Author Topic: Question about pending Midland law suit  (Read 3768 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Brunothe JDBKiller

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 5778
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #135 on: October 26, 2014 08:52:38 PM »
You make your argument, and you support it with case law. Like this.

"Howucantoo came into my store and bought $500 worth of wine. She paid with a bogus credit card. Later, the credit card company declined the purchase because she is a deadbeat. Therefore, I petition this honorable court (unless it is in Illinois LOL) to make me whole."

Then you cite cases, like Bruno vs. Howyoucan'teither 2006 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, and Bruno vs. The Terror of Chicago, Western District of Illinois, and Bruno vs. The Terror, Small Claims, (short dog) etc. all of which Bruno won. He is still waiting to collect his judgment. Fat chance.

The cases you cite should be from your state courts, the higher the better. The cases you cite should be cases where the judge made a ruling that agrees with your argument. If they are higher cases, appellate or more, they are BINDING which means the lower court judges have NO option but to follow that ruling.

If your case law is from other states or lower state courts, it is "persuasive." That means the judge can take it into consideration but is not obliged to follow the ruling.You ALWAYS want higher court rulings, otherwise somebody like the Terror will take you into JAMS and bleed you dry.
I am not an attorney. Any information I post is strictly my opinion and should be treated as such.

howucantoo

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4487
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #136 on: October 26, 2014 10:17:00 PM »
Bruno gave good advice.  We'll wait for Bellebutton to chime in later with her remarks .   :lildevil:

For hearing I always take my notes with me and I have stickys on them to allow me to quickly flip to the appropriate page. I always recommend taking your time and pause, don't let the other side rush you (that is  one way to fluster a pro se defendant ). Read through your notes the night before court and make sure to have every angel covered. People who lose are because they go in winging it. You must be prepared for all types of arguments. You'll never know when or if it happens.

I would emphasize greatly on FAA sections I mentioned above. Those make great arguments for establishing why agreement must be enforced.

Here is a synopsis of what I argued in the past (Courtesy of Terror's Appellate brief)

9 U.S.C. §2.), the  “primary substantive provision of the Act,” (Moses H. Cone Memorial  Hospital v. Mercury Construction. Corp., 460 U. S. 1, 24 (1983)), provides, in  relevant part, as follows: “A written provision in any maritime transaction or a contract evidencing a transaction involving commerce to settle by arbitration a controversy thereafter arising out of such contract or transactio shall be valid, irrevocable, and enforceable, save upon  such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.”

(9 U.S.C.§ 3) Stay of proceedings; If any suit or proceeding be brought in  any of the courts of the United States upon any issue referable to  arbitration under an agreement in writing for such arbitration, the court  in which such suit is pending, upon being satisfied that the issue  involved in such suit or proceeding is referable to arbitration under such an agreement, shall on application of one of the parties stay the trial of  the action until such arbitration has been had in accordance with the terms of the agreement, providing the applicant for the stay is not in  default in proceeding with such arbitration.
       
(9 U.S.C §4) requires that “upon being satisfied that the making of the agreement for arbitration or the failure to comply therewith is not  in issue,” the court must order arbitration “in accordance with the terms of the agreement. (Sec §2, means grounds related to the making of the agreement). This would require enforcement of an agreement to arbitrate unless a party successfully asserts a defense concerning the formation of the agreement to arbitrate, such as fraud, duress, or mutual mistake.” (Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388 U. S. 395, 403–404  (1967), (interpreting §4 to permit courts to adjudicate claims of “fraud in  the inducement of the arbitration clause itself” because such claims “go  to the ‘making’ of the agreement to arbitrate”). Contract defenses unrelated  to the making of the agreement—such as public policy—could not be the  basis for declining to enforce an arbitration clause.
I am not an attorney, just  type" A" personality.
If you need legal help, you should seek legal counsel.

BellEbutton

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 1619
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #137 on: October 26, 2014 10:34:19 PM »
Quote
Bruno gave good advice.  We'll wait for Bellebutton to chime in later with her remarks .

I think that both you and Bruno have given great advice about notes and case law for arbitration.   You seem to think that because I asked questions about the copies of affidavits you provided that I was attacking you. 

I didn't mean for it to appear that way, and I sincerely apologize if you thought I was attacking you.   All I wanted to know was if the WA court ruled that the affidavits were false.  The OP asked the same thing. 

If we're not allowed to ask questions for fear that we're appearing to attack, there's alot we won't learn.   I was really hoping that there had been a ruling in Laudner that the affidavits were false and that I hadn't found.

The point is that if those affidavits were not ruled to be false, we shouldn't say for a fact that they are false.  I absolutely agree with you that all affidavits from JDBs are robosigned, but our opinion isn't proof (although I think it should be).  :)

Again, I apologize if my questions were worded in such a way that they appeared to be attack on you personally.

Brunothe JDBKiller

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 5778
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #138 on: October 27, 2014 01:41:46 PM »
The problem with this is that the Lauber case was consolidated with Gray vs. Suttell & Associates. The court made its final ruling in August 2014. They ruled that Midland required a license as a debt collector. It did not address the affidavits specifically because it was probably considered moot. Midland Funding has no employees, therefore any affidavit from them would automatically be fatally defective.
I am not an attorney. Any information I post is strictly my opinion and should be treated as such.

JohnDoe76

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 65
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #139 on: October 27, 2014 05:59:23 PM »
Just so I don't look dumb, can someone explain the 9 U.S.C. §2. part again so I can make sure I understand what I saying. Is it the 9th circut of the USC (Supreme Court)?

howucantoo

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4487
I am not an attorney, just  type" A" personality.
If you need legal help, you should seek legal counsel.

JohnDoe76

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 65
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #141 on: October 27, 2014 06:04:42 PM »
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/9/2

Ok, Title 9 Section 2 US Code


How do I decipher AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 321 the numbers at the end?
Thanks

Brunothe JDBKiller

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 5778
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #142 on: October 27, 2014 06:23:39 PM »
You don't have to decipher, it's just junk to tell lawyers where the case can be located in the federal register.
I am not an attorney. Any information I post is strictly my opinion and should be treated as such.

JohnDoe76

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 65
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #143 on: October 28, 2014 04:29:15 PM »
Well I was taken by surprise twice in court today. First plaintiff failed to show up... Second the judge would not dismiss the case, he said it was just a motion hearing. He approved my MTC Arb, but said that if we didn't get it worked out in Arb then we would have a hearing to resolve the matter. The judge didn't know anything about JAMS other than both parties. He didn't know it was legally binding. The judge wasn't going to approve my MTC unless I admitted there was a contract...

So I guess now we wait for MC to respond to JAMS.

howucantoo

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4487
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #144 on: October 29, 2014 01:42:42 AM »
Good job John !

You Overcame the biggest hurdle today. Going to court and forcing MTC is not a small feat for pro se.

It is a well known fact that Midland will never pay for JAMS. Initiate if you haven't done so , pay your fees if the contract says so. Then sit down and wait for none-payment letters to arrive.

Save all those letters JAMS requesting payment from Midland, then after the case is dismissed go back get a dismissal with prejudice from the court.
I am not an attorney, just  type" A" personality.
If you need legal help, you should seek legal counsel.

JohnDoe76

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 65
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #145 on: October 29, 2014 02:12:21 AM »
Good job John !

You Overcame the biggest hurdle today. Going to court and forcing MTC is not a small feat for pro se.

It is a well known fact that Midland will never pay for JAMS. Initiate if you haven't done so , pay your fees if the contract says so. Then sit down and wait for none-payment letters to arrive.

Save all those letters JAMS requesting payment from Midland, then after the case is dismissed go back get a dismissal with prejudice from the court.

That's the thing the judge made it sound like if we didn't reach a resolution in JAMS then we would have to go through with a hearing anyway. The judge sat there and said he wasn't familiar with JAMS...

howucantoo

  • Valued Member
  • Posts: 4487
Re: Question about pending Midland law suit
« Reply #146 on: October 29, 2014 04:47:39 PM »
That's the thing the judge made it sound like if we didn't reach a resolution in JAMS then we would have to go through with a hearing anyway. The judge sat there and said he wasn't familiar with JAMS...

Most state court judges don't know or maybe don't want to know what JAMS is.

I am in a big metro city and the circuit court judge (after I appealed his MTC denial and got a reversal) still ordered judicial arbitration instead of JAMS. I had another judge reverse that order too.
I am not an attorney, just  type" A" personality.
If you need legal help, you should seek legal counsel.

 

credit