Tips on motions for a protection order when sued for debt
Protective order motions are requests for the court to limit the other party’s engagement in certain behavior. In debt law cases, two situations are likely to occur with respect to discovery: limiting the types of discovery you request, and limiting the parties’ ability to publish what they get. Neither of these things is generally helpful for people who are being sued for debt. It’s usually a good idea to oppose these moves.
Protective order limiting the types or amount of discovery
If the parties are in a deposition (a situation similar to a taped interview under oath) and one of the parties decides to invoke a privilege and refuses to answer a question, the proper legal way to do so, often overlooked, is to file a motion. . by order of protection. The privilege invoked could be, for example, an attorney-client privilege or a communication privilege between husband and wife. In either case, a refusal to answer a question at the deposition is supposed, under most rules of civil procedure, to be followed by a motion for a protective order. That motion asks the court to consider whether the privilege should apply and, if so, to order the party seeking the information to stop seeking it.
As I say, this rule is often ignored and the requesting party is usually required to file a motion to bind.
More generally, if the other party asks too many intrusive questions or simply asks too many questions, one of the parties could file a motion for a protective order as a way to impose some sort of overall control over the discovery process. In debt law cases, this would almost always be bad for people who are being sued for debt: debt collectors are typically not aggressive in discovery, and you need to know as much as possible about your case. So if the motion comes up, you generally have to oppose it.
Protection order that limits what you can do with Discovery
A much more likely use for a protective order in debt law cases is to try to limit the use of a certain discovery. You could, for example, file a motion to try to prevent the other party from contacting or trying to contact certain people. And this could arise, for example, if the debt collector was trying to contact the employer or friends of his. The argument would be that this was simply a way to circumvent the protections of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and damage relationships as part of a debt collection ploy. Or that the damage to these relationships would outweigh any possible legitimate purpose of discovery of the discovery. In debt collection cases, because they usually involve small amounts of money, or people without a lot of money, this is relatively unlikely to come up because that type of discovery would be expensive to make. But it could
Publication of limitation of protection orders
Normally, materials discovered during litigation can be published if the party wishes. There is some information that debt collectors hate to reveal. They hate revealing how much money they paid for the debts they bought. They call it a “trade secret,” but they probably don’t want to reveal the price because it’s too low or because there are other terms of the deal that they don’t really want to reveal (ie, the debt is purchased). with recourse” and technically goes back to the seller if you don’t pay, which could make them the wrong party to sue you and turn your lawsuit into an unfair debt collection practice.) In either case, you have the right to publish the information you receive from them if you want to, unless there is a protective order.
Can they publish information about you? Well, according to the rules of civil procedure, they probably could. But the FDCPA would likely limit much of that, since it prevents debt collectors from contacting most people in an attempt to collect a debt.
Debt collectors hate advertising. They hate having their prices known because it reveals how predatory they are. And posting information about debt collectors can enlist the help of other defendants. Therefore, protective orders generally do not benefit debt defendants when they limit advertising.
How to get a protection order
Protective orders may not add much protection to the FDCPA for a consumer against a debt collector, but remember that the FDCPA only protects “consumers” (not businesses) from “debt collectors” (not to the original creditors), so it might make sense to seek a protection order if you are not covered. You can also pursue one because it adds some theoretical protection and defending against it would require the debt collector to pay more individual attention to your case. This could make you more willing to negotiate and settle, or to dismiss the case against you.
The way to apply for a protection order is relatively easy. Check your rules of civil procedure to see if there are any specific requirements, but generally you just file a motion asking for a protective order and telling the court why you think you should have one. That is, you must tell the court the legal basis for granting your motion: what privilege or need you have. You may need to file a supporting memorandum that also tells the court why it should grant your motion, and then you probably need to file the motion for argument and go to court and argue it.