This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
BAM! First Amendment Foundation Takes on Akerman Senterfitt & Smith, Hiatt, Diaz Case v ABBY G. LOPEZ RE Purging Leaked Email
Motion to Intervene from the First Amendment Foundation below.
For complete background on this epic landmark case see here...
(be sure to get background at link if you already haven't)
If you know the details, check out our latest update below.
Told you all we had a big surprise coming on this case.
FIRST AMENDMENT FOUNDATION
336 E. College Avenue, Suite 101 Tallahassee, FL 32301-1554
(800) 337-3518 or (850) 222-3518
PRESS RELEASE
First Amendment Foundation Opposes Motion to Purge in Lopez Foreclosure Litigation
07 June 2012
The First Amendment Foundation has moved to intervene in the case of HSBC Bank USA v. Abby Lopez for the limited purpose of opposing closure of judicial records and proceedings.
Scripps Media, Inc. and the Sun-Sentinel Publishing Company have joined FAF in the motion which was filed yesterday in the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court in Palm Beach County. The FAF is opposing a motion by HSBC to purge email correspondence filed with the court eight months ago that shows confusion over who actually owns the mortgage that is the subject of the Lopez foreclosure proceeding. HSBC filed a Motion to Purge the emails claiming attorney/client privilege and at a scheduled hearing last week, an attorney for the plaintiff asked the judge to close the courtroom so the motion could be argued in private. The judge refused, and HSBC subsequently filed a Motion for In Camera Inspection and Hearing on the Motion to Purge.
There has been considerable public interest in questionable foreclosure practices throughout the state. The court record at issue here has itself been the subject of public debate and discussion. The FAF advocates for open court proceedings and is concerned about the attempt to purge information from a public court file. The FAF also seeks to ensure that proceedings concerning this issue are also conducted in open court.
There has been some press and blog coverage of this issue, and the documents HSBC seeks to purge have been posted on the internet:
Deanna Shullman of Thomas & LoCicero is representing FAF, Scripps Media, and the Sun-Sentinel.
The First Amendment Foundation, based in Tallahassee, is a private, non-partisan, not-for-profit organization that acts as an advocate for the public’s right to oversee its government through application of Florida’s open government laws.
For additional information, please contact Barbara Petersen at 800/337-3518.
###
Good luck on "purging" this Akerman...
See ya at the hearing...
Motion to Intervene from the First Amendment Foundation and accompanying documents below...
www.4closureFraud.org
Motion to Intervene from the First Amendment Foundation
Akerman Motion to Close the Court
Internal Emails Pg 1 - Foreclosed in Wrong Party Name
Internal Emails Pg 2 - Foreclosed in Wrong Party Name
»
- advertisements -
Land of the illegaly foreclosed upon?
i love you 4closurefraud!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! when the news is 99% bad regarding the bush crime syndicate's war on america, it is nice to hear when some citizens grow a pair and stand up to the nazi menace.....when a president sits with the cia thugs to target persons for murder, it is high time that people start fighting back....
My prediction: Judge closes hearing, and purges email. Homeowner loses in SJ hearing, and house is foreclosed. Public yawns and moves on.
From nakedcapitalism.com/Friday
In a unanimous decision, the Alabama Court of Civil Appeals reversed a lower court decision on a foreclosure case, U.S. Bank v. Congress and remanded the case to trial court.
We’d flagged this case as important because to our knowledge, it was the first to argue what we call the New York trust theory, namely, that the election to use New York law in the overwhelming majority of mortgage securitizations meant that the parties to the securitization could operate only as stipulated in the pooling and servicing agreement that created that particular deal. Over 100 years of precedents in New York have produced well settled case law that deems actions outside what the trustee is specifically authorized to do as “void acts” having no legal force. The rigidity of New York trust has serious implications for mortgage securitizations. The PSAs required that the notes (the borrower IOUs) be transferred to the trust in a very specific fashion (endorsed with wet ink signatures through a particular set of parties) before a cut-off date, which typically was no later than 90 days after the trust closing. The problem is, as we’ve described in numerous posts, that there appears to have been massive disregard in the securitization for complying with the contractual requirements that they established and appear to have complied with, at least in the early years of the securitization industry. It’s difficult to know when the breakdown occurred, but it appears that well before 2004-2005, many subprime originators quit bothering with the nerdy task of endorsing notes and completing assignments as the PSAs required; they seemed to take the position they could do that right before foreclosure. Indeed, that’s kosher if the note has not been securitized, but as indicated above, it is a no-go with a New York trust. There is no legal way to remedy the problem after the fact.
The solution in the Congress case appears to have been a practice that has since become troublingly become common: a fabricated allonge. An allonge is an attachment to a note that is so firmly affixed that it can’t travel separately. The fact that a note was submitted to the court in the Congress case and an allonge that fixed all the problems appeared magically, on the eve of trial, looked highly sus. The allonge also contained signatures that looked less than legitimate: they were digitized (remember, signatures as supposed to be wet ink) and some were shrunk to fit signature lines. These issues were raised at trial by Congress’s attorneys, but the fact that the magic allonge appeared the Thursday evening before Memorial Day weekend 2011 when the trial was set for Tuesday morning meant, among other things, that defense counsel was put on the back foot (for instance, how do you find and engage a signature expert on such short notice? Answer, you can’t).
It will become increasingly apparent as this motion is heard, that criminality will be exposed and the whole house of cards will come crashing down renewing the faith back into our justice system... Oh wait!... that only happens with Perry Mason... Sorry, I got our justice system confused with a old 1950's TV show....