STATE OF VIRGINIA IN THE GENERAL DISTRICT COURT FOR
THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
BRUNSWICK COUNTY CASE NO. GV23000102-00
AMERICAN EXPRESS NATIONAL BANK )
Plaintiff )
- )
)
MICHAEL ECK )
Defendant. )
GROUNDS OF DEFENSE
NOW COMES Defendant, MICHAEL ECK, pro se, hereby files the following Grounds of Defense:
These Grounds of Defense are based upon investigation conducted and made available to undersigned counsel, as of this date. Further investigation and discovery may be necessary and the product of such may result in new or different witnesses, exhibits, and issues relating to causation and damages. Therefore, these Grounds of Defense are not intended to be a complete statement of Defendant’s theories, witnesses or exhibits; rather, it is an initial assessment of same, subject to ongoing supplementation. Should any attempt be made to utilize the contents of this pleading before a jury, fairness requires that this preliminary statement also be read to the jury and that the jury be duly informed that the evidence therein was evidence available at the time of its filing.
- FACTUAL BASIS OF THE DEFENSE
- Defendant entered into two settlement agreements with Plaintiff for the purpose of settling debt owed to Plaintiff.
- Defendant sent a settlement agreement for Account 3779785l6801000 documented in a letter which was sent via USPS with verification by Defendant to Plaintiff, which clearly stated terms of the agreement. (See a copy of the settlement agreement marked as “Exhibit A”).
- Plaintiff cashed the check, check no. 716 provided by Defendant in accordance with the settlement agreement, but later, without justification, refused to acknowledge that Defendant’s account was settled. (See a copy of the check marked as “Exhibit B”).
- Defendant sent a settlement agreement for Account 376741426891003 documented in a letter which was sent via USPS with verification by Defendant to Plaintiff, which clearly stated terms of the agreement. (See a copy of the settlement agreement marked as “Exhibit C”).
- Plaintiff cashed the check, check no. 717 provided by Defendant in accordance with the settlement agreement, but later, without justification, refused to acknowledge that Defendant’s account was settled. (See a copy of the check marked as “Exhibit D”).
- Despite cashing the checks and accepting the terms of the settlement agreements, Plaintiff is now pursuing legal action against Defendant.
- However, Defendant contends that Plaintiff accepted and cashed the checks, which constitutes acceptance of the settlement agreement. (See “Exhibit B” and “Exhibit D”).
- LEGAL THEORY AND ARGUMENT
LEGAL THEORY
- In order for a settlement agreement to be valid, it must be: in writing, signed by both parties, contemplate a compromise of a disputed claim, and be supported by adequate consideration.
- In this case, the settlement agreements were in writing, signed by both parties, and contemplated a compromise of disputed claims. Defendant also provided adequate consideration by cashing the checks provided by Plaintiff. Therefore, the settlement agreements are valid.
- Defendant entered into two valid settlement agreements with Plaintiff. Plaintiff cashed the checks provided by Defendant in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreements. Plaintiff later refused to acknowledge that Defendant’s accounts were settled. Plaintiff’s refusal to acknowledge the settlement agreements is not justified. Defendant has therefore met his burden of proving that the plaintiff accepted the terms of the settlement agreements.
ARGUMENT
- The Doctrine of Accord and Satisfaction
- The doctrine of accord and satisfaction provides that once a debtor and creditor reach an agreement on the satisfaction of a debt, the agreement is binding on both parties. Once a debtor makes a payment according to the terms of the agreement, the debt is discharged. The doctrine has been recognized in 1946 Owen v. Wade, 185 Va. 118, 37 S.E.2d 759.
- Plaintiff informed Defendant of the debt owed to Plaintiff by him. Due to financial hardship, Defendant requested to settle the debt as per the terms of the settlement agreements dated April 18, 2022. (See “Exhibit A” and “Exhibit C”).
- In this case, Defendant reached an agreement with Plaintiff for the satisfaction of the debt, and Plaintiff cashed the checks provided by Defendant in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreements. The doctrine of accord and satisfaction therefore applies, and the debt owed to Plaintiff is considered discharged.
- The Doctrine of Estoppel
- The doctrine of estoppel provides that a party may not take a position contrary to a prior position taken by that party where the other party has relied on the prior position to its detriment. See American Mutual Liability Ins. Co. v. Hamilton, 145 Va. 391, 135 S.E. 21 (1926).
- Defendant sent two verified letters to Plaintiff and proposed a settlement where he referenced the amounts, he could pay in relation to Account 3779785l6801000 and Account 376741426891003 and the terms to be accepted by the Plaintiff if they agreed to cash the checks. The check numbers were referenced in the letters. (See “Exhibit A” and “Exhibit C”).
- Defendant argues that Plaintiff cashed the checks provided by Defendant in accordance with the settlement agreements. By cashing the checks, Plaintiff represented to Defendant that it had accepted the terms of the settlement agreements and considered the account settled.
- Defendant relied on Plaintiff’s representation to his detriment, and now, Plaintiff is taking a position contrary to its prior position by claiming that the accounts were not settled. The doctrine of estoppel therefore applies, and Plaintiff should be precluded from denying that Defendant’s accounts, Account 3779785l6801000 and Account 376741426891003 were settled.
- Plaintiff’s own actions demonstrate that it agreed to the terms of the settlement agreements. After receiving the settlement agreement letters, proofs of delivery, and cashed checks, Plaintiff sent Defendant a letter requesting him to resend the settlement letters, proofs of delivery, and proof of cashed funds to their corporate office. By doing so, Plaintiff effectively acknowledged the terms of the settlement agreements. (See copies of proof of delivery of settlement agreements both marked as “Exhibit E”).
- Plaintiff accepted and cashed the checks, check no. 716 and check no. 717 which constituted acceptance of the settlement agreements. Plaintiff cannot now dispute the terms of the settlement agreements after accepting and cashing the checks.
- Plaintiff does not want to acknowledge Defendant’s accounts as being settled yet Defendant was extremely clear that acceptance of the terms of the settlement agreements and cashing the checks would settle the accounts.
- WITNESSES
- It is anticipated that Plaintiff will bring its witnesses to testify for the Bank and try to prove Plaintiff’s case.
- Defendant will testify regarding his recollection of the agreements and transactions and any conversations he had with Plaintiff and other witnesses.
- Any and all witnesses to the agreements and transactions, if discovered. Defendant will supplement the names and specific testimony if learned, through the course of discovery.
- Any and all custodians of record or other witnesses who are needed to establish a foundation for exhibits listed to be used at the time of trial.
- Without waiving objections, any and all witnesses listed by Plaintiff in its disclosure statement and all supplements even if later withdrawn.
- At this time, Defendant is unaware of any additional persons believed to have relevant information. Should such persons come to Defendant’s attention through the course of further discovery, Defendant will promptly supplement this Initial Disclosure Statement.
- EXHIBITS TO BE USED AT TRIAL
- “Exhibit A: Copy of the Settlement Agreement for Account 3779785l6801000 between Plaintiff and Defendant”.
- “Exhibit B: Copy check no. 716”.
- “Exhibit C: Copy of the Settlement Agreement for Account 376741426891003 between Plaintiff and Defendant”.
- “Exhibit D: Copy check no. 717”.
- “Exhibit E: Proof of delivery of the Settlement Agreements”.
Respectfully submitted this [DATE]
[DEFENDANT’S SIGNATURE]
Michael Eck
159 Little Deer RD
(434)949-0912
mikeck44@yahoo.com
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The Defendant does hereby certify that a copy of the above Grounds of Defense was served on this date, upon [PLAINTIFF] by depositing it in the exclusive care and custody of the United States Postal Service via certified mail, with sufficient first-class postage affixed thereto and addressed to the person(s) at the address shown below:
Zwicker & Associates, PC
6 Montgomery Village Avenue, Suite 505,
Gaithersburg, MD 20879
(301)355-7400
marylandlitigation@zwickerpc.com
This the [INSERT DATE]
VERIFICATION
I, [INSERT DEFENDANT’S NAME], being first duly sworn, deposes and says that I have read the above and know the contents thereof; that the same is true of my knowledge, except as to those matters therein alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true.
___________________________________________________
Mike Eck
STATE OF [INSERT NAME]
COUNTY OF [INSERT NAME]
Sworn to (or affirmed) and subscribed before me,
This the………day of………………………2023.
……………………………………………………
NOTARY PUBLIC, Signature
My Commission Expires: ……………………..
At Legal writing experts, we would be happy to assist in preparing any legal document you need. We are international lawyers and attorneys with significant experience in legal drafting, Commercial-Corporate practice and consulting. In the last few years, we have successfully undertaken similar assignments for clients from different jurisdictions. If given this opportunity, The LegalPen will be able to prepare the legal document within the shortest time possible. You can send us your quick enquiry ( here )