Civil Cases

A brief summary is to describe something or tell about something in a few short paragraphs or sentences.

No. Dismissed with prejudice means the case has already been adjudicated, and that res judicata would prohibit bringing the case again.

Furthermore, small claims court is a level of civil court that has a lower monetary jurisdiction than other levels. The alternative to civil court is criminal court, and small claims cases are not, by their nature, criminal matters.

The complaint is the original document filed to create a lawsuit. Once the complaint is filed, it is served on the defendant, and the lawsuit has begun.

its best to find out why you are being summoned but otherwise no you dont its not madatory

Very hard to answer this question without knowing what the motion to compel was requiring of you.

It means that some says that you owe them money and they have a contract that says this.

If you have grounds to counter sue yes if you are in the wrong and the person suing you has a legitimate claim then don't waist your money.

Full hearing

If you are an independent contractor in Georgia, you should not have a regular paycheck that can be garnished. If you have a regular paycheck from one specific employer and taxes are taken out, it can be garnished.

Use commas if the name is not essential to what you are trying to say. For example, if you want to express that someone was hurt by a member of his very own family, you might write, "He was cheated by his own brother." You might want to add some additional information, such as the name of his brother, "He was cheated by his own brother, Samuel." Then you would use a comma.

If you were conveying this information to readers who knew the family, possibly from your prior narrative, and you wanted to point your finger at Samuel, you would write, "George had three brothers, Fred, Pat, and Samuel. He was cheated by his own brother Samuel." Then you would not use commas.

In civil court, you are not entitled to the appointment of an attorney in the same way you are in criminal court. However, you do NOT want to ignore the case against you.

Many attorneys provide pro bono (free) legal services for indigent (poor) people. Get on the phone and start calling law firms. Ask, "Does your firm provide pro bono services for indigent defendants?" If they say, "No..", ask "Do you know who you can refer me to?"

Also, Google "free legal services in [your state]" Various nonprofit groups might be able to help.

Finally, if there is a law school in your area, contact them. Most law schools handle cases in their Law Clinics for no charge. All cases are supervised by an experienced attorney, but are handled by law students.

While you search for representation, you need to pay close attention to any due dates that apply to you. For example, you probably have 30 days to file an "Answer" once you've been served with a lawsuit. Call the clerk of the court where the case is filed. He or she will be invaluable to you, at least initially, in answering basic questions.

Get busy! Pick up the phone and start making those calls! Good luck.

In the US ANYBODY can sue ANYONE for ANYTHING. The question is, is it worth it? My advice would be this - if you paid for the car rental with a credit card, contact your credit card company and lodge a "dispute" against the portion of the rental car charge that relates to the GASOLINE FEE ONLY.

If you paid cash instead, I suppose you could take the car company to small claims court.

Hang onto that gas receipt, because if your allegation is true, it should show the date and time you gassed the car which should gibe with date/time car rental company logged the car back in as returned. It will serve as your only evidence of having fueled it.

prior restraint

Minimum age: 18, with a major credit card, and proof of present (and current) automobile insurance.

Company secretary

of course

yes

This is a question for the "decider of fact." If it is a jury case, the jury must decide who to believe. In a bench trial, the judge must decide who is more credible.

This is not a question of law, but of human nature. The "decider of fact" will consider each person's demeanor, their potential motives for lying, and whether or not their story makes sense. It isn't a procedural question, but the same as any other situation where you must decide which person is telling the truth. The decider typically won't pinpoint anything specific, but will simply feel that they believe one or the other.

Unlike a criminal case where the criteria is "guilt beyond a reasonable doubt," the rule in civil cases is only "the preponderance of the evidence."

any action in a tort is to acquire legal compensation only, for the damages

tort is based on the principles of "demnum cyne injuria" and "injuria cyne demno"