Bottom line, can an OC win a lawsuit with account statements only?

[xavi72]

So after a request for BOP and production of documents, the only thing the OC has been able to provide has been several years of credit card statements.  In a lawsuit involving breach of contract and money lent, would this be bare minimum needed for an OC to win its case?

 

 

 

[Clydesmom]

In many states:  yes.  Since credit card agreements now state that using the card and getting billed via statement constitutes a monthly renewal of the original contract it isn't necessary to have the original application.  Especially since you are referring to an original creditor and not a JDB.  The OC can attest to their own statements and does not need an affidavit.

[1stStep]

However, if you haven't been provided a full accounting (as required under CCP 454), then you can still file a motion to have them precluded...

[Credator]

What is required for an OC to "win a lawsuit" depends on the particular state's required (by case law) elements for the cause of action/claim they allege. If the OC proves up all of the required elements to their claim they should win. If the defendant shows in and for the record a missing required element then the OC should lose.

 

There are a lot of moving parts in the should win just mentioned. It most accurately applies with both sides having "A" team attorneys playing their "A" game. There are many ways to lose. Judge's erroneous decision with no appealable record (or unable/unwilling to appeal), a fatal flubbing the RCP, believing oppossing's affidavit stated something that it did not actually state, failure to use case law or use it properly, etc.

 

From what I have seen and read, OCs typically win lawsuits while never being required to prove up all of the required elements. The court is not going to make them prove up the required elements. Such work is the responsibility of the defendant.

 

For the pro se there is nothing quite like being the plaintiff against a large company defendant to clarify the task of proving up all those required elements. Opposing counsel will almost certainly go after the missing elements as they are low hanging fruit.

 

Here is some insight as to how the states vary in their required elements for proving a Breach of Contract claim: SURVEY OF THE FIFTY (50) STATES AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELEMENTS OF A BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM

 

I won't bring a claim without believing I have admissible evidence to prove up each required element. I won't permit a claim, brought against me, to prevail while it lacks proof of any of the required elements.

 

In litigation the elements to a cause of action are similar to the components necessary to start a fire. If even one element is missing then there will be no fire.

[racecar]

http://irvinebusinesslawyers.blogspot.com/2013/04/california-breach-of-contract-law.html

http://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/300/303.html

[xavi72]

What is required for an OC to "win a lawsuit" depends on the particular state's required (by case law) elements for the cause of action/claim they allege. If the OC proves up all of the required elements to their claim they should win. If the defendant shows in and for the record a missing required element then the OC should lose.

 

There are a lot of moving parts in the should win just mentioned. It most accurately applies with both sides having "A" team attorneys playing their "A" game. There are many ways to lose. Judge's erroneous decision with no appealable record (or unable/unwilling to appeal), a fatal flubbing the RCP, believing oppossing's affidavit stated something that it did not actually state, failure to use case law or use it properly, etc.

 

From what I have seen and read, OCs typically win lawsuits while never being required to prove up all of the required elements. The court is not going to make them prove up the required elements. Such work is the responsibility of the defendant.

 

For the pro se there is nothing quite like being the plaintiff against a large company defendant to clarify the task of proving up all those required elements. Opposing counsel will almost certainly go after the missing elements as they are low hanging fruit.

 

Here is some insight as to how the states vary in their required elements for proving a Breach of Contract claim: SURVEY OF THE FIFTY (50) STATES AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA ELEMENTS OF A BREACH OF CONTRACT CLAIM

 

I won't bring a claim without believing I have admissible evidence to prove up each required element. I won't permit a claim, brought against me, to prevail while it lacks proof of any of the required elements.

 

In litigation the elements to a cause of action are similar to the components necessary to start a fire. If even one element is missing then there will be no fire.

 

Great information!  However, if the plaintiff presented only billing statements, will this constitute enough evidence to support a breach of contract?

[racecar]

Who is the law firm suing you?

[Credator]

Great information!  However, if the plaintiff presented only billing statements, will this constitute enough evidence to support a breach of contract?

The answer to that question should be found in what is required to form a contract in the applicable state: SURVEY OF THE FIFTY (50) STATES AND DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LAW OF CONTRACT FORMATION

 

 

 

 

 

[racecar]

302. Contract Formation—Essential Factual Elements

http://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/300/302.html

credit card statements are just credit card statements unless somebody from the original creditor comes and authenticates them and states there is a balance due and owing.

 

Credit card statements do not mean you owe any money.

 

Did you ever dispute the amount owed were you not given credit for a payment?

 

Some of the law firms are debt buyers and act like they are the original creditor.

[xavi72]

Who is the law firm suing you?

The Moore Law Group

[xavi72]

302. Contract Formation—Essential Factual Elements

http://www.justia.com/trials-litigation/docs/caci/300/302.html

credit card statements are just credit card statements unless somebody from the original creditor comes and authenticates them and states there is a balance due and owing.

 

In my latest production of documents request, I was mailed statements from when the account was almost opened until it went into default.  There's was a person's name with her signature representing the CC company verifying the statements.  It was supposedly signed at the place where the CC's headquarters are at.  So does this mean the statements have been authenticated?