Consequences of transacting business without authority.--

[RickA]

iamfreeru2, could it be possible that a step in your process has been missed and they have spotted it? Just thinking, if this is so, their contracting to do this over the phone could be an attempt to deny and close it
Possible?

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by RickA

iamfreeru2, could it be possible that a step in your process has been missed and they have spotted it? Just thinking, if this is so, their contracting to do this over the phone could be an attempt to deny and close it
Possible?

Rick,

No, I do not believe I have missed anything. I have others that are checking all that I have done. I believe they have been backed into a corner and may be trying to trip me up, but it's not going to happen. This is why I drafted the response the way I did. The attorney is barred from testifying and cannot enter any evidence by telephone. If you saw the rest of my docs you would know I have not missed anything. I am prepared and ready for what they may attempt. I believe I will prevail and will keep everyone abreast of what happens.

Remember this hearing is regarding my motion to dismiss. There has been no rebuttal to my memorandum of law in support of motion to dismiss. Since counsel for plaintiff is barred from testifying and cannot enter evidence over the phone, it will be very difficult for them to "deny and close it." This type of hearing takes longer than five minutes and if they are going to object, I do not see how they will be able to without appearing in person. This just supports my motion to dismiss, don't ya think? I have no objection to their motion for the grounds I have stated. I got my back side covered though just in case.

Great, I believe you are correct that it looks like a win. Do you think a more definite statement in your response that you do not agree to testimony over the phone would be helpful. In other words he can argue to the judge just based on the pleadings filed but he cannot give any explanations, etc not contained in evidentiary form(affidavits). Has he responded in writing to your motion?

[Libertarian]

This type of hearing takes longer than five minutes and if they are going to object, I do not see how they will be able to without appearing in person.

How long will it take him to say "frivolous"? Because you know that that's what he's going to say.

[BOBT12]

Originally Posted by Libertarian

How long will it take him to say "frivolous"? Because you know that that's what he's going to say.

Then say "I OBJECT". The grounds for the objection are that any statment made through an affidavit stands as the truth, and must be proven otherwise. The judge (fool in a black robe) has no power to make a summary judgment on the matter. Only another affidavit can provide proof.

However, a foolish judge may rule anyway. I say file an interlocutory appeal. Make the judge prove his case. Depending on your determination, and funds, run it up to the state supreme court. This will put the case on hold until the appeal is ruled on. Make the court pay attention.

Also, in some states, lower court judges face penalties, such as reduced pay, for having too many of their cases overturned on appeal. Make the appeal, if you can.

If you don't fight for the Right, there is no Right. The system is corrupt, for the most part, no doubt. Yet, why go down without a fight. In addition, I feel that there are still a few honest people in the system. Even a system that is 90% corrupt, you still have a chance of encountering the 10% that will hear you.

If you lose, you are in the same position, less the filing fees, than if you did not take action. However, if you win, the court (the black robed wonder) will be very careful about how they deal with you. This will affect how they deal with others who act as you do.

Of course the attorneys will be burning the bank's (CCC) cash, with fees. This is what they are good for, put them to use. This will kick the CCC's butt, one way or the other. If they come after you for the attorney fees, you are judgment proof! BAM!!!!!! (Unlimited Sui Juris AMMO shotgun) :o

This is how you use the system, people.

[iamfreeru2]

Originally Posted by francis

Great, I believe you are correct that it looks like a win. Do you think a more definite statement in your response that you do not agree to testimony over the phone would be helpful. In other words he can argue to the judge just based on the pleadings filed but he cannot give any explanations, etc not contained in evidentiary form(affidavits). Has he responded in writing to your motion?

Francis,

I believe the fact that I have already put case citings in the record that counsel is barred from testifying should suffice. If he tries to testify it will most definitely be objected too. There has been no response to my motion and I do not foresee any response coming. Of course I may be wrong about that and only time will tell. Counsel has some time yet to respond.

Originally Posted by Libertarian

How long will it take him to say "frivolous"? Because you know that that's what he's going to say.

Libertarian,

So far counsel for Plaintiff has not used that term, but I certainly have in my answer to their motion for protective order. He can use the word frivolous all he wants, but everything I have done is based in law with Appellate as well as S.Ct. citings. I do not believe frivolous will be brought up, but if it is I am prepared. What is he going to base that statement on if it is made? Remember he cannot testify and is incapable of entering evidence via telephone. We will see what the other side does as time gets closer. I have asked for counsel to produce his delegation of authority to act on behalf of plaintiff. If there is no delegation of authority produced sounds to me like there is none, don't ya think?