Have Legal Questions? Ask a Lawyer Now.
Thank you so much for using JustAnswer.com. I truly aim to please you as a customer, but please keep in mind that I do not know what you already know or don't know, or with what you need help, unless you tell me. If I did not answer the question you thought you were asking, please respond with the specific question you wanted answered. PLEASE use REPLY to EXPERT if you would like more information or if you feel something was not included in your answer.
Kindly remember the ONLY WAY experts receive any credit at all for spending time with customers is if you click on OK, GOOD or EXCELLENT SERVICE even though you have made a deposit or are a subscription customer. YOU MUST COMPLETE THE RATING FOR THE EXPERT TO XXXXX CREDIT, if not the site keeps your money on deposit.
First the court clerk didn't do any accounting at all, the law firm did the accounting. Second my copy and the banks copy, state in memo line " for in full"," last payment". and clearly marked , readable, yet they cashed it and didn't later catch their error, and within 90 days return my money. being a law firm, if the law is not ambiguous and clear they accepted a offer of consideration etc. And they knowing precedents of this statue and supporting case law, since 1941,then they had no real legal merit to file the suit in the first place. They are expected to be empowered to legally know they had no legal grounds to win a ruling, than wouldn't there pursuit of further fees be without legal merit, unless they want to over turn 72 years of recorded case law. I personally, think is its without legal merit and frivolous, unless they are able to argue some unique twist in this case that would merit revisiting 72 years prior of statutory law... ??? Considering this perhaps I should file a formal motion to dismiss the foreclosure and included a copy of the check... ??? unless they can raise some new argument the court might just rule in my favor. ???
Thanks, XXXXX XXXXX am a little worried to argue that in a motion to dismiss, with attached check and full explanation of sequence of events, I 'd be disclosing or exposing my entire defense. Because I think I or a decent attorney could cross examine the law clerk in charge of my file and get caught in a lie or make inaccurate statements. in relation to the added fee of 175.00, and when and how it got added etc. If I state the full sequence of events up to the payment in full check and I don't prevail on the check in full issue I may tip my hand and the clerk alter what she might have said and or prepare , her thoughts, Please share your thoughts, Or if I only argue the paid in full issue in a motion to dismiss, will I be barred from other arguments at trail, if the judge decides to proceed to trail anyway, ???
are you available ??? I am writing a motion ,
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).