Instead of asking, let your fingers do the Google ! How is that for exercise ?
Oh, I get it! We're supposed to take your word for whatever you say! In other words, anyone who questions your posts have to do you what you're not willing to do. It doesn't take much googling. Since you're either incapable or willing to do nothing, I'll bite.
1. The affidavits you copied in "false affidavits of Midlands" were offered in Laudner v. Midland
, a Washington lawsuit. They were not offered in Midland Funding v. Bren
2. So far, you have nothing to show, other than your opinion, that those affidavits are false. I agree that they are false, but there's nothing from a COURT that says so. Absent a ruling from a court, it's merely our opinion that your copied affidavits are false.
3. One of the details referenced by the court in Midland Funding v. Brent
was the fact that the affiant said that he was involved in the decision or act of hiring the law firm to pursue action but after being question, he admitted he was not involved in that decision.
4. The affiant in Brent was subpoenaed and questioned. The ruling was not based upon the affidavit alone. Details, details.
4. Brent was a Northern District of OH ruling. I suggest that you read Myers v. Asset Acceptance
and Webb v. Asset Acceptance
, LLC both of which are Southern District of OH rulings and reference the Brent ruling. They're based upon the details
of the affidavits.
Here's a quote from Webb:
The fact that Melasi does not have personal knowledge regarding Webb's alleged credit card debt does not render her affidavit deceptive or misleading.
You never responded to the OP's question in post #116. Where's the proof? That was also my question. You provided no answer but simply resorted to an attack. You seem to think I was attacking you, but I wasn't. I thought that perhaps you knew of a ruling on those affidavits that I didn't know about and had not found.