Search results

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT CLOSING STATEMENT Throughout the entirety of this case you have seen how the defendant had blatantly disregarded his contractual obligations to the plaintiff. It is clear that not only did the plaintiff fulfill their contractual obligations but granted the...

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT OBJECTION - PERJURY The defendant's counsel has intentionally lied about the plaintiff's counsel actions in attempt to dismiss the case. The defendant's counsel has falsely stated that "Plaintiff's failure to provide an opening statement and disregard for these...

Sorry the first part was the draft of the closing, I’ve been incredibly busy with family matters recently may I amend this message your honor?

IN THE FEDERAL COURT OF REDMONT CLOSING STATEMENT @Pepecuu @Superwoops plaintiffs opening

Some of the money will also be used for the procurement of the land.

$25k- S087, We have already put all offices in here for our company as well as our clients to use. $25k - C306, we plan on building luxury apartments in here. $20k - C171, we plan on building a supermarket here for people to buy fireworks, food, gas, etc.

Sorry I thought this was another trial I am involved in

If you overruled these would that mean my questions are unstuck from the record?

Your honor may I respond to this?

Both of us?

To my knowledge no assets have been moved? That’s the entire reason I’m asking for this order to be lifted

Confused about this question. Do you want to know our reorganization plan, or are asking if we have paid the creditor Oakridge Community Bank because we haven’t hence why I am not withdrawing myself from this case.

Here is the proof of representation

May I send proof your honor?

Your honor as Sagamo2008’s attorney regarding his bankruptcy proceedings may I object to this order?

No response to objection 1 Response to objection 2: The plaintiff is once again asking the witnesses feeling about the bonds, it is also relevant again to assess the damages and humiliation your client has caused to the plaintiff.

We ask for the witnesses feeling on investments offered by the bank we don't lead them into any answer and bonds offered is very clear as bonds offered by the bank

This provides foundation as it tells the court and the defense who the witness is and what pertains to them.

This isn't speculation this is asking their opinions? They are asking if they were skeptical due to the news to deposit money in the bank, the witness can attest to their own feelings.

We are not leading, all bondholders were sent a notice that the borrower behind the liability represented in the bond was in default and asking what their response was.