Justin W. Ellis - Page 4

                                        - 3 -                                         
               By notice served May 11, 2005, this case was set for trial             
          in Knoxville, Tennessee, on October 17, 2005.  On July 19, 2005,            
          respondent filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and a Memorandum             
          in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment.  Attached to the                 
          memorandum were records of GMAC concerning petitioner’s account             
          with GMAC.  Those records of GMAC include correspondence sent to            
          GMAC by petitioner in response to GMAC’s demand on him dated                
          December 21, 2001.  For example, by document dated February 12,             
          2002, petitioner made a “good faith Offer to pay off in full the            
          alleged debt to GMAC.”  Petitioner further demanded                         
          “verification” of the debt and contended that the debt would be             
          discharged if GMAC did not comply with petitioner’s demands.  In            
          a document dated April 1, 2002, petitioner claimed that, by                 
          reason of GMAC’s alleged default, petitioner’s debt “is now fully           
          discharged and that you will not make any credit reporting that             
          adversely affects me without incurring a major commercial                   
               In respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment, respondent                
                    8.  The exhibits to the respondent’s memorandum of                
               law show plainly that the petitioner, in his                           
               correspondence with GMAC, has taken the position that                  
               the debt was cancelled.  There is no dispute as to the                 
               fact that GMAC cancelled a debt in 2002 and the                        
               petitioner has failed to raise any exceptions to the                   
               taxability of the cancelled debt.                                      

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011