LVNV dismissed case "without prejudice" ????

[hopefull700]

LVNV tried to sue me in court but dismissed the case "without prejudice".  We assume because they could not provide the requested documents to prove the debt was mine and that they own it.  This is great news but  I have a couple of questions:

1. Can someone provide detailed explanation of the "without prejudice" means to me?  does it mean they can resue me another time? 

2. What is the best approach to get this item removed from credit report?  Should I dispute with the credit bureaus and is it ok to send the court filing showing that the LVNV dismissed the case? 

getting this removed should have a positive effect on my credit scores.

Thank you to anyone who can provide input.

[Underconstruction]

"The purpose and effect of the words without prejudice in a judgment, order, or decree dismissing a suit are to prohibit the defendant from using the doctrine of Res Judicata in any later action by the same plaintiff on the subject matter. The doctrine of res judicata (from the Latin, "a thing decided") is based on the importance of finality in the law. If a court decides a case, the subject of that case is firmly and finally decided between the persons involved in the suit, so no new lawsuit on the same subject may be brought by the persons involved. Therefore, the words without prejudice protect the plaintiff from a defendant's res judicata defense.

A court may also enter judgment with prejudice, however. This signifies that the court has made an adjudication on the merits of the case and a final disposition, barring the plaintiff from bringing a new lawsuit based on the same subject. If a new lawsuit is brought, a defendant can properly invoke res judicata as a defense, because a court will not relitigate a matter that has been fully heard before. Often a court will enter a judgment with prejudice if the plaintiff has shown bad faith, misled the court, or persisted in filing frivolous lawsuits."-wikipedia

In other words they COULD bring suit later, but not likely if they dismissed it once. dispute as "not mine" with the dismisal. Thats what i would do but someone here may have a better idea.

[hopefull700]

thank you for the detailed reply.

[gdale6]

---

@Underconstruction wrote:

"The purpose and effect of the words without prejudice in a judgment, order, or decree dismissing a suit are to prohibit the defendant from using the doctrine of Res Judicata in any later action by the same plaintiff on the subject matter. The doctrine of res judicata (from the Latin, "a thing decided") is based on the importance of finality in the law. If a court decides a case, the subject of that case is firmly and finally decided between the persons involved in the suit, so no new lawsuit on the same subject may be brought by the persons involved. Therefore, the words without prejudice protect the plaintiff from a defendant's res judicata defense.

A court may also enter judgment with prejudice, however. This signifies that the court has made an adjudication on the merits of the case and a final disposition, barring the plaintiff from bringing a new lawsuit based on the same subject. If a new lawsuit is brought, a defendant can properly invoke res judicata as a defense, because a court will not relitigate a matter that has been fully heard before. Often a court will enter a judgment with prejudice if the plaintiff has shown bad faith, misled the court, or persisted in filing frivolous lawsuits."-wikipedia

In other words they COULD bring suit later, but not likely if they dismissed it once. dispute as "not mine" with the dismisal. Thats what i would do but someone here may have a better idea.

---

Wow, I learned something today, thx for the detailed explanation of this.

[polno1234]

<---- all knowing and omnipotent

it happens on a rare occasion