Legal Question in Civil Litigation in California
I live in California. I gave a personal loan to Jane in October 2010. Jane lived in New York at that time. We had a verbal agreement that she will repay me back in January 2011. Since January 2011 I have asked her verbally multiple times to repay me the loan and she always comes back with false vebal promises. I have the online bank transfer proof of the $9500 I loaned her. I sent Jane an email to repay me the loan. She did not reply to my email. Jane is a Permanent US resident (Green Card). Jane now lives in India. I am a permanent US resident (Green Card) too. My questions are 1) I cannot sue her in small claims court because the amount of loan is greater that $7500. I can sue her in Limited Jurisdiction Court but Jane does not live in Los Angeles County or even in New York or even in the US anymore. I cannot sue her in India because of the corruption of Indian Judiciary. Where in the US can I sue Jane? 2) Instead of paying $2000 or more to an attorney can I represent myself?
2 Answers from Attorneys
The amount in controversy more than $7,500. Additionally, California's long arm statute regarding out of state service of process, as tailored for service of small claims demands, does not apply in this situation.
You can sue in limited civil jurisdiction, but the issues that I see are twofold. First, you would have to serve her in India, in which case you would need to comply with the Hague convention. Second, you have an issue of whether or not she has sufficient ties with California for a court here to exercise personal jurisdiction over her.
You can represent yourself, but be sure you know what you are doing.
I mostly agree with Mr. Roach. Your case, if filed in California, would be filed in the Limited Jurisdiction division of the Superior Court. I also agree that you have a potential issue with sufficient ties to California. Without examining the details of the transaction, I cannot tell if there is a valid case to be made that the loan agreement was made or performed in California. Since she does not reside here, one of those two things would have to be proved in order for California to have jurisdiction. If it was not made or performed in California, however, then it most certainly would have been made or performed in New York. So you can sue in the U.S., but have to figure out which state. Assuming you can sort that out, you have the service of process hurdle. The Hague Convention treaty on service of judicial process is a vast improvement on its predecessor procedures, but is still cumbersome and expensive. Your chances of doing it properly and successfully as a layperson are nearly zero. Which brings me to the point Mr. Roach omitted: how are you going to collect on a judgment? After going to all the trouble and expense of suing her, if you get a U.S. judgment, now you have to enforce it. Unless she has property or accounts here in the U.S., you will have to find out what the law is in India on enforcement of foreign money judgments and figure out how to enforce the judgment under Indian law, and then go through that whole process.