if a list of pepole that have been ripped off (fraud) by msx can be assymbled,,,,it might help prove to the judge that msx was neglegent

ps...dont bother posting about the spelling

 

Those are two different scenarios. You can't get a judgment with service. Due Process requires notice and an opportunity to be heard.

If he is served and fails to show, a judgment will be entered against him according to the proof presented to the judge.

 

That would almost certainly be inadmissible. Proving that someone is bad does not prove that he acted badly with respect to the events at issue in the present case.

Noe problams wuth theyt u no eye dont car mush abut speling

 

almost certainly????? LOL!!!!! nice,,,,,i guess thats equal to speeling everything right some of the time

putting a list together of pepole that have been ripped off by msx would ONLY do a guy good. what it will boil down to is,,,,he says this and the other guy said that,,,,BUT if you can prove msx has a HISTORY of fraud,,,,well even you can figure it out now,,,,right?

 

Owned!!!!!!!!!

 

That's how they get it in the back door on Law and Order..

 

(erlier post)
my car was stolen about 10 half months ago. 6 months before that we made the sale on the motor and extra parts. my car or what was left was found 2 months after theft. legal docs. and papers were filed roughly 3 months ago which means he is in the proccess of being served or should have aready been and is ignoring it, which is a bad idea. i decided to yake legal action after my car was recovered because thre was nothing left and billy(owner) still could not be reached. that leaves about 5 months of down time that consisted ofreserching hard facts from my situ. as well as possible other victoms. turns out there are many of them by the way. in any case certainly not 2 years.

i had liability and like 25/50 bodily, no theft. all through my high school days i worked in an auto shop and we insured cars on the lot up to 5 days after repair and when your done you notify cust. right after. MSX said my car was completed when i was notifed that it was stolen. the *** hole didnt put it inside his shop but rather he parked and locked it up in front of his shop on his lot on fri. and left it there for the weekend to get ripped off! he said he didnt have lot insur. every car should be in the garage if you have no lot insur. a disclaimer on a wall is garbage to a judge, thats heresay. now a disclamer on the back of an invoice with my signature then im pooch screwed. MSX has no invoice. Bureau of automotive repair states that by law a shop needs to have a written estimate or invoice with a sig. or if N/A, verbal confirmation on that written estimate or invoice. The company that i work for files 7 years of past/signed copies of invoices so we dont get pooched. I think i got case here boys! i dont give a f**k who you are. in my world if you steal or lose something that is very dear to me, i will fight for what i believe in and for what is mine in court or on these forums. if i lose in court well atleast i have my livelyhood and pride. So im gonna give my all. Wish me luck or not, ill keep you posted in the future. later.

 

"Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith." Federal Rule of Evidence 404. Most states have a similar rule.

It is possible to get in evidence of prior bad acts in some cases (felony convictions, for instance, are admissible), but I won't debate the rules of evidence with you. Let's just say that I know them, and you don't, and leave it at that.

But since you're such a legal genius, perhaps you can leave me your cell phone number in case I get in trouble this morning. I have a Final Pretrial Conference in federal court at 9.

 

sorry i stepped on your E *****,,,lol

 

sound like a federal DA

 

so basicly you are trying to say that you wish you had had insurance????

 

Tim...

Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, provided that upon request by the accused, the prosecution in a criminal case shall provide reasonable notice in advance of trial, or during trial if the court excuses pretrial notice on good cause shown, of the general nature of any such evidence it intends to introduce at trial.


I've been away for a while -- but lurking. Sold the "L" to a guy who left it out in the snow and salt this winter, wasn't too happy about that~!

Decided to redo the '69 mustang. Next up is the '70 stang.

Work has been crazy hectic, had my first case in the Court of Appeals, been in federal District and Bankruptcy Court a lot. I think one of my C.O.A. cases is going to be published. Not too shabby for someone with 1.5 yrs under their belt.

 

great,,,just fricken great

now, he is gona want your cell phone number also, that means im not gona be the top spot on the memory

 

I intentionally did not quote the full rule because none of the exceptions apply here. The argument suggested was -- yeah, he's ripped off a bunch of people, so he must have also ripped me off. That's straight up barred by 404.

 

Sorry I misread the timeline. That was my bad and I will admit that. I wish you the best. But I still don't understand why you don't have the car insured. That's simple common sense.

Fwiw, I wish you the best.