Original Credit Card application

salutesoldier37,

The selling of a debt resulting in extinguishment is plain wrong. The debt (asset) still exists, but someone else (usu. the buyer) now has rights in its value. The only extinguishment that occurs is to the seller, that of the extinguishment of his rights in the debt's value itself, simply because he sold them for value. It's the same thing as if one sells/buys a claim. The value inherent in it goes with it, if there is any value in it to begin with.

Don't wait around for your enemy to explain anything to you (re: 8-501 or anything else for that matter). If he does, it is to trick you.

A motion for summary judgment may be better off for you. This will force their poker hand.

Bill,

Would you care to contribute and elaborate as to where "elsewhere" actually is? And maybe be more specific as to why certain material is a "total" loser in Court? Did you lose using it? Someone else you know? etc...

-squirrels

[Campy]

listen guys and gals, I think its best just to ignore Bill. He has been called out by many on this site, and he just pops up like a festering sore.

Campy

[suijuris]

Originally Posted by Campy

listen guys and gals, I think its best just to ignore Bill. He has been called out by many on this site, and he just pops up like a festering sore.

Campy

Ditto - stop feeding the troll, it is a one-sided discussion.

If anyone needs a little help ignoring him, just go to http://forum.suijuris.net/profile.php?do=editlist and type "Bill Smith" under your "Ignore List" and update...

...or, just click this link http://forum.suijuris.net/profile.ph...=ignore&u=2334 and confirm...

Then enjoy a little peace and quiet.

Thanks again for the info.

Squirrels,

I just have a one more thing. Pls review my draft for motion for summary judgement and let me know if I am on the right track

Defendant of Case No and Counterclaimant of Motion to Dismiss and Request for Summary Judgement, in response to Plaintiffs’ Case No. , and Defendants this Counterclaim for Motion to Dismiss and Summary Judgment, Credit Card Co., respectfully asks the court to grant this motion to dismiss and summary judgment on the basis of substantive and procedural nullity.

Brief and Support. Plaintiff and counterclaimant, Credit Card Co, has placed no facts on record. No fact appears on record whether by disposition, admissions, and answer to interiority or by affidavit to suggest or to support the affirmations of Credit Card Co. Documents proffered by Credit Card Company’s representatives, Law Firm and Associates, are unverified, out of date, irrelevant and inadmissible. The record shows that the defendant and counterclaimant, Salutesoldier37, has testified and testifies again in further establishing the material fact that there is substantial controversy are at an issue in this case.

State of Controversy. Defendant has requested verification of debt from the Credit Card Co and the law Firm. However, Plaintiffs have not provided verification. In Pursuant to Rule 196, Request for Production, the defendant requested the original credit card application with original signature. Plaintiff’s response the original credit card application with original signature is no longer exists. Defendant and counterclaimant Salutesoldier37 contends the Plaintiff cannot not use terms and agreements for an original application they do not possess.


Holdings on which I am basing the empowerment of the court.

Argument and Authority. Statements of counsel and their briefs of arguments are not sufficient for the purposes of granting a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment. "TRENSEY V. PAGLIARO. Unsupported contentious of material fact are not sufficient on motion for summary judgment but rather material facts must be supported by affidavits and other testimony and documents that would be admissible in evidence at trail. Where there are no dispositions, admissions, answer to intergories or affidavits. Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment could not be considered under district court rule Oklahoma Statue 12 Chapter 12, Rule 13 providing for judgments where facts are not controverted in as much as their was a complete absence of any reluctant basis for proper determination that no substantial controversy existed. (annotated statues). Any ruling on a motion summary adjunction must be on record parties have actually made and not one that is theoretical possible.

Remember, I am not seeking any legal advice

Originally Posted by salutesoldier37

State of Controversy. Defendant has requested verification of debt from the Credit Card Co and the law Firm. However, Plaintiffs have not provided verification. In Pursuant to Rule 196, Request for Production, the defendant requested the original credit card application with original signature. Plaintiff’s response the original credit card application with original signature is no longer exists. Defendant and counterclaimant Salutesoldier37 contends the Plaintiff cannot not use terms and agreements for an original application they do not possess.

CHECK YOUR STATE'S RULES OF EVIDENCE. THE JUDGE MIGHT ALLOW A COPY UNLESS :

RULE 1003. ADMISSIBILITY OF DUPLICATES

A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (1) a question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or (2) in the circumstances it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original.

Originally Posted by salutesoldier37

Holdings on which I am basing the empowerment of the court.

Argument and Authority. Statements of counsel and their briefs of arguments are not sufficient for the purposes of granting a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment. "TRENSEY V. PAGLIARO. Unsupported contentious of material fact are not sufficient on motion for summary judgment but rather material facts must be supported by affidavits and other testimony and documents that would be admissible in evidence at trail. Where there are no dispositions, admissions, answer to intergories or affidavits. Plaintiffs motion for summary judgment could not be considered under district court rule Oklahoma Statue 12 Chapter 12, Rule 13 providing for judgments where facts are not controverted in as much as their was a complete absence of any reluctant basis for proper determination that no substantial controversy existed. (annotated statues). Any ruling on a motion summary adjunction must be on record parties have actually made and not one that is theoretical possible.

Remember, I am not seeking any legal advice

I LIKE THE RICHARD CORNFORTH STUFF. I HAVEN'T TRIED IT YET. IS YOUR CASE IN OKLAHOMA? IF NOT, CHECK YOUR STATE STATUTES.

PJT04,

I will do some research on the duplicate copy of the application. I appreciate the reference. I reside in Oklahoma and was served here but the lawsuit was filed in a Texas court. So after reading your post I realize now I need to research Texas Rules and Civil Procedures. Anyone familiar with Texas law? Thanks again for the info. Once again, I am not seeking legal advice.

salutesoldier37,

Honestly, I am really confused as to what you are asking the Court to do. I am being bluntly honest for your benefit, but your motion for summary judgment is a mess. If I have more time tomorrow, I will respond with more detal. Below is a website of the San Francisco Superior Superior Court in Calif. It is a great site b/c your can pull up just about all documents that have been filed with the Court, being Complaints, Answers, Summ. Judg. motions, etc. Play around on there and find something that you can model your motion after. Remember, each Court has a different format, Rules of Court, etc. But this site will help all to gain a good understanding of what is involved and how to phrase their court papers.

www.sftc.org

You may want to see if Texas or Oaklahoma has a similar site.

Good luck.

-squirrels

Originally Posted by salutesoldier37

PJT04,

I will do some research on the duplicate copy of the application. I appreciate the reference. I reside in Oklahoma and was served here but the lawsuit was filed in a Texas court. So after reading your post I realize now I need to research Texas Rules and Civil Procedures. Anyone familiar with Texas law? Thanks again for the info. Once again, I am not seeking legal advice.

TRY THESE:
http://www.courts.state.tx.us/publicinfo/TRE/Toc.htm
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/bc.toc.htm
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/statutes/statutes.html

PJT04,

Thanks for the links I will check them out.


Squirrels,

Thanks for reviewing my motion. I appreciate your honesty. I knew that I may have some probelms with it. I want the court to grant me a summary judgement based on the fact: the debt was not verified, the debt was verified by an attorney. Also, I found under Texas Rules and Civil Procedures Rule 196 Request for production: I may request the original credit card application with my original sigature. In the lawsuit filed by the attorney they claim they do not have it. So that is why I was asking earlier if they cannot produce the document then they do not have a case. But I was informed to ensure a copy could not be used. The attorney has also sent me a letter informing me they are going to have a judgement filed against me. I want the judge to realize before granting their motion that there is controversy between both parties. I await your response in detal. In the meantime I will visit the website you provided and continue to do more research. Once again, thanks for the info and remember I am not seeking legal advice.