Mortgage Servicing Fraud
occurs post loan origination when mortgage servicers use false statements and book-keeping entries, fabricated assignments, forged signatures and utter counterfeit intangible Notes to take a homeowner's property and equity.
Articles |The FORUM |Law Library |Videos | Fraudsters & Co. |File Complaints |How they STEAL |Search MSFraud |Contact Us
Hi All
 
I have read that most pro SE litigants have no shot of winning in foreclosure court.
Many lose due in part by not familiarizing themselves with the rules of the court.
OK we all agree on my statement.
 
Now let me pose a question.
Wants a pro SE litigant enters the court to defend or present his/her case. Does that pro SE litigant become an officer of the court for those proceedings?
If not, then is the litigant still required to act as if he/or she is an officer of the court? If they are not considered an officer of the court, then would they be held less accountable for committing fraud against the court or lying to the court?
It would seem the courts can't have it both ways in regard to pro SE litigants.
Are pro SE litigants held to a higher standard then there lawyer counterparts?
It would seem that just because a person can not afford a high priced attorney but still has the intelligences and integrity to defend or present his/her case that the pro SE litigant should not be put under the microscope simply because he/she is not a member to the old boy network via a law degree.
 
TIA for your thoughts and opinions.
 
Best regards
Acesfull
Quote 0 0
George Burns
Based on my observations and readings etc,  plus my personal experience as a pro se in more than 12 cases of various sorts, I have never seen or read of a pro se being held to a higher standard. On the contrary, very often they  are given some leeway and consideration.

A pro se usually, by themself, screws up their own  case by not following or even knowing the rules  and procedures.
Quote 0 0
Often at Hearings, the Judge would listen to both parties arguments. The Bank lawyer would bring up orally case laws favorable to his side. If the Prose does not know how to bring up case law favorable his own case, the Judge will rule against the Prose. 
Here is a Hearing transcript of  a real case  in a court room.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/44631459/Capacity-Transcript-Florida?in_collection=3011910 
Quote 0 0

Hi George Burns--

 

Thank you for your reply. So you agree with my first paragraph. What was your succes rate in the 12 cases you litigated if you don't mind me asking?

 

George, what type cases were you involved?

 

Thank you for your reply.

 

Acesfull

Quote 0 0

Hi Ann

Thank you for your reply.

 

The pro SE in your video was a moron and had no shot of winning in that proceed or.

 

Best regards

 

Acesfull

Quote 0 0

Hi All

 

This is interesting supreme court ruling on the subject of Officers of the court.

 

Supreme Court of the U.S. held in Ex Parte Garland 71 US 333 (1866). That attorneys and counselors are not Officers of the United States, they are Officers of the Court,admitted as such, by its  upon evidence of their possessing sufficient legal learning and fair private character.

 

 

Interesting. No mention of having to possess a law degree or pass the bar examine.

 

Possessing sufficient legal learning and fair private character.

 

Best regards

 

Acesfull

Quote 0 0
George Burns
1 Pro se Mortgage Foreclosure Loss in District Court which was then lost on Appeal but then in following up I discovered that my lawyer had not turned up nor gave the agreed oral arguments. Case was then settled out of court.

1 Pro Se Mortgage Foreclosure loss in DC. Then after an Appeal and a temporary BK filing, the real holder of the Note settled amicably.

1 Pro Se Mortgage foreclosure court directed re-dating and recalculating of mortgage payments. 6 months later the Bank returned that month's payment leading to the above case. Bank then went Bankrupt during that case.

3 Pro se Mortgage Foreclosure cases all stipulated settlement. We settled on mutually agreeable terms which were all very beneficial to me as planned.

1 Loss with lawyer inLandlord/Tenant dispute as Plaintiff Tenant. Not his fault. Noone in the room including the attorney for the City's Building Code Violations (co-Plaintiff) understood or believed his reasons.

4 Pro Se Landlord in Tenant disputes all won.

1 Pro Se DUI with complications, Plea Bargained after Jury selection to negligible sentence.

1 Fraud, Writ of Replevin, Tort, Contract violations etc etc. Initially represented then went Pro Se Defendant for 3 years. Won.

1 as represented Defendant Tortious Interferance, Trade Secrets etc .Won  but gave stipulated no interferace with Plaintiff clients.

There were other Business and Consumer issue cases but not worth mentioning. 

Depending on the Court and Judge, I decide whether to  go Pro Se or not. It is usually better to have a lawyer respond to the Complaint or file the intial MTD etc. It is always good to seek legal counse whether or not you go Pro Se. You cannot know or see everything, so another point of view is always advisable.
Quote 0 0
Hi George Burns

Thank you for your reply. Not a bad track record for PRO SE. Good work.

George, why do you feel it necessary to have an attorney file the answer an MTD to the complaint? From my prospective this was the most basic part of the proceed or. I have actually had three debt collections dismissed with prejudice. All three by the way were not SOL. I feel that I won the cases based on my proper answer and motions.

I actually contacted an attorney before filing an answer to the foreclosure complaint, however both wanted a 5k retainer.  I filed the answer and MTD with the court for $135.00. Presently working on preparing a BK motion for 10-12 months down the road.

I look forward to your reply.

Acesfull
Quote 0 0
George Burns
Note: I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

Although it depends on the facts and circumstances etc, most attorneys would file a MTD (or Motion to Expand etc etc) and get that decision BEFORE answering the Complaint. Especially if you are buying time.

The sequence of actions should have been found out at the initial meeting.

Judges seems to like things to start smoothly and traditionally, which is why using a lawyer initially iis advised. You can easily amend, correct or supplement his/her fling as needed and you have someone who is recognized by the judge, to blame for the need.

Retainers are not cast in stone and are negotiated. A retainer is not needed for a single specific task.
Quote 0 0
Hi George Burns

Thank you for your reply. Great info for me to remember.

Much appreciated.

Best regards

Acesfull
Quote 0 0
Coyote
During a hearing in my case, where I was forced to represent myself instead of hiring a lawyer to get the same result, the judge stated on the record: "I am holding you to the highest standards of a lawyer.", despite case law precluding a court from doing so.

In Foreclosure cases, many judges are directed to use the banksters' own elementary mathematical equation, rather than use that complicated law and rules stuff:

           No true party in interest
minus  No Note
minus  No Lost Note Affidavit  (Which are bogus anyway)
minus  No evidence of a debt
minus  No evidence of a default or missed payments
           _________________________________
        = GRANT BANK FORECLOSURE

In Eviction cases, many criminals use the same mathematical calculation, only without committing fraud on the court:

           No valid court judgment to foreclose
minus  No mandated hearing
minus  No mandated judge
minus  No mandated court Order
minus  No mandated Writ of Possession
minus  No mandated county or court record of a foreclosure or eviction     
           scheduled for the person or property address
plus    A fabricated Court Order handwritten on a blank piece of paper, with 
          Order spelled "Ordor" and a forged signature of a judge
plus    One or more corrupted sheriffs, locksmiths, moving company, or any 
           adult willing to commit one or more felonies
           __________________________
        =  Another FREE HOUSE for the bank

Total Cost for the Eviction:  Perhaps a small amount of money, drugs, alcohol, or as much of the homeowner's personal belongings as they can steal.  In some cases, a shower with real soap and water may also be available - if needed to seal the deal.

THIS IS FROM AN ACTUAL CASE IN MARYLAND.


Quote 0 0
Bill
Coyote wrote:
During a hearing in my case, where I was forced to represent myself instead of hiring a lawyer to get the same result, the judge stated on the record: "I am holding you to the highest standards of a lawyer.", despite case law precluding a court from doing so.

In Foreclosure cases, many judges are directed to use the banksters' own elementary mathematical equation, rather than use that complicated law and rules stuff:

           No true party in interest
minus  No Note
minus  No Lost Note Affidavit  (Which are bogus anyway)
minus  No evidence of a debt
minus  No evidence of a default or missed payments
           _________________________________
        = GRANT BANK FORECLOSURE

In Eviction cases, many criminals use the same mathematical calculation, only without committing fraud on the court:

           No valid court judgment to foreclose
minus  No mandated hearing
minus  No mandated judge
minus  No mandated court Order
minus  No mandated Writ of Possession
minus  No mandated county or court record of a foreclosure or eviction     
           scheduled for the person or property address
plus    A fabricated Court Order handwritten on a blank piece of paper, with 
          Order spelled "Ordor" and a forged signature of a judge
plus    One or more corrupted sheriffs, locksmiths, moving company, or any 
           adult willing to commit one or more felonies
           __________________________
        =  Another FREE HOUSE for the bank

Total Cost for the Eviction:  Perhaps a small amount of money, drugs, alcohol, or as much of the homeowner's personal belongings as they can steal.  In some cases, a shower with real soap and water may also be available - if needed to seal the deal.

THIS IS FROM AN ACTUAL CASE IN MARYLAND.



I think the problem in cases like this is the Pro Se didn't know and follow the rules.  You have to know the rules of procedures as well as the rules of evidence for the jurisdiction you are in.  Your failure to do so will end up in a quick loss not matter how bad the Plaintiff's case is. 

FAILURE TO PROPERLY FRAME AN ARGUMENT BEFORE THE COURT WITH ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE WILL RESULT IN A WAIVER OF THE ARGUMENT. 

If you did properly make the arguments and foreclosure was granted improperly I personally feel the appellate courts are very fair and do not have the bias that some lower courts show from time to time. 

WHAT HAPPENED WHEN YOU APPEALED THE DECISION?

The bottom line is that you are NOT held to a higher standard, just the same standard and you are expected to follow the rules and make arguments supported by case law.
Quote 0 0
anon
In my case, a year ago. I did not know what I was doing. I lost. I was very bitter at the time. However the judge said that I did just as well or better than a lot of attorneys he saw. I knew I was going to lose from the start. I got in a lot of good points. Unfortunate it looks like I might have to write the appellate brief. I have been waiting for a year for some luck to flow my way in the form of money but I think I have at least a fighting chance. I have heard that appellate court is better. That much more depends on a good written interpretation of case law. I will let you all know in a couple of months. The judge did help me by admitting "the copy of the original note" into evidence over objection. I had no clue. My advice to anyone if they are representing themselves would be this. Know the evidence rules. If you don't object the evidence gets admitted. Second just be very nice. Get a court reporter and get everything on the record. Things sound a whole lot better when read. There is recent case law that supports some of the points I made at the time : ie the affiant did not enter the data payments herself. Opposing counsel fell all over herself objected when I asked if the affiant had entered in the payment information herself?  But now there is Glarum and Lasalle. 
Quote 0 0
Coyote
Thank you for responding Bill.  You are correct, most Pro Se litigants do not follow the civil and evidence rules, but what I have witnessed in many of these foreclosure cases, the evidence (transcript) shows neither do opposing counsels or the courts, and when called on it, like in Florida, they are ignored, and refuse to cite a law or rule they are supposedly following.  

To answer your question about the Maryland case, when the sheriff showed up with two dumpsters, a crew, and no court order, the woman protested.  The sheriff then arrested her and later had her admitted to a hospital.  This left her special needs son and disabled Mother to fend for themselves.

The week before the eviction, the court had actually, sua sponte, sent her case to the special court of appeals and pulled its Writ of Possession.  The woman could not find an attorney to represent her in the wrongful foreclosure and she had become too traumatized to defend her innocence.  She had been fighting Ocwen for more than a decade and the lawyer fees had run her out of money.

There are many cases that need to be reopened.  Like the man who had his appeal dismissed for failure to timely file his Notice of Appeal because he was in a medically-induced coma after his unlawful eviction went horribly wrong. (The eviction was video taped by a New York film crew.)

The family had lost their first home after making all their payments.  They saved up and bought another home.  Made all the payments, and the banks foreclosed on it too and had that homeowner arrested also.

He filed a Motion for Reconsideration based on his certified medical records confirming he was in a coma at the time, and the appellate court denied it.

The case is now before the U.S. Sup Ct. on a writ of certiorari. 
Quote 0 0
TheEquitableOne
Read the rules.

Then read them again.

Then, you guessed it, read them again.

Don't ever stop reading them.

The rules of civil procedure and evidence are likely available online. Better yet is to read the annotated rules. This will include case law that will help you to understand how the courts are interpreting and applying the rules. There is likely no better place to do this than a law library. The librarians will want to help you.

As for the standard to which pro se litigants are held there is the case of Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972). The relevant portion is below:

"Whatever may be the limits on the scope of inquiry of courts into the internal administration of prisons, allegations such as those asserted by petitioner, however inartfully pleaded, are sufficient to call for the opportunity to offer supporting evidence. We cannot say with assurance that under the allegations of the pro se complaint, which we hold to less stringent standards than formal pleadings drafted by lawyers, it appears"beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief." Conley v. Gibson, 355 U. S. 41, 355 U. S. 45-46 (1957). See Dioguardi v. Durning, 139 F.2d 774 (CA2 1944). [emphasis added]."

If you Shepherdize Haines, and likely the other cases cited, I expect you'll turn up some local cases expressing similar. 

A link to Haines:

http://supreme.justia.com/us/404/519/case.html

Of course, this isn't legal advice.




Quote 0 0
Hi All

I received a letter signed by the in regard to my foreclosure case.

The letter was instructing the litigants to attend the hearing and discuss any discovery issues. The part of this letter that I found interesting is that I MUST ATTEND in PERSON and opposing counsel is not required to appear in person but thru a phone hook up. Is this not an example of bias against the Pro Se litigant? I must get up early, fight traffic, pay for tolls and gas, pay to park my car at the court house that is a  45 minute commute from my home.
Opposing counsel gets to sit in there big office and address the judge via a phone.

So clearly this could be the start of the judge making the case more difficult for the pro se litigant.

Would anyone advise sending a letter to the judge an ask for an explanation of this procedure? I don't want to get on the judges bad side however I don't want to show any weakness.

TIA

Best regards
Acesfull




Quote 0 0
I believe the Florida Civil procedure allows attending hearing by phone . Banks lawyers often appear by phone in foreclosure hearing, even if the Homeowners are represented by a lawyer.

I think the party that physically present at the hearing has the advantage to argue their case and show the Judge documents. So be well prepared, learn case law and organize the case files to show the Judge your evidence of your claim.  If it is an Evidentiary Hearing the Judge will ask you the proof of your claim. If you are unable to defend your claim, the Judge may rule against you. Get a lawyer to represent you if you can.
Quote 0 0
Hi All

Hi Ann-  Thank you for your reply.

I believe this meeting is related to discovery issues however I could be wrong. I see your point in having an edge by attending in person.

My main argument in the case is that the plaintiff US BANK National did not attach a copy of the mortgage note therefore they do not have legal standing to foreclose.

Please see Bank Of New York v. Raftogianis( F-7356-09 NJ Chancery Division)

In the case law listed above that was won by the defendant.
I have the same judge that ruled on this case in favor of Defendant. So that may give me a small edge in the case.

I will be framing my defense in the same fashion as the case listed above.

If I feel like I am getting in over my head then I may seek counsel probably the same attorney that defended in the case cited above.. They are local.

Presently I am very cash poor and very unemployed. LOL So my goal is to prolong the process. I do however have enough to file a BK, but that will hopefully be in the distant future.

Ann, thank you again.

Best regards

Acesfull
Quote 0 0

SOME IDEAS FOR HEARING ARGUMENTS

 

In accordance with the Disclaimer posted on this site, nothing here shall be construed as legal advice. The information below is strickly commentary designed to help attorneys enhance there presentation skills in the performance of their jobs. The hiring of an attorney is very important. If you are in need of legal assistance, consult a licensed attorney for legal advice.

 

The Assignment Not Attached To The Complaint & Is Dated After The Complaint Was Filed

It is important to note here that judges like rulings from the appellate division that cover their circuit or other opinions from WITHIN their circuit (colleagues). Find those cases first and if you can’t and have to use other Florida cases, show the judge WHY they should rule the same. Remember you have 5 minutes to bring it home.

I’m going to use Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for FFMLT 2006-3 as the Plaintiff and Marshall C. Watson as their counsel for this example.

Judge: We’re here on Defense Counsel’s Motion to Dismiss. Counsel please proceed.

Defense Counsel: Good morning Your Honor. This Motion is based on 3 points that warrant dismissal of this action (we will only focus on one – Standing)

1) Plaintiff lacks standing to bring this foreclosure action against my client (FACT/OPINION). The allegations in the complaint allege Plaintiff is the OWNER and HOLD of the NOTE that they seem to have apparently LOST (FACT) but have failed to identify, WHEN they became the OWNER and HOLDER of the Note (FACT) and HOW they became the OWNER and HOLDER of the Note (FACT), or the approximate date WHEN they allegedly lost the NOTE (FACT) and explaining HOW they allegedly lost it (FACT). They have attached a copy of a print out from court records AND NOT THEIR CLIENTS FILES of the Mortgage (FACT) which indicates First Franklin as the ORIGINAL Lender (FACT) and does not mention Plaintiff Deutsche Bank anywhere on THAT document (FACT). No NOTE or a CERTIFIED COPY of such nor has a LAWFUL and EQUITABLE ASSIGNMENT been ATTACHED to the Complaint (FACT) in support of their allegation that they are the OWNER and HOLDER of the NOTE (FACT).

STOP RIGHT HERE (EDITORS NOTE): First always state facts and not opinions. If you have to state an opinion it better be extremely persuasive and you need to have sufficient evidence to back it up. Second, if there was a Notice of Filing after the complaint was filed and you filed your Motion to Dismiss of the Assignment you want to say:

In an attempt to cloud the court’s judgment (OPINION), PLAINTIFFS COUNSEL has magically caused an Assignment to appear (FACT) which according to the date was CLEARLY drafted, executed and filed AFTER the filing of this action (FACT) where numerous case-law opinions throughout Florida PROHIBIT such Assignment filings warranting dismissal (FACT)!

STOP RIGHT HERE (EDITORS NOTE): You don’t want to come off as condescending here. Your want to come off as confident to your position and a little fantastical about Opposing Counsel’s Actions (Not PLAINTIFF) in filing the Affidavit this way. You have to end your speaking presentation here because you don’t ever want the judge to cut you off to allow opposing counsel to speak but you want your last words to the judge the prompt the question…what case law and opinions do you have to support your position?

Judge: Plaintiffs Counsel what do you have to say?

Plaintiff’s Counsel: Your Honor, our Complaint clearly states a cause of action (OPINION). Plaintiff is in possession of the original Promissory Note and we are prepared to drop the Re-establishment Count Your Honor. Since we have possession of the Original Note, the Court should find that an equitable assignment occurred prior to the actual dated assignment and the date of the assignment is irrelevant (OPINION). We only need to have possession to be the holder in due course judge which allows us to bring this action. I have numerous case-law to support our position.

Judge: Such as?

Plaintiffs Counsel: Well Your Honor, WM Specialty Mortgage, LLC v. Salomon, 874 So.2d 680 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) and Johns v. Gillian, 184 So. 140 (Fla. 1938) clearly state that because Plaintiff had possession of the original Promissory Note the Court should find that an equitable assignment of the mortgage occurred prior to the actual dated assignment and the date of the assignment should be deemed irrelevant.

Judge: I see…Defense Counsel?

Defense Counsel: Your Honor, Counsel’s argument is misplaced (FACT/OPINION). WM Specialty Mortgage requires that, whatever the form of the assignment, there MUST first be an “unconditional” transfer of interest BEFORE the assignee may maintain a foreclosure (FACT). Unlike the matter presently before the Court, in WM Specialty Mortgage the Plaintiff alleged facts of a physical transfer of the mortgage to the assignee prior to the Plaintiff filing suit (FACT). The allegation of physical delivery SUPPORTED an equitable assignment (FACT) and based on THAT fact the Court in WM Specialty Mortgage overlooked the late executed assignment and allowed the foreclosure to continue (FACT). In the matter before this Court, the Plaintiff made no allegation IN THE Complaint of physical delivery (FACT) within the holding of WM Specialty Mortgage and the allegations in the Complaint do not rise to the standard of showing an “unconditional” transfer of the assignor’s rights to Plaintiff (FACT) nor has Plaintiff alleged in the Complaint it is the HOLDER IN DUE COURSE which counsel is alleging here.

Your Honor, before Plaintiff’s Counsel responds, I’d like the court to note that PRESENTING Affidavits that are dated AFTER the a Complaint is filed and the foreclosure has been initiated in the manner done so EXACTLY as seen here (FACT/OPINION), is a pattern and practice amongst the law firms Marshal C. Watson, Florida Default Law Group, Law Offices of David J. Stern and Shapiro & Fishman (FACT) who represent over 90% of foreclosures in the State of Florida (FACT). In fact the argument I’ve just expressed to the court comes straight from Judge Anthony Rondolino of the 6th Judicial Circuit in and for Pinellas County BANK OF AMERICA vs. COLLEEN M. MCKENNA Case No. 09-4179-CI-13 (FACT) which Marshall C. Watson was counsel of record for, where His Honor granted Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss against Marshall C. Watson for the very same reason (hand a copy of 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 833c to Judge) (FACT). At a glance I have over ten (10) cases where this tactic has been used and the case was dismissed as a result (FACT) (hand Judge the cases with the points highlighted). Those cases are BRANCH BANKING AND TRUST COMPANY vs. REGINALD JENKINS, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 642a, CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC v. JANET DOBSON, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 428a, CITIMORTGAGE, INC. vs. MICHAEL EASOM, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 100b, CREDIT BASED ASSET SERVICING AND SECURITIZATION, LLC v. TAMMY D. HARDY, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1147a, SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC. vs. ELENA V. FULLERTON, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1146b, THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. MARY L. BARNICH, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 100a, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION v. BRENDA C. ROSE, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1044a, US BANK N.A. v. JESUS TACORONTE, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 17a and WACHOVIA BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION vs. JUANITA NORTON, 16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1043a.

All of these cases support that where an Assignment is filed AFTER the Complaint is filed and the Complaint fails to allege and/or Plaintiff fails to submit other documentary evidence showing conclusively an EQUITABLE TRANSFER of the Note (FACT), Plaintiff lacks standing to bring a foreclosure action and the case should be dismissed (FACT). I would ask the court at this time based on the OVERWHELMING support I have provided to dismiss this case.

STOP RIGHT HERE (EDITORS NOTE): I cannot tell you what the judge will decide or what Opposing Counsel will say after this point…you be the judge. What I will say is that Judges want to hear the FACTS. You have presented the FACTS very well here. The key to success in this example is your flow of words in a strong and confident manner without studder, interruption or indecisive pause.

Another very important point and cross argument I want to point out is the Assignment is 99% of the time from MERS to the Plaintiff. There are two (2) important positions to take on this.

(1) While the Mortgage may name MERS as the Nominee for Lender, it does so only in the Mortgage and the Mortgage interest only. MERS is not mentioned ANYWHERE on the Note hence it can not assign an interest greater than that which it is entitled to. The MERS assignment (outside of the number of fraudulent issues that may exist on the face of it) will casually state in the language that it is transferring ALL beneficial interest in the Mortgage AND Note. Be sure to bring to the court’s attention that MERS name is not mentioned anywhere on the NOTE as the Lenders Nominee and Plaintiff has NOT provided evidence to support MERS ability to transfer the beneficial interest of the Note.

(2) In instances where the Plaintiff is Trustee for a securitized pool of loans, find the Pooling & Servicing Agreement at http://www.secinfo.com/. Show the court that it would be impossible for MERS to transfer interest to Deutsche when it is clear from the case caption that this loan is part of a pool of loans (FYI – just because they allege your loan is part of a pool does not mean it is but for argument sake use this allegation against them). The Pooling and Servicing Agreement will show who the Depositor is, Servicer, Master Servicer and Deutsche as Trustee. This document is evidence that a) the loan transferred from the original lender to at the very least, the Depositor (where is the evidence of this transfer?), and from the Depositor to the parties in the pool (where is the evidence of this transfer or transfers) and that the Trustee gets its alleged power from this pool and agreement which only begs the question…why is counsel here attempting to claim this Note has moved from MERS to Plaintiff directly?

This is a great point to proving the assignment is a fraud. Watch what opposing counsel answers to this because it will probably amount to testimony at which point you need to be quick to say to opposing counsel “unless you intend to recuse yourself as counsel from the Plaintiff please refrain from testifying on their behalf.” Because at this point anything opposing counsel says will not be supported by anything alleged in the complaint or in the court record and that should always be your…”maybe so your honor but Plaintiff has not alleged such in the complaint…Plaintiff has not submitted any documented evidence to support what counsel is saying here today.”

Well my fellow soldiers of the cause, that is my 2 cents. Master this in 5 minutes and I think the outcome will be a positive one. I’d be very interested to hear any comments and feedback on this. My next topic will be Summary Judgment. I hope this helps.

Anthony Martinez Esq.

Quote 0 0
Bill

Acesfull wrote:
Hi All

Hi Ann-  Thank you for your reply.

I believe this meeting is related to discovery issues however I could be wrong. I see your point in having an edge by attending in person.

My main argument in the case is that the plaintiff US BANK National did not attach a copy of the mortgage note therefore they do not have legal standing to foreclose.

Please see Bank Of New York v. Raftogianis( F-7356-09 NJ Chancery Division)

In the case law listed above that was won by the defendant.
I have the same judge that ruled on this case in favor of Defendant. So that may give me a small edge in the case.

I will be framing my defense in the same fashion as the case listed above.

If I feel like I am getting in over my head then I may seek counsel probably the same attorney that defended in the case cited above.. They are local.

Presently I am very cash poor and very unemployed. LOL So my goal is to prolong the process. I do however have enough to file a BK, but that will hopefully be in the distant future.

Ann, thank you again.

Best regards

Acesfull


I'm not an attorney and this isn't legal advice......

It appears from your post that you are aware of cases decided favorably for the defendants in your area.  The most efficient use of your time would seem to be to make a trip to the courthouse and pull a foreclosure case or two and make copies of the pleadings.  This would give you case law and arguments that have prevailed in your jurisdiction.  There is NO reason to change or reword these arguments.  You can just strait plagiarize the pleadings.


Quote 0 0
If you are in Florida, check my site. There are many info and legal pleadings for research purposes.

http://www.scribd.com/my_document_collections
Quote 0 0

ORAL ARGUMENTS BEFORE FLORIDA’S 2ND DCA…MUST WATCH!

FAILURE OF JURISDICTION IN FORECLOSURE CASES

http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/2011/10/oral-arguments-before-floridas-2nd-dca-must-watch

Quote 0 0
Write a reply...