the motor vehicles is and was tortuous, malicious, outrageous, oppressive, fraudulent, made in bad faith…" Grissom concurs.
DSC's SACC verifies that they have indeed committed unconscionable acts.
In a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, all allegations are considered factual. DSC's SACC , Page 7, Paragraph 41 explicitly states:
"DSC's conduct in selling and/or converting the motor vehicles is and was tortuous, malicious, outrageous, oppressive, fraudulent, made in bad faith…" Grissom concurs.
DSC's SACC verifies that they have indeed committed unconscionable acts. Determining the intent of this "Contract" requires strict adherence to the Objective Theory of Contract, looking to objective, not subjective, criteria to determine the intent of the parties. See, e.g., Lawyers Title Ins. Corp. v. U.S. Fidelity & Guar. Co. (N.D.Cal. 1988) 122 F.R.D. 567, 568-569, citing Brobeck, Phleger & Harrison v. Telex Corp., 602 F.2d 866 (9th Cir.1979), cert. denied 444 U.S. 981.
This Contract must be read without preconception and by the full integration of each word. It must also be read in conjunction with the Power of Attorney, which is explicitly incorporated as part of the Agreement.
It is also axiomatic that the court is bound to interpret as true all allegations contained in DSC's SACC.
The terms of the Contract objectively state that DSC's intent was to commit unlawful acts that were contrary to California statutory provisions and in violation of public policy.
Join Michael Grissom the man that stop DSC from unlicense lending in California
Call 818 749 3288