I read through this transcript. I was struck by what seemed to be rule and evidentiary issues on the part of the borrowers attorney. I’m definitely “pro-borrower,” but it looks like the court could have easily ruled for plaintiff as a result of these issues.
My opinion is that our system is not geared towards, or based in, finding the truth and the facts. Instead it is based on adherence to the rules. Violate the rules and it doesn’t matter what the facts are – you won’t be allowed to present them to the court.
I don’t believe it is possible to know the rules TOO well. In fact, if you know them better than opposing counsel you might just beat ’em with the rules (of course, most defendants in foreclosures also have the truth and facts on their side also).
I read through this transcript. I was struck by what seemed to be rule and evidentiary issues on the part of the borrowers attorney. I’m definitely “pro-borrower,” but it looks like the court could have easily ruled for plaintiff as a result of these issues.
My opinion is that our system is not geared towards, or based in, finding the truth and the facts. Instead it is based on adherence to the rules. Violate the rules and it doesn’t matter what the facts are – you won’t be allowed to present them to the court.
I don’t believe it is possible to know the rules TOO well. In fact, if you know them better than opposing counsel you might just beat ’em with the rules (of course, most defendants in foreclosures also have the truth and facts on their side also).