Wikipedia Entry Invalid As Proof In Establishing Creditor's Standing To Sue In Credit Card Collection Litigation, Says New Jersey Appeals Court
The New Jersey Law Journal reports:
- A New Jersey judge who allowed a lawyer to plug an evidentiary gap with a Wikipedia page has been reversed on the ground that the online encyclopedia that "anyone can edit" is not a reliable source of information. "[I]t is entirely possible for a party in litigation to alter a Wikipedia article, print the article and thereafter offer it in support of any given position," an appeals court held. "Such a malleable source of information is inherently unreliable and clearly not one 'whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned,'" such as would support judicial notice under New Jersey Evidence Rule 201(b)(3).
- The ruling tossed out a judgment in a collection case, Palisades Collection v. Graubard, A-1338-07, in which the plaintiff relied on a Wikipedia entry to help trace ownership of a credit-card debt to establish standing to
sue.(1)
***
- [Defendant-debtor's attorney Ronald] Groseibl says he is disappointed the appeals court did not take the opportunity to set standards for proving chain of title in credit-card cases like those adopted by some courts in mortgage matters. Last year, the New Jersey judiciary's Office of Foreclosure announced it would no longer process cases where the complaint did not allege the plaintiff owned the mortgage at the time of filing.
- There are thousands of credit-card cases raising a similar issue regarding standing, [...] but a dearth of court opinions, because "people who don't pay credit cards don't have money to pay lawyers either," says Groseibl.
For more, see Wikipedia Too Malleable to Be Reliable Evidence.
For the court ruling, see Palisades Collection LLC v. Graubard, Docket No. A-1338-07 (NJ Super. App. Div., April 17, 2009).
In a related story on courts relying on information floating around on the Internet, see The Legal Intelligencer: Questioning Courts' Trust of Web Sources.
(1) According to the story, during a bench trial in Bergen County, New Jersey, the Defendant-debtor contended that the Plaintiff-creditor lacked standing to sue. The challenge for the creditor was to show how the obligation wound up in the company's hands, providing proof for each step of the way. ThetaMissingDocsMtg
1 comment:
Every Consumer Defense Attorney in America should participate in this conference call and ask Gary Stern, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, about the illegal contract with Unifund CCR Partners where Asta Funding (Palisades Collections) pays a 50% premium for collections "...outside the related Statute of Limitations" (see SEC form 10Q filed May 19, 2008).
Asta Funding Revenues for the three months ended March 31, 2009, were $18,126,000, a decrease of 46.6% compared to revenues of $33,882,000 a year ago. The Company reported a net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2009 of $5,168,000.
A conference call to discuss the results of the second quarter and six months results of fiscal year 2009 will be held on Monday, May 11, 2009 at 1:00 PM EDT, subsequent to issuance of second quarter Report on Form 10-Q, scheduled to be filed with the SEC the week of May 4, 2009."
Interested parties may participate in the conference call by dialing USA/Canada (888) 427-4192, International (706) 679-4480 about 5 -10 minutes prior to 1:00 pm EDT. Please refer to the Asta Funding earnings teleconference ID 98363718. A recording of the conference call will be available from 2:00 pm EDT May 11th through May 18th, by dialing USA/ Canada (800) 642-1687, International (706) 645-9291, conference ID 98363718.
Post a Comment