Free Doc of the Day: King Lee P. Rudofsky has no clothes

Yesterday I began to present the evidence that Trump Appointed Federal District Court Judge Lee P. Rudofsky is a dishonest man. He does not belong on the bench and I am happy to give testimony against him at any confirmation hearing if he is considered for a Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.

Today, I am posting a transcript of the oral order Judge Rudofsky made during the latest Star Chamber hearing. This is a busy time for me, so I will take several days to share with you all the lies and legal errors made by the Harvard educated judge in rationalizing denying a jury trial on this case.

Today I will concentrate on Lee P’s misquotation and subsequent misinterpretation of a single sentence.

“I will say I appreciate and accept Ms. Hammett’s discovery that I had a drafting error [Ya, ya, drafting error, wink, wink] in footnote 463. I said at one point in that footnote that Ms. Hammett in her affidavit said, quote, I am a consumer in respect to any debt incurred by me on a credit card issued by Capital One Bank USA in or about 2001, period. And as Ms. Hammett correctly points out, that period was too early and chopped off the rest of the sentence. The full sentence is, I am a consumer in respect to any debt incurred by me on a credit card issued by Capital One Bank USA in or about 2001, comma, as I used any credit card to purchase household items, food, and other consumer items, period, close quote.

“I hope that is the correct — is the correct iteration of it. I am going off of page 6 of Ms. Hammett’s brief in support of opposition to the defendant’s supplement motion for summary judgment. But I agree that I should not have chopped off the sentence with the period. I take responsibility for that. [Hooray, a man who can say the four most difficult words in the English language, “I made a mistake.” But he could not leave good enough alone. He continued…]

“Having said that, the last clause does not change anything in my mind. It does not create more — a more favorable situation for Ms. Hammett were this to go to a jury than she had before. In fact, if it does anything, it hurts her, but I just don’t think it makes any difference one way or the — or the other.”

Judge Rudofsky’s interpretation of the sentence found in the consolidated order denying my motion for partial summary judgment and granting Portfolio Recovery’s motion for summary judgment:

“But, on this record, it does not appear to be genuinely disputed that Ms. Hammett owed PRA, LLC $2,297.63. fn 463 That is, the Court (tentatively) believes that every rational juror would conclude that Ms. Hammett owed PRA, LLC this amount. In turn, there is good reason to think that no rational juror could conclude that PRA, LLC falsely represented to Ms. Hammett the amount of the debt.”

The lengthy footnote 463 starts with the premise, “Ms. Hammett concedes that she ‘probably’ opened a Capital One account in 2001.” True. Then the misquotation is added. “‘I am a consumer in respect to any debt incurred by me on a credit card issued by Capital One Bank (USA) in or about 2001.’” Lee is not the slightest bit lazy. He continued spinning his lie in two footnotes that hopped down three pages. I will address the rest in future writings.

Here, I just want to share my question and answer session with ChatGBT’s OpenAI. This is language based artificial intelligence.

It is important to share a fact that I shared with the Court in several ways. The meaning of “debt” in the context of the FDCPA is “alleged debt”.

Q: I wrote, “I am a consumer in respect to any debt incurred by me on a credit card issued by Capital One Bank in or about 2001, as I used any credit card to purchase household items, food and other consumer items.” Does this mean I agree that I owed a particular debt. Or does it mean that if I owed the debt, it was used to purchase consumer goods?

A: Based on the statement you provided, it seems that you are acknowledging that you used a credit card issued by Capital One Bank to make purchases for household items, food, and other consumer goods. However, it does not necessarily mean that you are admitting to owing a particular debt.

It is possible that you are acknowledging the use of the credit card but disputing the amount of the debt or any fees or charges that may have been added to the original debt. Alternatively, you may be acknowledging that you owed the debt, but you are simply explaining the nature of the purchases that were made using the credit card.

Overall, the statement you provided suggests that you used a Capital One credit card for consumer purchases, but it does not necessarily indicate whether you acknowledge or dispute any particular debt related to those purchases.

Q: How does the meaning change if I change the sentence to, ““I am a consumer in respect to any alleged debt incurred by me on a credit card issued by Capital One Bank in or about 2001, as I used any credit card to purchase household items, food and other consumer items.”

A: By changing the word “debt” to “alleged debt” in the sentence, you are indicating that you do not necessarily acknowledge that you owe the debt. The term “alleged” suggests that you are disputing the existence or validity of the debt and that you are not admitting to owing the debt.

The rest of the sentence remains the same, indicating that you used a Capital One credit card to make purchases for household items, food, and other consumer items. However, the addition of “alleged” before “debt” makes it clear that you are not admitting to owing the debt and that you may be disputing its validity or accuracy.

Summary judgment is an extreme measure. There was a reasonable inference that I meant I opened an account to use for consumer purchases but did not incur the alleged debt of $2,297.63. Especially when taken in context with my certified complaint and my motion for partial summary judgment that is based on the fact that the debt collector made false statements about the amount or character of a debt.

Lee P. Rudofsky is putting your tax dollars to work by forcing me to go to the Court of Appeals and the CFPB.

Please contact me if you want to represent me as plaintiff to the Court of Appeals and beyond. bohemian_books@yahoo.com