Quote: What should a homeowner expect in any a foreclosure case?? If you look at it realistically a voluntary dismissal is a great result in this case or any case. Yes, they may refile or an other bank will refile some time from now, but the fact is the homeowner and his counsel won this round. Please show me a case and show me a defense Lawyer that is up to your expectation, please!
No! While in most legal cases a defendant is looking to have a case dismissed at the earliest opportunity and often does this through motion practice, when a case is horribly defective, a plaintiff ought to voluntarily dismiss, clean up the case and re-file.
Voluntarily dismissing the case is the best strategy for the foreclosure mill, not the defendant.
Mr. Roper first noted an emerging pattern amongst New York foreclosure cases in Brooklyn (Kings County) in 2008. He pointed out that the Judges on the Kings County bench had essentially discontinued granting foreclosures in the fraud laden cases. But instead of dismissing these cases as had been done in the Ohio Federal case dismissals, the Judges in Kings County adopted precisely the opposite tactic.
They simply stopped granting motions for summary judgment or any other motions for an order of reference. The denial of the requested relief, without dismissing, was never even applicable by the plaintiff, kept the borrower in the property and held the plaintiff to its fraud laced evidence.
The sensible strategy would have been for the foreclosure mill plaintiffs to voluntarily dismiss these cases. That they didn't do so reflected several dimensions of the foreclosure mill business model.
First, the foreclosure mill was paid a fixed amount for each case no matter the complexity or whether a case was defended or protracted. The foreclosure mill could always make more money getting five to ten more default judgments rather than litigating old languishing cases to completion.
Second, the law firms were being assessed by the banks based upon various milestone based performance metrics. As long as the foreclosure mill made its milestones, they could blame the failure to grant an order on court congestion. They had filed quickly, sought a default or motion of reference quickly, etc. If they voluntarily dismissed, particularly after a couple of years, then the performance milestones would all be reset and a firm's graded performance would be out the window.
So instead of doing what was best for the client, the foreclosure mill did what was best for itself, responding to incentives in place.
What this foreclosure defense law firm has done is helped the foreclosure mill to more quickly take the course of action which is best for the bank, rather than what is best for the defendant.
Characteristically, as with self-promoting Charlatans Matt Weidner and other mediocre Florida foreclosure defense law firms, this firm obscures the fact that they have done serious harm to their client by simply trumpeting this as a success.
Ann is either so stupid that she believes this nonsense OR she is being paid by yet another firm to SPAM the Forum message board for her personal profit.