Sued for Breach of Contract

[sampaul]

Are you going to commit perjury by denying that you received money from her? How do you intend to explain away the purpose of your payments to her if not meant as repayment of a loan?

My purpose for giving her money and paying her bills was she was my wife and she was going through treatment for thyroid cancer. After we got married she told me that I didn't owe her anything because we were now married.

 

[sampaul]

You received a SUMMONS? Or copies of court papers? To what court have you been summoned?


It doesn't matter what you spent on her.

I wasn't served. My friend gave me a heads up and he went down and got copies.

It is LA County Superior Court



Why doesn't it matter what I spent on her? If I give her money that is giving her money right?

 

[Zigner]

I wasn't served. My friend gave me a heads up and he went down and got copies.

It is LA County Superior Court

If you are being sued, then you want to consult with an attorney. I think you are misunderstanding something though. The checks would not be attached to the paperwork unless you are talking about small claims court. If you are talking about small claims court, then you're not talking about sixty THOUSANDS dollars.

Why doesn't it matter what I spent on her? If I give her money that is giving her money right?

Nope, that's maintaining a marriage.

 

[sampaul]

If you are being sued, then you want to consult with an attorney. I think you are misunderstanding something though. The checks would not be attached to the paperwork unless you are talking about small claims court. If you are talking about small claims court, then you're not talking about sixty THOUSANDS dollars.



Nope, that's maintaining a marriage.

I promise you, there are copies of 2 checks attached to the filing and the lawsuit is for 60K. It is filed as Civil Unlimited.

So giving someone money that claims I owe them money is not really giving them money. I need to call Yogi Berra.

 

[Zigner]

So giving someone money that claims I owe them money is not really giving them money. I need to call Yogi Berra.

I can borrow $50 from my dad and then give him a $50 gift card for his birthday. Do I still owe him the $50 that he loaned me?

It's really quite simple.

 

[Zigner]

When you are served, contact an attorney.

 

[sampaul]

I can borrow $50 from my dad and then give him a $50 gift card for his birthday. Do I still owe him the $50 that he loaned me?

It's really quite simple.

If you borrow $50 in cash one day from your dad and then on another give him $100 in cash do you still owe him?

 

[swalsh411]

Stand by which? You’re already equivocating.

No I'm not. My initial advice was that without a written agreement there was no case. You seemed to think otherwise and you would be wrong. The question about paying her back was unrelated.

Or does the distinction escape you?

There is no distinction to be made.

 

[CameronNewport]

No I'm not. My initial advice was that without a written agreement there was no case. You seemed to think otherwise and you would be wrong.

That's absurd. There are other ways to prove that a contract existed, and if the plaintiff can prove the existence of a contract in those other ways, then she may win the case.

 

[sampaul]

That's absurd. There are other ways to prove that a contract existed, and if the plaintiff can prove the existence of a contract in those other ways, then she may win the case.

I appreciate your input. How could it be proven? There is a claim that a large chunk of money was lent to me. If it was wouldn't there be a check, receipt, or some proof of a deposit into my account?

It shouldn't be that easy for me to go out and sue someone claiming they were loaned $1,000 when I really only loaned them $100.

 

[CameronNewport]

I appreciate your input. How could it be proven? There is a claim that a large chunk of money was lent to me. If it was wouldn't there be a check, receipt, or some proof of a deposit into my account?

It shouldn't be that easy for me to go out and sue someone claiming they were loaned $1,000 when I really only loaned them $100.

How could it be proven other than by a typical signed agreement? Testimony, emails, text messages, videos, recordings, bank statements, forum postings, etc.

I don't know how the plaintiff in your case will prove it, obviously, but the point is that it's possible. In fact, unless you're willing to perjure yourself, it sounds like the existence of a contract is not even going to be an issue. The primary dispute may be over the amount owed, and who knows what the plaintiff has up her sleeve to prove that.

 

[sampaul]

How could it be proven other than by a typical signed agreement? Testimony, emails, text messages, videos, recordings, bank statements, forum postings, etc.

I don't know how the plaintiff in your case will prove it, obviously, but the point is that it's possible. In fact, unless you're willing to perjure yourself, it sounds like the existence of a contract is not even going to be an issue. The primary dispute may be over the amount owed, and who knows what the plaintiff has up her sleeve to prove that.

What exactly is a contract? My understanding is that is an agreement for two or more parties to perform specific actions in a specific period of time. Close enough?


So with that in mind when she did give me $8,000 (not $60,000) two months before we got married it wasn't a loan. We never discussed any terms of paying it back. As far as I knew then it was a gift. It was only in the last few months after the divorce filing was the word "loan" ever used.

Her filing says she gave me 60K. If there is no record of anything remotely to that amount - bank deposits, receipts, cancelled checks etc - I think that raises legitimate questions about credibility. I have gone through every email between us for the last 13 months - no mention of it.

 

[You Are Guilty]

So when you go to trial, either she tells the truth about the loan amount, in which case you are out roughly five grand (~$8k minus your $3k of provable repayments). Or, she lies/fabricates evidence showing a $60k loan to you, in which case... what? You need to prepare your defense for this possibility. (Showing that you "only" deposited $8k is a start, but what about that other $52k you put under your mattress?)

 

[Mass_Shyster]

When you are served, contact an attorney.

I wouldn't wait to be served.

If EX is willing to testify to the existance of a non-existant loan, I suspect she is also willing to produce proof of service where none occured.

Call a lawyer today.

 

[latigo]

What exactly is a contract? My understanding is that is an agreement for two or more parties to perform specific actions in a specific period of time. . . . . If there is no record of anything . . . .

Speaking of records you might do well if you kept better tract of some of your statements in here. Some of your inconsistencies are rather glaring.

sampaul 5/2/12 There was no contract or at least there was never an agreement that I signed.

Ziqner – Q: (Zigner) How long did this alleged loan occur?
A: One year ago.

Q: (Swalsh) Have you paid back what you admit you did loan her? A: I have given her quite a bit more.

sampaul (paraphrasing) Two months before we be got married she gave me $8200 which I deposited. As far as I knew it was a gift and not a loan. . . . . .After we were married she told me that I didn’t owe her anything. It was only after the divorce when the subject of a loan was mentioned.

Her filing says she gave me 60K. If there is no record of anything remotely to that amount - bank deposits, receipts, cancelled checks etc - . . .

If you are referring to your personal financial records, then such a consideration is asinine.(Again, I’m innocent of shooting the clerk because you can’t prove I bought any bullets.)

If you are referring to her financial records, then until your attorney forces her to produce or not produce the same, you are simply conjecturing. And guessing what your opponent has as proof is a recipe for disaster.

Talk to your attorney and stop wasting time in here. No one from this end is going to dismiss her lawsuit.