• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


usctrojanalum last won the day on April 24

usctrojanalum had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

362 Excellent

About usctrojanalum

  • Rank

Profile Fields

  • Location
    New York

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The results are in.... PASSED! I submit my application to the character and fitness committee next week. If approved, I will be sworn in as an attorney June 12, 2019.
  2. I would just research the law and make your arguments that the credit card agreement has arbitration.
  3. Witnesses having to come to court and miss work time to testify is a cost. Even if it's not a direct financial one.
  4. You have to do 7503(a) no matter what if going the arbitration route. That's simply making a motion, the motion process itself is more or less pretty basic even if the argument can be complex. That's not that bad. However, if you also follow (c); when you make the motion creditor can't say arbitration agreement is invalid. Which is pretty nice to have in your pocket.
  5. So the verification itself is an affidavit, but that not necessary mean it needs its own page. You can just put it on the bottom of the answer.
  6. Better to be safe then sorry. While that statute is rarely enforced - do you want to be the rare exception where it is enforced? No of course not! The chance of it being enforced against you as someone who is unrepresented would be extremely slim too. The only thing that makes this kind of annoying is that once you verify a pleading, every pleading thereafter must be verified as well. So if you don't have easy access to a notary it presents an obstacle.
  7. Doesn't this already happen? Not so much the former, but definitely the latter.
  8. I have really no other response but to say that you're wrong. You are both not applying the elements of conversion correctly. You are also not understanding what it means to have "vested" rights to property. Just because someone signs some "financial guarantee" or whatever does not mean that person executed an assignment.
  9. You're not dumb, just not trained in the language of contracts. The arbitrator is right. An "individual basis" as used in this context is a legal term of art. Means not a class action claim.
  10. It's not. Conversion is when you take someone else's property. The medical provider rights never vest in that money. It doesn't belong to the medical provider until it's paid to them or there is an assignment in the insurance proceeds. But I get it, third party beneficiary law is not easy to understand.
  11. We will just have to agree to disagree. It's not conversion. But BlueCross agrees with me. We may get an answer if they win this lawsuit.
  12. Yeah, that's just not true at all. The child is not a victim of a crime and still remains principally liable for the debt. I agree child may have third party claim against parent, but I don't think many children would go that route.
  13. Yes, but you're making an assumption that the patient is personally keeping the money as opposed to the policyholder. There have also been extremely unfortunate situations where an adult child > 21 years of age but still on a parent's insurance went to a medical provider who was out of network. Insurance money goes to the parent who is the policy holder and then the child patient gets sued who is basically stuck in the middle. I disagree with you guys, I really can't see how the hospital would have standing to go after the parent directly, without an assignment in the insurance proceeds signed by the parent. That's not conversion. The parent paid the premiums and is entitled to the benefit. Another interesting wrinkle is when the patient or insured later files a Chapter 7. Bankruptcy Attorney (different from the health provider attorney) has taken same path. Adversary proceeding seeking to have to the amount exempt from a discharge where there is an assignment to the proceeds, but if there is no assignment, then not fighting the discharge.
  14. I think that is optional. There is nothing in the CPLR that permits it or prevents it. Either way, to add a defense later on you would have to make a motion under CPLR 3025.