Author Topic: Journey to the United States Supreme Court!  (Read 7805 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.


  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 701
Re: Journey to the United States Supreme Court!
« Reply #45 on: September 07, 2013 10:25:59 PM »
Rule 10 of the SCOTUS is not an exhaustive list of what they will hear.

One argument I could make is that it gives them the chance to define the "regularly" prong of the definition of debt collector. Another argument  could be to correct the erroneous factual findings(rarely they do this but it isn't completely impossible).
I am not a lawyer and most likely a crackpot.


  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 10768
Re: Journey to the United States Supreme Court!
« Reply #46 on: September 07, 2013 10:55:39 PM »
A couple of points...

1.  What error did the trial court make that gets to the "regularly" prong.  In my state, the appeals courts have defined 30% debt collection as reaching "regularly".  What case law do you have that supports your position?

2.  Appeals courts are bound by the facts of the case as found by the trial court.  Unless there is an obvious misinterpretation of the calling "green" as "red", the best you can get it to have it remanded for rehearing.  The Supreme Court does not determine new fact.

3. Appeals court do not gratuitously go beyond what the trial court has established or what has been proffered in the court filings.  If you failed to object at trial, your issues are dead, period.

4. The Supreme Court rules only on law or confusion in law as established by conflicting lower courts. If you can't establish that, your appeal is dead.

5. Look to you circuit's refusal to hear your case for evidence that there is no conflict or confusion in law.  And BTW...there will be the presumption at the Supreme Court level that the Circuit Court of Appeals acted correctly.

<Shaking head>

You're pushing a rope, and you haven't a clue as to it being a rope yet.


  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 2178
Re: Journey to the United States Supreme Court! UPDATE
« Reply #47 on: September 24, 2017 02:22:55 AM »
Yes I know this thread is 4 years old.  Not only did the OP (Gowyo) not make it to the Supreme Court he now has a second case setting precedent harmful to consumers out there.,41

This kind of pro-se case is EXACTLY what is shifting the courts to consider FDCPA cases frivolous (people like him who file frivolous claims) and making it harder for the consumers who were truly harmed to seek redress from the courts.

"The Court acknowledges one of the main purposes of the FDCPA is "to eliminate abusive debt collection practices." See 15 U.S.C. 1692(e). However, courts have also become more cognizant of the potential misuse of the FDCPA by consumers, especially in light of the bargaining power it can create with the consumer's potential liability."

Nice work.  You just set back consumer protections a decade or more.
Be VERY careful following advice from the internet! What worked for someone with thousands of posts on a message board may not work for YOU in your state.  Consult a lawyer when ever possible.


  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 8601
  • Welcome to my Temper Tantrum
Re: Journey to the United States Supreme Court!
« Reply #48 on: September 24, 2017 09:08:46 PM »
There are a couple of procedural hurdles before either party can get a case from the Wyoming District Court to SCOTUS.
BTW-the Flyingifr Method does work. (quoted from Hannah on Infinite Credit, September 19, 2006)

I think of a telephone as a Debt Collector's crowbar. With such a device it is possible to pry one's mouth open wide enough to allow the insertion of a foot or two.

Debtors Exams are the perfect place for us Senior Citizens to show off our recently acquired Alzheimers.

Founder of the Credit Terrorist Training Camp (Debtorboards)


  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 10768
Re: Journey to the United States Supreme Court!
« Reply #49 on: September 24, 2017 11:17:05 PM »
And, until that time, the  District Courts ruling is binding in federal courts in that district.

The abuse of private attorney general provisions in filing suits where there is only an alleged violation of the FDCPA based on a narrow interpretation of both law and precedent not only can be injurious to the one making the frivolous case but for those who are, legitimately, using the FDCPA for its intended purpose.

The rope has been pushed, and the litigant managed to push it into a noose that hanged himself...

And the rest of us.