Can Somebody Make You Pay for an Item They Bought For You

[TV-Tastic]

If he's an attorney then he's a fool, plain and simple and should be disbarred.

Honestly, if he's a lawyer, he's the dumbest I've ever seen in my life. In fact, it just makes it that much funnier that his advice and knowledge is so lacking.

[free9man]

He can admit to the Kennedy assassination on the tape, it's not admissible (nor did he suggest that even with his friend making him aware of the recording after-the-fact, that he acknowledged/admitted there was an agreement, hence, why I suggested the friend was blowing smoke). The guy recording it (if he actually did record it, which I doubt) committed a felony by recording it without his consent. 'Clean hands' mean anything to you?

Without knowing the specifics of where the alleged conversation occurred, there is a possibility that the recording was legal if it actually happened.

As to your BOQs, you apparently haven't been in the legal field long enough to know the difference b/w class and real life. Classes teach general principles. Real life has varying laws by jurisdiction as well as varying controlling case law by jurisdiction. Further, a wet behind the ears paralegal (regardless of your GPA...kudos by the way) has no room to try and tell a lawyer with years of experience in the courtroom that they are wrong.

[aaron]

My position is that there is no contract because in his own words there was no offer and no acceptance (ergo, no mutual assent), no consideration and no terms... that's chapter one of Contracts 201, I remember it distinctly...

Contracts 201.... That would be a some type of undergraduate or associate's-level class? At a law school that's a 500 level class.

As was already explained to you, one side is saying "I offered to buy a computer for you and you promised to repay me, you accepted, you took the computer, and you're not holding up your end of the deal by paying me the money you owe." (Would you like me to walk you through the elements of a contract?) The other side is saying, "I don't remember promising to repay, and although I was never told it was a gift I simply assumed that it was a gift, and... would a tape contradicting me be admissible?" What part of that do you find to be a compelling response?

His opening line is that his story begins with his friend purchasing him a laptop, not that he asked his friend to buy him a laptop.....

You are confused about how things work in court. In court both sides tell their stories and, to the extent that they conflict, the court attempts to determine which version is more probable. As you have been told, simply saying, "I disagree with what the plaintiff says" is not going to keep you out of court, and it's certainly not going to guarantee you a win. If your story is not credible and the other side's is credible, you lose.

Sorry, but unlike you, I don't speculate and I can only make an assessment based on the facts he's provided.

You failed to read the part, then, when he told us, in essence, "My friend says it was a loan, has been repeatedly asking me to repay the money, and says he has a tape of me agreeing to repay the money"? None of that is speculative.

'Clean hands' mean anything to you?

Actually, you're thinking of "unclean hands", a doctrine that can prevent somebody from pursuing an equitable remedy in court. This is a contract action, not an action in equity. (Do you need me to explain the difference?)

You also appear to be confusing the equitable defense of "unclean hands" with a rule of evidence.

The question of whether or not a tape would ultimately be admitted is not germane to the point that people were trying to impress upon you. The statement, "I am going to deny something, but the other guy says he has me on tape - can he use the tape in court?" is indicative of a speaker who knows that the tape could substantiate the other side's story. It goes to credibility, here and now:

• If the tape doesn't exist, it's not going to be offered as evidence because it doesn't exist, and your protest is moot.
• If the tape does exist, then the OP is on tape admitting that he owes the money and his story to us is untrue.

Do you understand now?

Westlaw and Lexis passwords. Would that be helpful?

Your college would not appreciate your sharing those.

Oh, BTW, I have my Bachelor's in Paralegal Studies, graduated high honors with a 3.83 GPA and I'm also a Certified Paralegal with specializations in Legal Research, Legal Writing and Contract Preparation.

Well, that confirms my prior inference. That also means you are licensed to practice law in zero states, and are authorized to advise clients as to what constitutes a contract in zero states. You can stop trying to "pull rank" now.

I understand that you're angry at being corrected, but your personal attacks on other forum members are not welcome here.