Another Liars & Cheats EXPOSED documentary

Superior Court Filings

The Documents Related to the Acarta Complaint, Answer and Motion for Summary Judgment.

The filings regarding attorneys fees, my counter claims, discovery and the appeal will be on separate pages.

PLEASE let me know if you have any problems with loading documents or incorrect documents.

8/15/11 Acarta complaint

8-15-11–Acarta-complaint-pub (218 kb)

10/15/11 Answer, Affirmative Defenses and Counter Claim

10-15-11–Answer-Acarta (20 kb)

10/27/11 Acarta Answer to Counterclaims

10-27-11–Acarta-answer (112 kb)

10/31/11 Acarta Motion for Summary Judgment:

10-25-11–MSJ-Acarta (627 kb)

10-25-11–MSJ-Affidavit-Victor-Gilgan (85 kb)

10-31-11-Exh-1-CardMemberAgreement (599 kb)

10-31-11-Exh-2-Chase-statements (173 kb)

10-31-11-Exh-3-BillofSale-Chase-to-TurtleCreek-to-Acarta (58 kb)

10-31-11-Exh-4-Detailed-Statement-of-Account-pub (48 kb)

10-31-11-Exh-5-Collection-letters (96 kb)

10-31-11-JesusJaramillo-v-PortfolioAcquisitions  (506 kb)

10-31-11-MaryWincheck-v-AmericanExpress  (496 kb)

10-31-11-StatementOfFacts (94 kb)

10-31-11-ProposedOrder  (43 kb)

1/17/12 Response to Acarta Motion for Summary Judgement

1-17-12-Response-MSJ (36 kb)

1-17-12-Table-Exhibits (10 kb)

Exh-A-Certified Collectors, Inc. v. Lesnick-AZ-Supreme (30 kb)

Exh B:  Attorney Edelman’s comments to the FTC including regarding debt buyer lawsuits
Too large to upload, but here is the original: (1890 kb)

Exh-C-Maryland-debt-buyer-rule-changes-Public-Justice-Center (549 kb)

Exh-D–11-9-10–Almonte-Chase-denial-motion-to-dismiss (537 kb)

Exh-E–1-15-09–DDS-FInancial-v-Walrod (516 kb)

Exh-F–2-15-08-LVNV-v-Thompson-AZ-superior-court (516 kb)

1/17/12 My Affidavit

1-17-12–affidavit-re-msj (13 kb)

1/17/12 my Controverting Statement of Facts

1-17-12–Controverting-statements-of-facts-response-MSJ (17 kb)

1/17/12 Motion to Strike Acarta Exhibits

1-17-12-Motion-to-strike-MSJ-exhibits (29 kb)

2/23/12 Oral Arguments

I provided these two documents to the judge:

1-17-12–MO-Supreme-Court (60 kb)

2/21/12 FTC Press Release (598 kb)

And after several months of filing requests for fee deferral and motions, I finally received the CD of the hearing and a transcript.  Unfortunately, the quality of the recording is poor and the transcript is rather bizarre. I have not had time to actually listen to the CD and compare it to the transcript to make the corrections.

Attorney Brian Partridge appeared by telephone.  He claimed not to have received my response to their motion for summary judgment.  Of course I had mailed it priority mail and I had delivery confirmation. LIAR!

And I found out that Acarta had filed the motion for summary judgment regarding my counterclaims in November. I had received my copy, but the court did not enter it on the docket.  When I called, they confirmed that it was not filed.   I went to the court in person, but was denied my request to review the file because it was in the judge’s office. I finally got to speak to someone in the judge’s chamber and they lied too, insisted that this motion was not filed.   Of course I recorded all the calls, but who would care to do something about this messed up court?

We agreed that we would both have 30 days to respond to those filings.

3/6/12 Acarta Response to Motion to Strike Exhibits

3-6-12–Acarta-response-to-motion-to-strike (520 kb)

3/6/12 Acarta Reply to my Response re MSJ

3-6-12-Acarta-Reply-my-response-MSJ (519 kb)

ORDER to grant the Acarta Motion for Summary Judgment

4-6-12–Ruling-re-everything  (331 kb)

4-12-12–ORDER-granting-MSJ (232 kb)

5/7/12 Notice of Appeal

5-7-12–notice-of-appeal (11 kb)

Request for Waiver/Deferral of Fees

I filed the first request and didn’t realize that they CHARGE $26 and had omitted the check box for the transcript.  So I had to file another request, and again pay $26 and once again judge Jantzen did neither approve/nor deny the request for the transcript.

Then I filed a motion:

6-21-12–motion-amend-order-fee-waiver-transcript (12 kb)

Finally I received the CORRECT 7/3/12 order,  but my troubles weren’t over.  I was informed that the CD was the property of the clerk and I would have to pay over $30 and for the transcript.  Finally the clerk of the court was consulted and I was to get the CD free of charge.  And after nothing but the most UNHELPFUL court personnel, I finally dealt with someone who cared and arranged for the transcript to be prepared.  Of course that took several more weeks and the quality of the transcript is extremely poor.

You can not images the FRUSTRATION, living 60 miles from the court and having to deal with this BS. I almost gave up.

Against all odds, the court of appeals remanded to the superior court and here is the notice of the 6/13/13 status conference:


We attended the status conference by phone, Acarta’s attorney stated that they would subpoena additional documents from Chase and a new conference was set for 9/3/13.

6/12/13:  Acarta supplemental disclosures


The exhibits appear to be identical to previous disclosures – the Gilgan affidavit, the Card Member Agreement, monthly statements, the Bills of Sale, the Detailed Statement of Account, their collection letters and my affidavit.  Acarta and its attorneys completely ignored the appeals court ruling.

6/26/13:  Acarta Partial Motion for Summary Judgment on the Issue of Standing









I received a copy of the subpoena to Chase from Chase and I do not know how Chase responded to Acarta.

7/24/2013 SERVICE: Certificate

7/25/2013 SERVICE: Certificate

7/29/13:  My Response to the Acarta MSJ and my Cross Motion for Summary Judgment





7/29/13:  My Motion to Amend my Answer and Counterclaims and for Joinder Victor Gilgan, James R. Vaughan P.C. and attorneys Eric Logvin and Brian Partridge


7-29-13–PROPOSED-AMENDED-Answer-Acarta (redlined)



Docket entry and I don’t know what this is.

8/6/2013 MOTION: Appear Telephonically [Acarta]

8/9/2013 PAYMENT:COPIES D1 [Don’t know what this is because I didn’t pay for any copies.]

8/9/2013 ORDER: Approving [Acarta’s Motion to appear telephonically]

8-19-13–Acarta- Reply-in-support-of-Partial-MSJ-Standing



I filed my motion to appear telephonically at the 9/3/13 status hearing and the court approved it immediately.

8/26/2013 MOTION: Appear Telephonically D 1
8/26/2013 ORDER: Approving D 1

8/29/13:  Acarta filed its notice of appearance and objected to my appearance by telephone as they wanted to discuss settlement in person after the status hearing.


Judge Jantzen subsequenty denied my motion to appear telephonically and I had to make a special trip to be in Kingman for the 9/3/13 Status Hearing at 8:30 am.  The hearing lasted about 3 minutes, with most of the time going to calendaring the next hearing for oral arguments in the afternoon for the convenience of the Acarta attorneys as they didn’t want to have to stay over night in Kingman (it’s about a 4 hour drive.)

I spoke with attorney Logvin for over half an hour after the hearing and he offered me $1,000 to settle the litigation.  I told him that I was looking for $50,000.  After all, they had forced me to litigate for almost 2 years and I have wasted many hundreds of hours on this litigation.  The stress and mental anguish due to their FDCPA violations was enormous. Attorney Logvin asked me to consider what all I could do with $2,000 and at one point he mentioned $2,500 — we were obviously way too far apart.

9/3/13 Acarta Response to my Cross Motion for Summary Judgment: 



9/3/13: my Reply in Support of my Motion to Strike:


9/3/13: my Reply in Support of my Motion for Leave to Amend and Joinder:


9/24/13:  My Reply in Support of my Cross MSJ:


10/24/13:  Before I filed my Motion to Appear Telephonically for Oral Arguments I contacted the Acarta attorneys to see whether they would object again.  Attorney Logvin asked for a copy of the motion (before I even filed it) and he promptly filed his opposition immediately and did NOT email a copy to me.

10/25/2013 ORDER: Denying D 1
10/24/2013 RESPONSE: TO MOTION P 1
10/24/2013 MOTION: Appear Telephonically D 1


Contrary to attorney Logvin’s claim in his motion opposing my telephonic appearance, oral arguments were NOT complicated at all.  Acarta WITHDREW its partial motion for summary judgment and asked the court to let the JURY be the “fact finder”.

I still have to upload the filings regarding attorneys fees, my counter claims, discovery and here are the appeals court filings.

PLEASE let me know if you have any problems with loading documents or incorrect documents.