Re: CAK--a case PRECEDENT would be nice

Posted by CAK (66.140.213.154) on December 17, 2003 at 11:01:21:

In Reply to: CAK--a case PRECEDENT would be nice posted by Working to pay bills on December 17, 2003 at 01:39:33:

I wish I could help you with an attorney. It seems to me WhyChat said something about one. But I'm not sure they are in your State. I believe they are ghost attorney's.

As for any Case Law there just plain ole ain't any. Thats why it's next to impossible to defend yourself with the lower SOL. I don't believe there is an attorney good enough to argue the lower SOL. You see, no attorney likes getting their butt whipped in court. They want to win. To prove this to you, why don't you just get the phone book and start calling the many lawyers in your State. I bet you won't find any takers because they all know what the outcome will be.

I have pre-paid legal service and they cover many states, and there is no one they know of.

Just because you print off various documents, from WhyChats Website doesn't mean anything to a Judge or the opposing attorney. It's just meaningless paper to them. You still have the burden of proof and Judges are really fond of Case Law, as a matter a fact they base their decisions on it.

If your Statute says Open End Account, or Credit Card Accounts carry the 4year SOL, then you win. But it probably says something like (Contracts not in Writing), carry the 4 year SOL and therein is the problem. Most if not all Judges and Attorneys believe that CC accounts, (open accounts) are a Contract in Writing and are subject to the higher SOL. In other words they consider them the same as a Written Contract.

I personally believe that CC cards should be considered to be a Contract not in writing, and should be subject to the lower SOL. However, that "dog, just won't hunt", and probably won't in our lifetime.

Now... you've heard both sides of the story, which normally you don't get on this forum. You'll have to decide for yourself.

Follow Ups:

Post a Followup