![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
final court update
Jan. 16th, 2008 11:42 amAs mentioned back in this post, today was the hearing on the motion to have me pay fees and costs.
The Judge found in my favor, so I didn't have to pay anything.
He said I proved in my objection that the one statute that was cited in the motion didn't apply. He then said that the rule that was cited also didn't apply because everything I did during the case was based on a law or rule, so nothing was done in bad faith.
He did note that sometimes I was right, sometimes I was wrong, and that sometimes I was technically right but found out that the practical application of the rule or law in question didn't work the way the law or rule read at its face value. He also said that because everything I did had a basis that I was much better than the average Pro Se Creditor, and even though I was at times emotional (and I was, I wasn't exactly hiding my displeasure toward the Defendant during this), that I wasn't acting from a purely emotional basis as is the case normally with people who represent themselves.
He said he had some sympathy for the Defendant because "the case was litigated aggressively", and, apparently, even more aggressively than what he is used to seeing from Pro Se Creditors. But that's not a basis for bad faith, so that's that.
The net of all this is that I spent $250.00 for filing the complaint, and I spent money on gas, postage, and copying costs to pursue the matter all the way through the trial, but didn't win. I didn't get any more money out of him, but I also didn't have to pay his attorney. The Defendant-sleazeball-contractor gets to keep his bankruptcy intact, doesn't get to collect any more money from me against our contract, doesn't have to pay the five grand judgment I have against him from the State District Court, but is also solely responsible for the $8,500+ bill from his attorney. He could have settled with me for the five, but chose not to.
Ultimately it was a case of "You pays your money and you takes your chances".
The Judge found in my favor, so I didn't have to pay anything.
He said I proved in my objection that the one statute that was cited in the motion didn't apply. He then said that the rule that was cited also didn't apply because everything I did during the case was based on a law or rule, so nothing was done in bad faith.
He did note that sometimes I was right, sometimes I was wrong, and that sometimes I was technically right but found out that the practical application of the rule or law in question didn't work the way the law or rule read at its face value. He also said that because everything I did had a basis that I was much better than the average Pro Se Creditor, and even though I was at times emotional (and I was, I wasn't exactly hiding my displeasure toward the Defendant during this), that I wasn't acting from a purely emotional basis as is the case normally with people who represent themselves.
He said he had some sympathy for the Defendant because "the case was litigated aggressively", and, apparently, even more aggressively than what he is used to seeing from Pro Se Creditors. But that's not a basis for bad faith, so that's that.
The net of all this is that I spent $250.00 for filing the complaint, and I spent money on gas, postage, and copying costs to pursue the matter all the way through the trial, but didn't win. I didn't get any more money out of him, but I also didn't have to pay his attorney. The Defendant-sleazeball-contractor gets to keep his bankruptcy intact, doesn't get to collect any more money from me against our contract, doesn't have to pay the five grand judgment I have against him from the State District Court, but is also solely responsible for the $8,500+ bill from his attorney. He could have settled with me for the five, but chose not to.
Ultimately it was a case of "You pays your money and you takes your chances".
