Judge Susan Weaver Gives Fraudster Bonus
I gave a copy of this letter handwritten and signed by “Mike” Pietrczak, that describes how he intended to collect over $75,000 from me and then have attorney William White sue me for many times the amount.
I brought a video tape to play in the hearing of March 17, 2022, in which Pietrczak tells me we will be even once I pay him $75,000. Judge Weaver did not allow me to say a word about the truth. I am not exaggerating. The Arkansas judge threatened that I would be committing a crime if I gave any testimony that would show Mike Pietrczak, his dad Walter and attorney White were committing a fraud.
Here is the recording.
Good Ol’ Boy Arkansas Sheriff Has Crooked Judge’s Back
Judge Susan Weaver in Searcy County Arkansas is making a habit of transferring assets from old womens’ trusts to her favored attorney’s clients (and therefore to her favored attorney).
She did this to me. I could not find an attorney in Arkansas willing to represent the trust. Literally, I was told “I will never win a case in front of Judge Weaver again, if I represent you or the trust.” [paraphrased, closely]
I get why Judge Susan Weaver and Attorney William Zac White would benefit from making these transfers.
But what is in it for Searcy County Sheriff Kenney Cassell? (Mr. Cassell sometimes uses “Kenny” so I’ll switch back and forth like him to help with SEO.)
The Sheriff had a recording of Mr. White’s client, Mike Pietrczak, calling the law while sloppy drunk. Mr. Pietrczak said something like: Come get this bitch. When the deputy asked what I did wrong, Pietrczak repeated that I was “a bitch”. When the deputy asked if I said anything threatening, Pietrczak said no.
Eventually I got on the phone. I was not drunk. In fact, I abstained from alcohol out of sympathy for my alcoholic boyfriend.
The deputy told me I should go stay in my office in Marshall, a 30-minute drive on a good day. This was not a good day. The roads were covered in snow and ice. The deputy told me the safest way to drive in these conditions, taking the dirt backroads. The deputy said that after Pietrczak ran out of booze and sobered up, he would call me apologetically and ask me to come home.
The deputy’s prophesy came true.
I made a Freedom of Information Act request for the recording. Sheriff Cassell’s crew had purged the tape.
Before the hearing of March 17, 2022 where Judge Weaver said she was transferring all the trust property to Mr. Pietrczak and attorney Zac White, Zac screamed at me in the courthouse. “Shut your mouth bitch!” Sheriff Cassell was in the room with me. Mr. White was in a different room. Judge Weaver was also in the small courthouse. Mr. White was not restrained by Sheriff Cassell or any of the three deputies who were there to protect…???
Later, in the courtroom during the hearing, with the full team of sheriffs present, Mr. William Z. White again called me “bitch”. He leaned toward me and spoke loud enough for two 70+ year-olds in the audience to hear.
Judge Weaver ignored the slur. So too, the big ape Cassell who masquerades as a good Christian man.
The Sheriff and Deputies stood there, watching the kangaroo court. They heard the judge shut me down any time I tried to object to impermissible evidence. Not that the judge overruled my objections. She demanded that I not object at all. She also said that if I testified, I would be practicing law unauthorized.
After this surreal and horrifying hearing ended, I pled with Sheriff Kenny Cassell to do something…anything in the pursuit of justice. I told him Pietrczak had lied on the stand. Perjury. I told him that the judge and attorney White had conspired with the court reporter in the past to fabricate what was said and not said in court. I spoke to Kenney Cassell directly and then to a young deputy at the station.
Nothing was done.
I know Kenny Cassell has a pleasant demeanor. He is a heck of a guy to go to a bar-b-que with. He will give you a firm handshake at church on Sunday.
But he is the man like that who watched as Nazis stole property from Jews and then sent the Jews off to concentration camps. Kenny Cassell is the man like that who looked at the captives beseeching him for help, gave a sympathetic pout and shrugged, palms up and shaking his helpless head.
Judge Weaver is evil. But those who stand by and let her get away with it are a special brand of puke.
Portfolio Recovery Associates Threatened Little Old Lady who had COVID and Auto-immune Disease
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, a Goliath debt buyer, files about 3,000 lawsuits per week against alleged debtors.
PRA knows the lists of debts it purchases from original creditors are riddled with errors, but presses forward before verifying the debt.
Government agencies such as the CFPB and State Attorney Generals have come to settlements with PRA over the conduct. Much of the restitution PRA made was to old people and people of color who lost in court when PRA sued them.
PRA is relentless when it is plaintiff in a case. There was one interesting, rare person who fought back named “Susan Young”. (04CV-20-197, Benton County Arkansas Circuit Court) PRA dismissed that case eventually. The reason it caught my attention is that there is a corrupt judge named Susan Weaver who was “Susan Young” briefly, due to a short-lived marriage. Maybe just a coincidence, but unconfirmed rumor has it that Judge Weaver had debt issues and she went to college in Fayetteville, in Benton County neck of the woods. This is just interesting speculation.
What I do know is that when I sued PRA for violating the FDCPA and causing intentional infliction of emotional distress against me, PRA brought out the big guns to defend itself.
They hired Rose Law Firm of Hillary Clinton fame. They hired a second big national firm called Troutman-Pepper. They filed motions that were hundreds of pages long and full of lies.
The judge on the case, Lee P. Rudofsky, appears to have a big-business bias. The Harvard trained judge was Solicitor General in Arkansas after working as counsel to Wal-Mart. He acts like Portfolio Recovery is not known to file false affidavits. He looked at the simple math errors made on the one statement produced by PRA and did not discount the statement. He saw that PRA claimed the alleged debt carried an interest rate of 29.4% on one document and an interest rate of 0.00% on another document, but did not accept the debt PRA bought for pennies on the dollar was invalid.
It looks to me like I have an uphill battle to fight. It looks that way to PRA, also. The fancy lawyers are getting real arrogant and bossy. Like they “own the court.”
While I was sick with COVID, PRA attorneys kept sending me demands to give them a list of people who I consider “employees”. Here is the latest letter with my response in red.
Ms. Hammett,
PRA has no interest in your “confidential” information and, outside of Dr. Adhia and PRA counsel, has disclosed it to no one. PRA posted my confidential information on PACER and I documented the contemptuous acts. Dr. Adhia’s report specifically excluded a “Confidential” designation and Dr. Adhia said he does not consider the exam as confidential. He said that he told me the exam was not confidential and that I proceeded. He failed to mention that I first corrected him as to the confidentiality.
You, however, have from the inception of this case tried to leverage threats to disclose PRA’s confidential and proprietary information – by “getting loud” PRA has access to all my blog posts and there is not a single confidential disclosure.– to extract an exorbitant settlement from PRA. PRA violated the Consent Order concerning me before the Consent Order expired. PRA already paid $8M in fines for the same behavior and it did not slow PRA down. I offered to settle for far less than that. I did as much work as the CFPB, without any compensation for my time and taking all the risk. As a public action, I anticipate the CFPB will collect quite a bit more than $8M. If PRA agreed to the settlement of our private right of action, the government would collect the appropriate percentage of my settlement as tax. Indeed, you have expressly stated your intent to publicly share as much of PRA’s confidential information as possible. I have not said anything of the sort. Put that in the bin with the other PRA lies, such as PRA’s invention of “online (therefore illegal) poker losses” and that PRA did not call my cell phone repeatedly in September and October 2020.
In your recent barrage of filings, you indicated that you have provided PRA’s confidential materials to other individuals No, I quite specifically said I had not provided confidential materials to Mr. Paisola yet.and that by errantly self-labelling these individuals as your “employees” that you can do so in contravention of the Protective Order with impunity. PRA does not have a monopoly on hiring employees. Note that PRA refused to disclose the names of any employees in response to discovery requests. Perhaps coincidentally, but likely as wrongdoing by PRA, I told PRA two of my employees’ names and within days, each of those employees ghosted me.
It is highly unlikely you have any actual “employees,” which is a term of art with a very specific meaning. PRA is pompous and self-absorbed. Note that PRA hired two law firms and has a legal department with hundreds of employees helping to try to crush a 60-year-old non-attorney and expects her to do every bit of the work without help. After being given documentation that the older woman has COVID and an auto-immune disease, PRA sent a barrage of demands to the woman telling her she must create employee records and disclose them to PRA, while she has COVID. Merely calling someone an “employee” does not make it so. Your latest attempt to sidestep Judge Rudofsky’s protective order is improper.
To be clear, my client does not wish to file a motion. There have been far too many of those in this case already. We agree on one point; this should have been a simple case. It did not warrant a thousand page motion for summary judgment or a protective order that requires a motion to unseal “Confidential” documents that already exist in the exact form (with different data) elsewhere on the internet.
Rather, my client’s sole objective is to ascertain who is in possession of its confidential materials, properly or otherwise, and to ensure that PRA’s confidential materials remain protected. PRA is inventing things to worry about. PRA has not seen any posting of its confidential information by me or anyone remotely related to me, because there has been no inappropriate disclosures. PRA on the other hand has violated the protective order and the signed confidentiality agreement from the settlement conference.
At present, you are refusing to identify the individual(s) to whom you have disclosed PRA documents designated as confidential under the protective order. We ask once more that you do so. I am not aware of any mechanism for you to make that demand. I copy and pasted your demand, changing the name of the requesting party, and you ignored that demand completely. All of this will be shared with proper authorities and the public at the appropriate time.
Should you once again refuse, PRA reserves all rights in this regard (attached).
I wrote a motion under Rule 11 against PRA in my head when I could not sit up to write it on the computer. I will add this latest threat if I decide to put the Rule 11 Motion in writing now that I am able to sit up. Frankly, I think the reports to the CFPB and the IRS are more important. There will be no confidential information included, but I will point out that you convinced the Court to keep evidence of PRA’s wrongdoing confidential.
Regards,
Jim (The debt buyer company attorney who filed for bankruptcy himself to get out from under his insurmountable debt.)
Laura Hammett
Clever Willy Files Another Summonsless Suit
[UPDATE, October 20, 2022: This blog was posted on September 29, 2022. On October 12, 2022, Attorney William Zac White issued three summonses in the case. Gold star for Willy. (I was down with COVID until a few days ago and am trying to catch up with my own cases.) Now we can wait with bated breath to see if the attorney serves the summonses before the final hearing on the case.]
You should catch up by reading how Arkansas Attorney William Zac White and Judge Susan Kaye Weaver transfer properties from trusts to his clients, each time failing to serve a summons on the defendants.
The out-of-control attorney filed another suit today. Named a trust. Check. Issued no summons. Check.
This case is against great-grandparents Harold and Patsy Land of Lawrence County Arkansas.
If any reader knows the Lands, give them a heads up.
The suit is based on a real estate sale “contract” that Mr. White claims was oral.
I am not an attorney, but I was a real estate broker for three decades. I heard about this thing called the statute of frauds. I bet most attorneys have heard of it too.
Here is a statute cut and pasted from a Justia, that looks to my non-attorney self to be the statute of frauds.
Instruments
Chapter 59 – Fraud
Subchapter 1 – Statute of Frauds
§ 4-59-101 – Contracts, agreements, or promises required to be in writing.
4-59-101. Contracts, agreements, or promises required to be in writing.
(a) Unless the agreement, promise, or contract, or some memorandum or note thereof, upon which an action is brought is made in writing and signed by the party to be charged therewith, or signed by some other person properly authorized by the person sought to be charged, no action shall be brought to charge any:
(4) Person upon any contract for the sale of lands, tenements, or hereditaments, or any interest in or concerning them;
Slick Willy forgot to issue a summons, but he remembered to file a lis pendens. He wrote in the complaint that the Lands have a sale pending. That lis pendens may block the sale. If Mr. White doesn’t serve summons on the elderly couple or the trust they set up, they will have a rude surprise in escrow. Mr. White will have leverage to extort some sort of settlement. Knowing Mr. White’s record, a judge may give default judgment to his client without a summons being issued.
Is this another way for Mr. White to grab property from the elderly for his clients and his “fee”?
I’d have to guess YES!
Searcy County Arkansas Sheriff’s Email Hacked: Deputy Dopey Not Too Concerned
I received an email that appeared to be from Searcy County Sheriff, Kenney Cassell today.
It said he was sharing a Dropbox file with me. Just click here.
I am sick with COVID and still under the influence of medications. It is difficult to sit. It is difficult to breath. Sorry William White, Susan Weaver and Portfolio Recovery Associates; I am not going to die from this. It is just slowing me down.
I foolishly clicked on the box and entered my email address and password, as instructed.
When there was no file presented to me, I quickly changed my email password.
I called the sheriff. Deputy Devon answered. (You can listen to the call below.)
He put me on hold a couple minutes to investigate. Then he said “We see an email. It was not meant to be sent to you. We are not sure exactly what this email is so you can disregard it. It’s not anything.”
Me: It’s very strange.
Deputy “Dopey” Devon: We didn’t send this email somehow.
Me: What do you mean you didn’t send it?
Deputy Dopey: We didn’t send this out this morning. We may have been hacked so…
Me: You may have been hacked?
Deputy Dopey: Disregard it. Delete it.
I gave him a long explanation of why I wanted more specific information about who hacked their system. I was concerned it might be Judge Susan Weaver or Attorney William White.
Finally, Deputy Dopey said “It was sent to a couple hundred people, so it wasn’t specifically targeted to you.”
So, the Sheriff of Searcy County Arkansas was hacked and its email is used to help the hacker convince old ladies who are on medication to enter their email and password. Many hours later, the sheriff still has not sent an email blast warning folks not to click on the “Dropbox” link.
A concerned citizen who is now likely to have further fraud committed against her by the hackers called and the Sheriff did not want to investigate. They made no effort to discover anything like IP addresses or anything that might be helpful to a computer forensics expert.
I’m glad Sheriff Kenney Cassell, who has a pleasant demeanor, has no brain. If he did, it would get lonely being the only one in the sheriff station.
There is an intermission when D.D. investigates. Grab a bite to eat or fast forward to 6:01.
Good Job, Young Simpson: Attorney W.Z. White Loses Again
Arkansas Judge Susan Weaver transferred property from a trust I was settlor, trustee and beneficiary of, by default. She used the excuse that I could not present evidence or arguments that would apply equally to the trust as to myself. I was named in the suit as a Common Defense Doctrine defendant. I was dismissed with prejudice. At that moment, Judge Weaver was obligated to dismiss the non-appearing trust.
The case began when attorney William Z. White of Heber Springs filed the suit and issued only one summons, the summons on me as an individual (misnaming me, but that is the general gist). Mr. White did not serve the one summons. I learned why later.
I found out about the case when I looked my own name up on Court Connect.
I recommend everyone in Arkansas monitor Court Connect to protect yourself against default judgments granted without service of summons.
You see, that is the devious plan that it appears was hatched by Mr. White and Judge Weaver. They previously were involved with a case filed by Richard Gawenis. There too, a trust was named but not served summons. Judge Weaver revoked the trust and Gawenis was going to grab the property.
But an attorney got involved. He filed a motion to set aside the order in the first case. Then he opened a second case. Judge Weaver presided on that case also.
It seems like Judge Weaver is a tad smarter than Willy White. (That is not a big accomplishment.) With an attorney involved, Judge Weaver made the right call. The trust got its property back and Mr. White’s client lost his rights as a beneficiary because of a no-contest clause.
Mr. White appealed.
He lost on appeal.
FUN Free Law Student Challenge
Here is the entire record of a case fought in Grisham country.
See how many legal errors you can find.
Abuse of discretion?
Use the comments to let everyone know how incompetent and unethical Judge Susan Kaye Weaver and attorney William Zac White are.
Feeling Funky, But Want to KIT
Sorry my posts are few and far between. Is this what the elder years are like? One ailment after another?
My current malady is COVID. The doctor diagnosing me did not seem too concerned. COVID is not the Russian Roulette it was in 2020 or when the delta variant hit.
There were moments in the past few days when I would rather be dead than handle the pain, but modern medicine is wonderous. Pop a pill and drift off into a comfortable sleep.
Unfortunately, law has not kept up with medicine. Judges usually hold non-attorney, self-represented litigants to the same standards as a team of high paid lawyers. I remember feeling like I do now, and Judge Susan K. Weaver of Searcy County Circuit Court denied my request to postpone an in-person hearing that entailed three hours of driving for me.
Funky as I feel, I finished a petition for writ of mandate today to cause Judge Weaver to play the recording of court hearings that were deliberately falsified in the transcripts.
Here it is.
Do You Play With Cheaters?
I finally have a good excuse to write about my passion: Poker.
What does poker have to do with court corruption?
Simple. Sometimes players cheat at poker. Sometimes litigants cheat at litigation.
Sadly, sometimes “the house” (the court) is complicit.
For instance, an attorney named William Z. White maliciously filed a lawsuit against me to benefit my former romantic and business partner, Micheal “Mike” Pietrczak. (Micheal is the correct spelling of his name, though even the Federal Court got it wrong when he was convicted of using a false i.d. at the U.S.-Mexico border.)
Mike was committing fraud on me. Mr. White had a suicide note written by Mike to his father that described the fraud. He proceeded against me anyhow, claiming I was defrauding Mike.
Eventually the suit against me was dismissed twice. The second dismissal was voluntary, instigated by Mr. White after the suicide note was sent to me in a production of documents. The big box of documents looked like someone peed and pooped on some papers, then shuffled them together. I put on gloves and looked through each page.
Still, I had a common defense doctrine co-defendant, a trust. I was trustee and beneficiary of that trust. I was not allowed to advocate for the trust because I am not licensed to practice law.
Judge Susan Kaye Weaver granted default judgment against the trust. She transferred all the assets I intended to use for retirement to a brand-new trust that will fund Mike Pietrczak’s drug and alcohol abuse and the trauma’s he causes to his own body. He was paralyzed in one of his accidents, after I broke up with him. (Mike told me his medical bills cost the taxpayers millions of dollars. His lawsuit probably cost the taxpayers quite a bit more.)
Early in the second case Mr. White filed in the Searcy County Arkansas Circuit Court, 65-CV-21-20, the Court Reporter Jana Perry deliberately falsified what was said in a hearing. Even though I threw a tizzy, filing motions to settle, civil rights lawsuits and complaints to administrative agencies, Ms. Perry repeated her dishonest services by falsifying a second hearing transcript.
You may notice that I am not using my usual cautionary words, such as “allegedly”. That is because truth is a defense against defamation, and I know what I am saying is true. If any of the conspirators who cheated at court sues me for defamation, the tape of the hearing will be exculpatory evidence and Ms. Perry will be required to play it in open court with a copy of the transcript on a screen for all to see. (Unless that court cheats, too.)
I have begged Judge Weaver and the Justices at the Court of Appeals to play the tape, with no success.
My 1983 suit in Federal District Court against Ms. Perry, Judge Weaver and Mr. White was dismissed without reaching discovery by Judge Billy Roy Wilson. (I call him “Billy Bob”.)
I was going to use the tape as evidence in an FDCPA case against Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC. But Judge Rudofsky is leaning towards ending that case before allowing Ms. Perry to comply with my subpoena.
Judge Weaver and her good ol’ peeps are definitely cheating.
Judge Rudofsky, if he is cheating, is much smarter and more subtle. He allows for Portfolio Recovery to file everything it wants under seal, even forms it has published to the public numerous times in other cases, with just different data. They are able to avoid scrutiny.
This is where law feels like a poker game. There is collusion going on. meaning two or more people at the table are working together. Collusion is a form of cheating.
For instance, I have watched a couple sitting next to each other. The woman was on the man’s right. Every time she played a hand, so did he. This is called “protection”. It is subtle and may happen unintentionally, as well.
I know that when I am at a table with my son, I am more likely to call a hand he is in. I know that if I lose, the money will probably go to him. He wins more hands than he loses. I would give him all my money and my right arm if he needed it. So, what’s an extra ten bucks? I should learn from the experience, because every time I play at a table with my son, I come out ahead. I should probably loosen up even when my son is not at the table.
The difference between how I play when my son is there and how the couple was playing is that I don’t play my crap hands when my son is next to me. I fold 7-2 off suit. I noticed the couple’s gambit when all other players folded and both had to expose their hands for the show down. They both had Jack-shit. (Not literally a jack and a shitty kicker. That is a colloquialism for “nothing” that was taken from poker, because a jack with a low off suit kicker is not likely to be a winning hand.) The woman had a good opening hand, but the flop made it unplayable. The man had nothing to start and nothing to finish. They both bluffed the other players out together. After that hand I paid close attention to their pattern. It defied statistical probability, so I got up and found other kids to play with.
I do not play with cheaters. Collusion is cheating.
My son, on the other hand, will. He once told me there were cheaters at the game he played the night before. I asked why he continued to play. He said “if they have to cheat to win, they are not good players. They might win a few hands against me, but I will win more. Eventually I will leave with their money.”
I don’t think my son’s theory works at law.
I took the case Billy Bob presided over to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and those Justices dismissed my appeal summarily. That means they did not allow me to write a brief. I didn’t know the appellate court could do that. Maybe I should have brought the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.
I made two bids on a case in California to go to the U.S. Supreme Court. Both petitions for writ of cert were denied. That is not unusual. A miniscule percentage of petitions are granted for discretionary review by SCOTUS.
On the California case I was able to have a judge admonished for his unethical behavior. That was a slap on the wrist. I believe the presiding family law judge took early retirement in part because of my complaints about her. But there was no dramatic improvement in the court.
It is too easy for judges to show a bias toward favored litigants or to outright cheat for them. They can easily collude.
Unlike at a poker game, the players are not allowed to just get up and leave without leaving all their money on the table.
Since the unethical judges will eventually transfer all the marks’ money to the opponent, is it wiser for the mark to hand her money over? I don’t think so.
Because unlike at poker, the opponent is allowed to force the mark to bring more money to the table, by filing another bullshit lawsuit or getting an impermissible order for attorney fees. Portfolio Recovery Associates and the William Zac Whites of the world make billions of dollars a year doing just that.
Punctuation Matters. Period. End of Story.
If this conduct by Goliath debt buyer Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC and Trump appointed Judge Lee P. Rudofsky was not so evil, it would be humorous.
So, I’ll start with one of my dearly departed father, Dr. Norman H. Kramer’s favorite jokes.
He wrote words on a piece of paper exactly like this:
Sex Sex Sex
Worry Worry Worry
Then he told his audience to punctuate the words correctly.
You try.
Sex Sex Sex
Worry Worry Worry
Should I help you?
Sex. Sex. Sex
Worry Worry Worry
Speak the punctuation outloud.
Sex, period, Sex, period, Sex, no period. Worry Worry Worry. lol
Seriously, the placement of a single period or comma can change the meaning of a sentence completely.
For example, there is a case Portfolio Recovery loves called Facebook, Inc. v Duguid. The U.S. Supreme Court decided that dialing systems like those used by Portfolio Recovery are not an “auto dialer” subjecting their obnoxious calls to the TCPA. The decision is 13 pages long, focused primarily on the placement of a comma in the Telephone Consumer Protection Act statute.
“When interpreting a statute, a qualifying phrase separated from antecedents by a comma is evidence that the qualifier is supposed to apply to all the antecedents instead of only to the immediately preceding one.” Facebook, Inc. v. Duguid, 209 L. Ed. 2d 272, 141 S. Ct. 1163 (2021)
If you don’t fear death by boredom, read this entire paragraph: “(a) This case turns on whether the clause ‘using a random or sequential number generator’ in § 227(a)(1)(A) modifies both of the two verbs that precede it (‘store’ and ‘produce’), as Facebook contends, or only the closest one (‘produce’), as maintained by Duguid. The most natural reading of the text and other aspects of § 227(a)(1)(A) confirm Facebook’s view. First, in an ordinary case, the ‘series-qualifier canon’ instructs that a modifier at the end of a series of nouns or verbs applies to the entire series. Here, that canon indicates that the modifying phrase ‘using a random or sequential number generator’ qualifies both antecedent verbs, ‘store’ and ‘produce.’ Second, the modifying phrase immediately follows a concise, integrated clause (‘store or produce telephone numbers to be called’), which uses the word ‘or’ to connect two verbs that share a common direct object (‘telephone numbers to be called’). Given this structure, it would be odd to apply the modifier to just one part of the cohesive clause. Third, the comma in § 227(a)(1)(A) separating the modifying phrase from the antecedents suggests that the qualifier applies to all of the antecedents, instead of just the nearest one. Pp. 1168 – 1170.” Ok, WAKE UP!
Judge Rudofsky created a “fact” in my litigation against Portfolio Recovery Associates by claiming that I admitted to owing a debt to PRA. He based that “fact” in major part on a sentence he claimed I wrote.
“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.” – see footnote 463 on the consolidated order granting PRA’s motion for summary judgment.
The actual sentence I wrote: “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, as I used any credit card to purchase household items, food and other consumer items.”
I could have said “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, as I had not borrowed money for business prior to 2013 when PRA allegedly bought the alleged debt.” Still, Judge Rudofsky would still truncate the sentence without indicating the clause removed.
I explained this in a later document, my opposition to PRA’s supplemental motion for summary judgment. I accidentally attributed the misquotation to the defendant instead of the judge. It is so difficult to remember who said something when the judge is creating arguments for a favored litigant.
Yesterday, PRA filed an opposition to my motion for reconsideration or alternatively to compel production of the credit card agreement that was necessary to create an obligation to pay. PRA admitted there is no record of an agreement, written or oral.
Unbelievable as it may seem, PRA repeated Judge Rudofsky’s misquotation of the sentence. But, like a child who looks around furtively and then interjects another lie to try to cover-up for its previous lie, PRA added two characters around the period. “[.]” Here is PRA’s version of the sentence:
“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[.]”
OOOOhhh… Lawyers James Trefil of Troutman Pepper and David Mitchell of Rose Law Firm were trying to not lie. The straight parentheses mean something was changed. They changed the comma to a period. But a person filing documents is subject to Rule 11, that they reasonably believe what they write is accurate. The change PRA made by straight parentheses is not accurate.
For instance, if quoting case law that says “Facebook, inc. is right” the filer writes “[Duguid] is right”, the filer has made a statement he knows is false. Otherwise, lawyers would riddle their points and authorities with straight parentheses that change the meaning of the caselaw completely. Don’t like caselaw? Just change “shall” to “[may]”.
Clever, clever children.
If you had a period after the last “sex”, you might not need the worry, worry, worry, either.
A Higher Law 