Fargo, ND
Debt collection Lawyer at Fargo, ND
Practice Areas: Debt Collection, Litigation ... +3 more
OUTCOME: Asset reclaimed and financial judgment obtained.
Represented plaintiff transportation company in repossession and debt collection case. Transportation company attempted, for several months, to reclaim leased truck. Mr. Teigland started lawsuit to rec ... laim truck day after he was hired, obtained an order requiring the defendant to return the truck less than 30 days after he was hired, and plaintiff reclaimed truck about 35 days after Mr. Teigland was hired.
OUTCOME: Asset reclaimed and financial judgment obtained.
Client loaned money to friend to purchase car. Debtor defrauded client by making no efforts to repay loan. Mr. Teigland successfully repossessed the car and obtained judgment.
OUTCOME: Successfully repossessed AG equipment.
Represented plaintiff-manufacturer in action to repossess agricultural equipment. Defendant-debtor was actively concealing the equipment, despite an existing court order to return equipment. Mr. Teigla ... nd recruited debtor's neighbors to provide information about debtor's whereabouts, which allowed the plaintiff to repossess its equipment.
OUTCOME: Judgment for Plaintiff. Judgment Satisfied.
Sued debtor for breach of promissory note and received judgment in the amount of approximately $180,000. Then collected in excess of $200,000 in post-judgment interest and attorney's fees by locating i ... ncome sources and assets in multiple states across the United States. Coordinated comprehensive and aggressive collection effort to satisfy the judgment.
OUTCOME: Judgment for Plaintiff
Tenants broke lease and moved out early. Property manager, MPM, sued for unpaid rent, Tenants denied being liable and counter-sued for reimbursement of rent that had been paid arguing MPM failed to mit ... igate its damages and committed fraud. MPM hired Teigland. Teigland and MPM offered to settle the case for 70% of the amount owed to MPM. Tenants rejected offer and chose not to give counteroffer. At a contested small claims court hearing, MPM and Teigland obtained the full amount requested - apx. $7,800.00.
OUTCOME: Judgment for Plaintiff
After a two-day bench trial, James acquired a $61,737.77 judgment against an oil-patch contractor on behalf of a sub-contractor. The judgment was for $40,488.97 in principal and included $21,248.80 in ... interest. The judge awarded 18% interest on the principal. The claim was for un-paid electrical work by a sub-contractor. The contractor-defendant claimed they were over billed, and made counterclaims for fraud, negligent performance of work, breach of warranty, and unlawfully removing parts (conversion). The contractor-defendant admitted to owing some money but believed it was about $10,000 and no interest should be awarded. At the end of the trial, the Court ruled from the bench by awarding Teigland's client $61,737.77 and dismissed the contractor-defendant's claims.
OUTCOME: Dismissal for Respondent.
Represented respondent in a contested Disorderly Conduct Restraining Order matter. Petitioner claimed Teigland's client was following her and threatening her. Matter was originally scheduled for a four ... hour evidentiary hearing. At the close of Petitioner's case-in-chief, Teigland move for dismissal of the case for failure to provide sufficient evidence of disorderly conduct. Judge granted oral motion from the bench.
OUTCOME: Plea
Client was charged with Murder - AA Felony, with a maximum sentence of life in prison without a chance of parole. Teigland and Nick Thornton presented a self-defense argument over the course of seven d ... ays to a twelve person jury. The trial ended in a mistrial when the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict. The case was then settled with a plea days before the second trial.
OUTCOME: Settled
L.S. purchased home for L.L. in the early '90s. L.S. and L.L. were co-tenants (50/50 ownership) in the home. Home was abandoned, left vacant, and in dilapidated condition. In 2013, L.S. attempted to se ... ll home but L.L. refused. Teigland represented L.S. in claim against L.L. to force a sale of the home and seek a fair division of sale proceeds. Case settled with L.S. obtaining approximately 90% of the net-sale proceeds of the home.
OUTCOME: Dismissal for Respondents.
Teigland represented Respondent-family in a series of Harassment Restraining Order cases. Two Petitioners brought four petitions against family of four for alleged harassment. Matter was scheduled for ... a four hour contested evidentiary hearing involving over a dozen exhibits. Court ruled for the Respondents finding the Petitioners did not meet their burden of proof.
Ad
Transform legal challenges into solutions.
Connect now to review your situation.
