CA superior court civil suit question

[CAron]

Question
Self representation in Superior court. If I present a good case do I have a fighting chance? Or do I need to know a lot of legal terminology? Do judges frown on self representation in such cases?

Any suggestion on legal resource material would be appreciated.

Former girl friend renigs on a verbal agreement involving a shady deal to acquire Citibank reward purchasing points.

The allegations: The lady I was living with wrongfully converted cash of sorts I gave her to her possession even though per our verbal agreement the money was mine, was only to be controlled by me and was to return to me at the end of meeting the obligations of the bank requirements in order to earn the "thankyou" rewards purchasing points. The Citibank offer was for new account holders only so I could not open such accounts to take advantage of the Citibank offer.

With my bank cashiers check she opened the proper checking & savings accounts in her name only which I was fine with. She gave me all bank documents pertaining to opening the accounts. I internet accessed the accounts to make 6 electronic payments to my credit cards and I paid 2 rent checks to her using checks from the account. I also drew one electronic check from the account to pay a bill. At the end of meeting the obligations to acquire the "thankyou" points 4 months from opening the accounts she requested I move out of her house and is claiming I illegally accessed the accounts.

Evidence I have indicating the money was mine, the original bank check receipt with on the back written "Rodneys money for thankyou rewards points", on the front indicates the bank, dollar amount, from "my name", to "her name". My hand written journal of account activities. The bank promotion advertisement. Account activity records which I would need an attorney to subpoena the records from the bank through the courts. Dollar amount involved $26,000 less my withdrawals equals $24,500

I had an attorney send her a demand letter. She responded with I illegally accessed the money and stole property from her in the process of moving out. She claims she has pictures of me stealing her property. I did not steal anything and I doubt she has any pictures of me removing her property and placing it into my possession. I have a clean background check, excellent credit rating and no debt.

 

[CAron]

She would be hiring an attorney. The same one she had when her previous husband tried to sue her for a portion of the value of the house she was making payments on. Attorneys are expensive so I am asking in such a case where are they most necessary. Knowing how to respond to legal terminology as it arises? Knowing how to present a convincing case? Her attorney would make me look like a lire and thief with little effort? Do judges and juries look down on self representation in such a case?
Trial by jury-who calls for it the judge, plaintiff or defendants attorney?

 

[dee_dub]

Self representation in Superior court. If I present a good case do I have a fighting chance?

Yes.

Or do I need to know a lot of legal terminology?

Depends on whether you are confronted with a lot of legal terminology requiring your response.

Do judges frown on self representation in such cases?

Depends on the case. If you don't have an excellent grasp of the rules of civil procedure and evidence, the relevant laws, and whatever else you might need (or if you don't know what else you might need), then don't do it. You will waste the judge's time and be less successful than you would if you had counsel.

 

[CAron]

Yes.

Depends on whether you are confronted with a lot of legal terminology requiring your response.

Depends on the case. If you don't have an excellent grasp of the rules of civil procedure and evidence, the relevant laws, and whatever else you might need (or if you don't know what else you might need), then don't do it. You will waste the judge's time and be less successful than you would if you had counsel.

The following observational sentence came to me in a reply.
"So, you're suing her because she didn't hold up her end of the bargain in your attempt to defraud the bank?"

My reply:
Basically it was a sort of attempt to defraud the credit card company. Regardless of the evidence that she accepted the money and opened the accounts in accordance with the credit card company offer.
The defendant could claim
(4) One side engaged in "fraud" to procure the contract; (8) The contract has an illegal purpose or act;
Which means my attempt to sue would be null & void as I have been told.

Is that correct I would have no case? Do to the "The contract has an illegal purpose or act;"

 

[dee_dub]

Geez, I didn't even read the substance of your original post that closely - I though it was a procedural question.

I don't know if you have no case, if your action is a nullity because it is founded on an illegal act - that is an area of law that varies by jurisdiction. Many have enacted laws barring actions on contracts with illegal purpose, and I do not know California's rule. At any rate, you're nuts if you try it. The two of you conspired to defraud a credit card company. Whether you have an action or not, no judge in the world is going to find for you. A court will not allow you to enlist its aid for this sort of purpose. Count yourself lucky the credit card company hasn't pressed charges, and move on.