Russell, Doerr, and Donovan, LLP and three of the firm’s attorneys are facing a proposed class action filed by a New York consumer who claims the defendants misrepresented the amount of time he had to respond to a state court collection action filed against him. According to the lawsuit, the man was served with a court summons on January 18, 2018 that contained the following statements:
YOU ARE HEREBY SUMMONED to answer the complaint in this action and to serve a copy of your answer on the plaintiff’s attorneys within twenty days after service of this summons, exclusive of the day of service, or within thirty days after service if this summons is not personally delivered to you within the State of New York. Upon your failure to answer, a judgment will be entered against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint.”
The case argues that the plaintiff’s answer was not due 30 days “after service” as suggested in the document, but rather 30 days after service was complete. “As a matter of law,” the complaint reads, “service is not complete…until 10 days after the affidavit of service is filed with the clerk of the court.”
Therefore, the suit continues, the defendants misinformed the plaintiff of his rights and potentially influenced his response to the summons by placing him under “a false sense of urgency.”
Camp Lejeune residents now have the opportunity to claim compensation for harm suffered from contaminated water.
Read more here: Camp Lejeune Lawsuit Claims
Sign Up For
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.