Summary judgment against CC in court

[sadie]

Jerseee



I have seen this mentioned a few times about the attorney can't enter evidence and can't purchase evidence it is a felony.



Where is this law? Is this a federal law or for a particular?

[Jerseee]

Sadie,



It is somewhere on this forum. I remember Ice or SJ posting it on a thread. It is a Oklahoma statute.



Logos,



Thanks. But to even bolster your position, have the notary sitting right there in court with you, just waiting to witness your signature after all the fussing has been hashed out. Oh Nelly, I bet that scene would go over real well.

[Akira]

Sadie,



Here is the Oklahoma statute on attorney testimony.



An attorney, acting in his role as an attorney, is not a competent witness. Whatever pleadings an attorney enters into a case do not constitute testimony. Testimony must be under oath, and the witness must testify to whatever facts, whether the evidence is an object, a document, or an event, that he or she has personal knowledge of. The testimony may be in one of three forms. These forms are listed in Section 421 of Title 12 of the Oklahoma Statutes (12 Okla. Stat. § 421):



Although there are serveral references on the forum to the purchase of evidence, THERE ARE NO CASE CITES / STATUTES GIVEN... (that I could find anyway)



Does anyone have this ?



For HIS Glory,

Akira

[rushpat]

Okay, do we have a federal version of the rules that attorney's can't act as witnesses and purchasing a debt for collection purposes is a felony? I think there must be something for those outside of Oklahoma.

[Akira]

Originally Posted by rushpat

Okay, do we have a federal version.... ?

Yep !



Trinsey v Pagliaro D.C.Pa. 1964, 229 F. Supp. 647



"Statements of counsel in brief or in argument are not facts before the court and are therefore insufficient for a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment."



Pro Per (yeah !) and pro se (booo) litigants should therefore always remember that the majority of the time, the motion to dismiss a case is only argued by the opposing attorney, who is not allowed to testify on the facts of the case, the motion to dismiss is never argued by the real party in interest.



This cite was first referenced by Sui Juris in his multi cited thread on Sunday, February 15 2004 @ 02:00 AM CST here.



Then by logos on Wednesday, June 16 2004 @ 11:59 AM CDT in this thread



referencing some sweet cites on this website.





Hmmmm....



So if a lawyer can't offer testimony per Trinsey v Pagliaro ...



and



CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM, VOLUME 7, SECTION 4.

tells us anyone who hires a lawyer is either...



an infant

-or-

a person of unsound mind



and only a competent witness can offer testimony....



then, without documentation or a 3rd party to offer testimony



THEY HAVE NO CASE !



I've never seen this spelled out.... Cornforth says this with SMJ, but never mentions CJS



is this the logic behind it?



feedback ???



For HIS Glory,

Akira

[logos]

Jerseee:

It would be an interesting scene to have the notary right there. What I'm wondering about, is if I tried to discharge it openly, is having to put his omniscience "El Judgo" into having to acknowledge the validity of what I'd be doing. I hear it might not go over well because of that, and it would be better to put him into the position of being able to give me what I want w/o having to admit my method is correct. I'm not sure how I'd go about that.

[Jerseee]

Logos,



You could be right but when did you start to care about the judge doing his/her job in the open? Isn't that where it should be done?



You're doing the honorable thing and abiding by public policy. I think that having a notary there to swear you in and witness your signature to public policy is more than honorable--its the American way.



Ice, Randy a little help here--I'm at a loss for words because I can't believe that Logos cares about the judges doing their job the right way. hahahahahahaaaaa

[Ice]

"What would you do if you weren't scared?"



Think it through very thoroughly, carefully... come to your own conclusion.



But, remember that it doesn't have to be done "in the open". Use the "Judicial Notice" and file appropriate docs. Remember, what controls the case is not what is seen in the court room... it's the case files (docs, affidavits, Judicial notices... etc.).