HELP, please look and give opinion. court fri.
Give opinion if it seem incorrect to challange jurisdiction
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S
CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendant‘s, (______names_______________________) natural human beings
with the power of attorney-in-fact, namesL: (hereafter Defendant’s)
appearing in Propia Persona and Sui Juris, demanding all their rights at all times,
waiving none of their rights at any time for any reason.
Plaintiff thus far has offer no competent facts they have been the legal holders of
this alleged debt to enforce it, or what the actual agreement between us was for the
court to judge whether either of us has kept it.
Plaintiff failure to exercise ordinary care of the instrument by way of the chain of
custody to prove they are still the holder of the instrument leaves doubt they are the
holder of the unnegotiated, unconverted debt instrument in law. MD Title 3 §3-
302(a) 1 Under the UCC, a promissory note is "instrument", security interest in
which must be perfected by possession.
See Matter of Staff Mort. & Inv.Corp., 550 F.2d 1228 (9th Cir 1977)
"Under the Uniform Commercial Code the only notice sufficient to inform all interested parties that a security interest in instruments has been perfected is actual possession by the secured party, his agent or bailee. See Bankruptcy Court followed by UCC in Re Investors & Lenders LTD 165 B.R. BKRTCY D.N.J. 1994"
Plaintiff’s pleading and affidavit establishes in no way that it is still the holder of
the alleged debt…..that is still exists,….that it was signed by the defendant….or
what the agreement between the parties actually was Defendant did sign, as the
affidavit make no affirmation or reference that the debt instrument can be produce
to establish these facts.
Defendant specifically deny that this the agreement I put my hand to and that this is
my signature that was on that agreement until they can produce the original contract
for me to determine this. MD Title 3 §3-308 (a). In the day of computer technology
and the sophisticated means by which documents can be put together to make the
copies say whatever the plaintiff wants to have them say with Defendants signature
from the alleged original attached in fact is no proof of anything without a
competent fact witness they still hold the debt to make the claim, and to show what
the original agreement actually was, and to show the original debt instrument has
not been altered, or Defendant’s agreement to it, as the subject matter of this action
giving jurisdiction for the Court to hear the claim.
Section MD Title 3 §3-309 (b) applies to the case as if the person seeking to
enforcement had produced the instrument. The court may not enter judgment in
favor of the person seeking enforcement unless it finds that the person required to
pay the instrument is adequately protected against loss that might occur by reason of
a claim by another person to enforce the instrument. Adequate protection may be
provided by any reasonable means.
CONCLUSION
Whereas, Plaintiff have provided no factual evidence to demonstrate this despite
numerous requests ((not then and now in discovery.)), and in case law we have cited
is replete that proof of the claim requires presentment of the original note/debt
instrument. Where the complaining party can not prove the existence of the debt,
then there is no debt. This is established well under MD Title 3 §3-302, Holder in
due Course, Absent this, Plaintiff’s pleading fail to empower the court with personal
or subject matter jurisdiction to hear the claim. The party claiming jurisdiction for
the Court to hear them has the burden to establish it, if challenged. Plaintiff cannot
produce any competent fact witness they are still legal holder of the original,
unnegotiated, unconverted debt instrument, who would have personal jurisdiction
and standing before the Court to bring this action, which they have not, as a matter
of law their claim must be dismiss. Plaintiff failure to provide the Court the original
debt instrument itself, to show the Court what the original, unaltered signed contract
actually was that we agreed to, then the Court has no way to judge the compliance
of either party to the contract if it doesn’t know the fact established by the rules of
evidence what the substance of the actual contract was. And as a matter of law, the
Court then lacks subject matter of the actual agreement to have jurisdiction to hear
any claims based on it, and they must be dismissed.
Defendant’s pleading and defenses we have disputed they are the legal holders of
the debt I actually signed as they have provided no factual evidence to demonstrate
they have it, despite numerous requests, we have demanded strict proof of it by
production of the original debt instrument, unnegotiated and unconverted, debt
Instrument, if it still exists, whether there is any monetary conversion of the debt
instrument into equity has been gained by the Plaintiff to recover funding of its loan,
without the risk of loss to it existing assets and deposits to recover represented to
me in their agreement, which would offset any loss or damaged they had from my
non-performance as a cause for action to bring this suit, are material fact of the
Plaintiff’s claim that are in dispute unsupported by presentment of the original,
signed, unaltered, unmarked, unnegotiated, unconverted, debt instrument, in their
possession, required production of the actual debt instrument and trail of these facts
in dispute before the Court can apply the law to this case.
Wherefore, the Plaintiff has failed to empower the Court with personal and
subject matter jurisdiction, Defendants request dismissal of the above title action
with prejudice. Defendant’s also request that the Court grant it such
other and further relief as my be proper under the circumstance of this case,
including not limited to a judgment against ________ Mortgage Company for
defendant’s costs of his valuable time and other fees incurred in connection with
this matter before the court.
Please rip it apart, I have Court on Fri 9/23 in the am
__________________
"We must affect our country as our parents,
And if at any time we alienate
Out love or industry from doing it honor,
We must respect effects and teach the soul
Matter of conscience and religion,
And not desire of rule or benefit"
Last edited by mr.yet : 09-18-2005 at 05:07 PM.
|
Can anyone offer an opinion
Thank you!!
