Judge Rudofsky in the Federal District Court of Eastern Arkansas gave summary judgment to the defendant in my FDCPA and Invasion of Privacy case against Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC yesterday.

I tried to apologize about my blog posts to Judge Rudofsky during my closing arguments at a telephonic hearing. The judge, who is usually polite, cut me short. He said not to apologize and explained that he values the First Amendment.

Some advice I got from my sister Roberta Kramer who was an attorney, is to always accept a compliment. If someone says you look nice today, don’t retort, “Oh no! I have this big zit on my nose!”

My corollary is, always accept an apology.

It is not easy for a person to apologize. It helps the person who is apologizing. You may find your common ground with the apologetic person. And it may help you to understand your contribution to the conflict.

For example, if a husband says, “I am sorry I was so grumpy today when we were driving in that horrible traffic”, the respectful wife will accept his apology. “Thank you, my love. It was frustrating, and it was kind of you to keep me company. I know how much you hate driving in a busy city.”

So, here is my apology in full.

I am sorry for any embarrassment or disrespect Judge Rudofsky feels from my posts.

That does not mean that I wrote or intend to write anything false or malicious. As he recognized, I have not written anything threatening.

It is like this. Once when my son was about four years old, we were walking in the supermarket parking lot. There were two morbidly obese people walking in front of us. My son shrieked in his loudest voice, “Look how fat they are Mom!”

OMG. I was mortified. Even remembering the story, my face gets red from embarrassment. I am sorry my son said that.

But they were fat.

There was just no advantage to my son speaking his observations out loud. Not that loud.

There is, hopefully, a good purpose for me to write about corrupt, unethical, or plain stupid acts by judicial officers. Even though most citizens have lost faith in our legal system, there is still a chance we can bring it back to what it was meant to be. A way to provide justice for all.

So, here is today’s exposé.

In the litigation, the lawyers for Portfolio Recovery lied. For example, James Trefil of Troutman Pepper (AKA Troutman Sanders) said PRA changed the balance on my account from $2,297.63 to zero “in light of the litigation”. He expanded by saying the debt was “waived”. But there was no 1099-C cancellation of debt issued within the time required by the IRS.

It is PRA’s known practice to issue 1099-Cs when it cancels a debt. Even if the debtor disputes the debt. Do a Dogpile search of “Portfolio Recovery Associates issued me a 1099-C” and you will find plenty of reading to fill your spare time.

Judge Rudofsky was not persuaded by what he called the “inference” that can be made from that. The judge said no reasonable juror can think that PRA set the balance to zero and did not issue a 1099-C because their investigation showed there was no credible evidence the debt was mine. In fact, he said the debt was mine. (That is a subtle error that I will address at the Court of Appeals. It is telling that Judge Rudofsky is well aware of the subtle difference when establishing PRA’s innocence on my case. He knew it was my burden to prove the debt did not exist on an FDCPA claim but ignored that the debtor’s lack of proof is not enough to establish there was a debt in a case against the debtor.)

Worse, PRA submitted business records that were falsified. I pointed out some of the falsifications. Judge Rudofsky ignored those obvious fraudulent exhibits.

Worse, I cannot give you specifics. I cannot post two documents created by PRA with conflicting data side by side. Because Judge Rudofsky allowed the fraudulent documents to be filed under seal.

Before yesterday’s hearing, the jury was out on Lee P. The jury is now in.

It sorrows me to say, guilty.

Email: bohemian_books@yahoo.com