Oregon Promissory Note: Fill & Download for Free

My mother-in-law engineered legitimate reshuffling of her parents assets as her father required 3 x weekly dialysis procedures. The costs of the medical attention required for her parents exceeded assets and income. So, to qualify for MediCal — which they had paid into the system — they had to take action.So, MIL and parents met with an attorney specializing in medical benefits in California. The reason you should contact an attorney is there are critically important timing issues you have to meet: how much time your mother has no assets; what SS and pension income, etc.**When discussing this with an attorney, inquire about “quit claims.” A quit claim is when a titleholder “quits” their claim on their property in favor of another.Many years ago, my elderly landlord sold me the triplex where I rented a unit. We had been good friends for a decade; weekly I took her grocery shopping and dinner out. She would order dinner in once a week for me too.When she decided to move into a care facility, she offered to sell me the property at about half-off, as a future inheritance. As my friend was already in a care facility, California law required an attorney to represent an elderly seller. Fortunately for me, my landlady knew that and had called her attorney to make the arrangements. The attorney came to the care facility to personally assure that there was no influence or pressure to sell. Satisfied that everything was as desired by her client — including both me and the attorney informing her what the estimated value would be.Landlady executed a quit claim and accepted a promissory note from me with the property pledged as collateral. With the quit claim, I was able to use the property as collateral for the new loan. Had a check to my now former landlady in less than a month.**What you need done is doable; tedious, but, not expensive, lots of forms and documents. Start soon so the timing issues work for you and not against you.

Federal student loans are not subject to a statute of limitations, but private student loans are. A statute of limitations sets a clock that limits when a credit can sue a borrower to collect a debt. Debts for which the statute of limitations has expired are often referred to as time-barred.Be careful when talking with a collection agency, as there are many ways to reset the clock on time-barred debt. For example, if you make a payment on the debt, no matter how small a payment, the clock gets reset to zero.You have the right, under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), to tell a collection agency to stop contacting you.The statute of limitations on federal student loans was eliminated by the Higher Education Technical Amendments of 1991 (P.L. 102-26). Prior to this law, federal student loans had a 6-year statute of limitations. This statutory change eliminated statutes of limitation on all federal education loans, even loans made prior to 1991. This is why you should never, ever throw away any documentation relating to federal student loans. If you believe your loans were paid off in full, but you did not preserve the paid-in-full statement, you may have a difficult time proving that the loans were paid off if the loan magically resurrects itself.Statutes of limitation vary by state. It can be confusing which state’s laws apply. Possibilities include the borrower’s state of residence, the lender’s state of incorporation or a state specified in the promissory note.Statutes of limitation that apply to private student loans range from 3 years to 15 years. Other types of debt may have different statutes of limitation.3 YearsAlaskaArkansasDelawareDistrict of ColumbiaKansasMississippiNew HampshireSouth Carolina4 YearsCaliforniaNebraskaNevadaNew MexicoPennsylvaniaTexas5 YearsArizonaFloridaIdahoIowaMissouriNorth CarolinaOklahomaVirginia6 YearsAlabamaColoradoConnecticutGeorgiaHawaiiMaineMarylandMassachusettsMichiganMinnesotaNew JerseyNew YorkNorth DakotaOhioOregonSouth DakotaTennesseeUtahVermontWashington8 YearsMontana10 YearsIllinoisIndianaLouisianaRhode IslandWest VirginiaWisconsinWyoming15 YearsKentucky

I don’t have time to give this the answer it deserves, in part because answering it would require a book. I will focus my observations here just on the Declaration of Independence.The Declaration of Independence is central—just fundamental—to contemporary public discourse on the purpose and meaning of the United States. This is true for discourse *within* the US, but it is also true for the public conversation about the deepest ends of the US more broadly, too.So, for example, read James Kloppenberg’s study of the origins of democracy in European and US political thought: TOWARD DEMOCRACY: THE STRUGGLE FOR SELF-RULE IN EUROPEAN AND AMERICAN THOUGHT:https://www.amazon.com/Toward-Democracy-Struggle-Self-Rule-European/dp/019505461X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1522524793&sr=8-1&keywords=james+kloppenberg&dpID=51EfsOLdIwL&preST=_SY291_BO1,204,203,200_QL40_&dpSrc=srchFor something more focused on the Declaration of Independence directly, see the analysis by David Armitage: THE DECLARATION OF INDENPENDECE: A GLOBAL HISTORYThe Declaration of Independence: A Global History: David Armitage: 9780674030329: Amazon.com: BooksAnother way to track the centrality of the Declaration is to track how often, and in what contexts, statesmen have referred to it, as they contest the meaning and purpose of American public life. So, just to pick a few examples:James Forten, writing in 1813 to protest invidious, racist legislation passed by the legislature of the state of Pennsylvania, and explicitly arguing that the Constitution exists in part to protect the vision of human equality expressed in the Declaration.Timothy Fuller, Congressman from Massachusetts, invoking the Declaration as the foundation of the US Constitution in the debates over the application of the Missouri territory for statehood, Feb. 1820 (Fuller is just a good example here—many other Northern politicians argued similarly, during the deliberations that produced the Missouri Compromise.)John C. Calhoun, denying that equality is an appropriate basis for the US, and explicitly criticizing the Declaration for its claim that “all men are created equal,” in his Address before the Senate on the Oregon Bill, which he delivered in June, 1848. Calhoun found it necessary, in order to defend slavery, to deny the validity of the Declaration. If you want to defend racial subordination of one group of people to another, you have to tackle the ethical claims advanced by the Declaration. In the end, you have to reject the Declaration, as apologists of slavery like Calhoun (who what ever else you want to say about him, was intellectually consistent) ultimately were obliged to do.Abraham Lincoln, speaking in Peoria Illinois on October 16, 1854. Lincoln’s words are worth quoting: “Our republican robe is soiled, and trailed in the dust. Let us repurify it. Let us turn and wash it white, in the spirit, if not the blood, of the Revolution. Let us turn slavery from its claims of ‘moral right,’ back upon its existing legal rights, and its arguments of ‘necessity.’ Let us return to the position our fathers gave it; and there let it rest in peace. Let us re-adopt the Declaration of Independence, and with it, the practices, and policy, which harmonize with it. Let north and south—let all Americans—let all lovers of liberty everywhere—join in that great and good work.”Ask yourself, when Lincoln stood at podium to deliver the Gettysburg Address in November, 1863, just what he was referring to, when he began his oration with the words “Four score and seven years ago, our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”Or, in the 20th century, Theodore Roosevelt, speaking to veterans of the Union Army at Osawatomie Kansas, in August, 1910, and noting that the great crisis of the union started in the Kansas territory, well before eleven southern states tried to secede from the union: “It was the result of the struggle in Kansas which determined that our country should be in deed as well as in name devoted to both union and freedom; that the great experiment of democratic government on a national scale should succeed and not fail. In name we had the Declaration of Independence in 1776; but we gave the lie by our acts to the words of the Declaration of Independence until 1865; and words count for nothing except in so far as they represent acts. This is true everywhere; but, O my friends, it should be truest of all in political life. A broken promise is bad enough in private life. It is worse in the field of politics. No man is worth his salt in public life who makes on the stump a pledge which he does not keep after election; and, if he makes such a pledge and does not keep it, hunt him out of public life. I care for the great deeds of the past chiefly as spurs to drive us onward in the present. I speak of the men of the past partly that they may be honored by our praise of them, but more that they may serve as examples for the future.”For Roosevelt, as for Lincoln, the Declaration established a promise—what Herbert Croly had a year earlier termed the “Promise of American life.”Or Calvin Coolidge, speaking on July 5, 1926, on the 150th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, and using the principles of that document to criticize the progressivism of Croly, Theodore Roosevelt, and Woodrow Wilson. Coolidge, still an inspiration (and rightly so) for conservative thinkers today, looked to the Declaration of Independence for his understanding of the proper role of government. You don’t have to agree with him in order to appreciate the content of his thought.Or Martin Luther King, speaking in August, 1963, and using the Declaration, in much the same spirit as did Lincoln and Roosevelt, to summon American resolve to live up to its founding principles: “In a sense we've come to our nation's capital to cash a check. When the architects of our Republic wrote the magnificent. words of the Constitution and the Declaration o1 Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir. This note was a promise that all men, black men as we11 as white men--would be guaranteed the unalienable rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. It is obvious today that America has defaulted on this promissory note insofar as her citizens of color are concerned. Instead of honoring this sacred obligation, America has given the Negro people a bad check, a check which has come back marked ''insufficient funds.''The Declaration of Independence has provided the moral guide on which a great deal of American public life—and most especially the emancipatory movements that have punctuated our public life from 1776 forward—has turned. You can not understand the arguments that animate public discourse in the US, historically or right now, without some appreciation of the Declaration of Independence.