My husband had a credit card debt starting around $2,500. After interest on late payments set in, it was about $8,000 and was sent to a collection agency. Finally he was ordered to court. But we decided to avoid court costs by giving all of our $2000 in savings towards the debt. They told us we were no longer obligated to go to court but that we need to pay $100 a month to continue payment on the debt.
Before our first $100 bill has come we got a letter in the mail reading
"No persons having appeared in objection to this matter being dismissed pursuant to TR 41 (E), Court now on its own motion orders this cause dismissed pursuant to TR 41 (E). CAUSE DISMISSED. cc"
Does this mean we don't owe the remaining balance of $6000? OR is it simply restating that we are not obligate go to court?
I do not know what jurisdiction you are in or the particular rules in your jurisdiction. It is likely that the case was dismissed "without prejudice" meaning that it can be brought up again.
Those rules tend to be administrative docket clearing devises to clear out cases where people are not actively pursuing the litigation, but allowing them to file again if the case was dismissed for no other reason than failure to pursue the case (called "failure to prosecute").
I would talk to an attorney in your area or go read the rule carefully at a local library or law library. If the rule states "without prejudice" it means that it can be brought up again.