I counterattack vs. loan shark industry in Tennessee by defending a suit by Flexibility Capital, a so-called business funder or buyer of future receivables in a Nov. 14, 2023, hearing before the court of appeals in Knoxville. Flexibility is represented by Mary Cheadle of Nashville, ignoring most of my claims about fraud in the contract, fraud on the court and fraud by a member of the bar.
Mary Cheadle dismisses my “no subject jurisdiction for unconscionable contract” claim by saying my notice of appeal is untimely.
Related posts:
Prayer request for ‘next friend’ intervention in court
Despite patriotic nostalgia, Dayton rally urges Christians to restore order
Group files mandamus to compel opening of hydroxychloroquine stockpile
Bill of rights banquet eyes gun bans, remonstrance project
What 3-, 5-baller ‘Gnomes’ talk about when you are asleep
How industrial farming destroyed local economy; the rise of the CAFO
Thousands of doctors rip lockdowns, demand end to CV-19 tyranny
Centralization reaches peak, faces irreversible breakup
What is local economy? The power rising for self-determination
Administrative bloat, piles of student debt hint colleges a legacy system
Leadership program in Hamilton schools tips over no moneychanger carts
Judge denial order tells me what to do in ‘Eye of Sauron’ petition
Can you be arrested if you don’t ‘show’ officer your identification?
The noise from the woods; or how corporations ruin stewardship
Gentry readies petition for remonstrance, asks for traffic stop reform detail
It sounds like the so-called contract is “void ab initio” due to fraud in the inducement to enter a contract. Fraud (non-disclosure) vitiates the most solemn of contracts.
Should be easy to get the judges on board with that Maxim of Law.