I'm currently attending court proceedings in Denver Colorado over an alleged bad debt. I've not admitted to anything in court. The atty has asked for summary judgment in this case.
My questions are as follows:
The atty made available to the court a "COPY" of an Agreement with the creditor that has my signature on it. The "Agreement" she entered into the court record does not contain the same credit card number as filed under the atty's original complaint. The card changed from a store credit card to a "Visa" credit card meaning that it became under different set of terms conditions and CC number. The Atty has not once showed up for court and continues to file Motions to attend by phone, which she is being granted by the court.
Does this atty have a right to sue without having an ORIGINAL SIGNED not a "COPY" of the credit card "Agreement" ?
Doesn't the wrong CC number for which she has filed her initial complaint under, make her complaint void and without merit?

I've filed a Motion to dismiss this case but does she have a right to NOT show up for these proceedings?

What about my right to cross examine? Don't I have the right to cross examine in a "Summary Judment" proceeding?
I would really appreciate any help someone could give? I can't find ANY information in the FTC site that would tell me a debt collector/Atty needs to have an "Original Contract" to have a valid case against me as I've read in some other oppinions. If this is true please guide me to this area of law and if you can answer my questions thanks so much in advance. Thank you!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Darryl Spencer

I'm currently attending court proceedings in Denver Colorado over an alleged bad debt. I've not admitted to anything in court. The atty has asked for summary judgment in this case.
My questions are as follows:
The atty made available to the court a "COPY" of an Agreement with the creditor that has my signature on it. The "Agreement" she entered into the court record does not contain the same credit card number as filed under the atty's original complaint. The card changed from a store credit card to a "Visa" credit card meaning that it became under different set of terms conditions and CC number. The Atty has not once showed up for court and continues to file Motions to attend by phone, which she is being granted by the court.
Does this atty have a right to sue without having an ORIGINAL SIGNED not a "COPY" of the credit card "Agreement" ?
Doesn't the wrong CC number for which she has filed her initial complaint under, make her complaint void and without merit?

I've filed a Motion to dismiss this case but does she have a right to NOT show up for these proceedings?

What about my right to cross examine? Don't I have the right to cross examine in a "Summary Judment" proceeding?
I would really appreciate any help someone could give? I can't find ANY information in the FTC site that would tell me a debt collector/Atty needs to have an "Original Contract" to have a valid case against me as I've read in some other oppinions. If this is true please guide me to this area of law and if you can answer my questions thanks so much in advance. Thank you!

---

I don't know about Colorado but I've seen copies admitted into evidence in NYS - Defendant is asked if that is his/her signature. If not, proof is required; if it is, it ends there. More and more credit card companies are issuing cards based on telephone OK with absolutely nothing signed - hopefully that practice will be tightened up - but basically once you use the card, agreement or not, it's your debt.

What issues are you planning to use for cross examination if you're allowed to cross examine? Is this not your debt or out of Statute?

You can't "cross examine" the attorney, you can only cross examine witnesses. If you dispute the documentation you need to give reasons. If there is a discrepancy between the documentation and the complaint, then, by all means, point it out to the judge and ask that the discrenancy be reconciled or the case dismissed.

Go to the next hearing if the attorney or plainitff is not present, move the court to dismiss for lack of jurisdication the complainting party must be present for you to cross-examine, no plaintiff present, no case. Attorney cannot testify for their client, that is consider hearsay.

Do not adit of deny anything to the judge, simply move the court to dismiss with prejudice