Glaski v. Bank of America, N.A. | Petition for Rehearing DENIED . . .

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Glaski v. Bank of America, N.A. | Petition for Rehearing DENIED

Glaski v. Bank of America, N.A. | Petition for Rehearing DENIED

08/27/2013 pro hac vice granted The ex parte applications of Leah Litman, Noah Levine and Alan E. Schoenfeld to appear pro hac vice, filed by respondents on August 23, 2013, are hereby granted. (JAA)
08/29/2013 Order denying rehearing petition filed.     JAA

Here is a recap:

  1. GLASKI v. BANK OF AMERICA || APPELLANT’S OPENING BRIEF ** RESPONDENTS’ BRIEF ** APPELLANT’S REPLY BRIEF (17.5) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE…
  2. Glaski v. Bank of America CA5 (5th APPELLATE DISTRICT) | Securitization FAIL(ed) — NY Trust Law APPLIED — Quiet Title and a HOST of other “Causes” REVERSED and REMANDED — Homeowner UTTERLY DEFEATS JP Morgan (12.4) INTRODUCTION  Before Washington Mutual Bank, FA (WaMu) was seized by…
  3. PUBLISHED! Glaski v. Bank of America CA5 (5th APPELLATE DISTRICT) | Securitization FAIL(ed) — NY Trust Law APPLIED — Quiet Title and a HOST of other “Causes” REVERSED and REMANDED — Homeowner UTTERLY DEFEATS JP Morgan (12.3)
© 2010-17 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Comments

comments

This post was written by:

- who has written 8713 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA.

CONTROL FRAUD | ‘If you don’t look; you don’t find, Wherever you look; you will find’ -William Black

Contact the author

6 Responses to “Glaski v. Bank of America, N.A. | Petition for Rehearing DENIED”

  1. WOO HOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Bring on the trumpets! Thank God!!

  2. Mike says:

    most people have know I idea what this means.
    Would be nice to add some commentary before the post.

  3. Texas T says:

    BOA attorneys argued that the trust was under Delaware law vs New York. So my question is how does one know what law governs the MBS trusts their mortgage was supposedly assigned to years and years after the closing date?

    Is it a legitimate fact they brought up just another wrench they are trying to throw in as a last ditch effort?

    Excited to hear a rehearing was denied!

  4. Bob Hurt says:

    Just watch and wait. The bank will correct its paperwork and pursue foreclosure again, and win. The Glaski ruling is an anomaly, not a harbinger of judicial insanity in the form of letting people steal houses. Glaski has spent a wad of dough litigating, and has a temporary win. Glaski will end up losing the house to foreclosure IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DEED OF TRUST AND NOTE.

    Only one means exists to get financial compensation or the house free and clear from the bank: get the mortgage comprehensively examined by a competent professional, then attack the lender or lender’s agents for the underlying causes of action.

  5. Sarah says:

    Gee whiz Bob, I ain’t no lawyer either but to imply this is a theft of house sounds particularly biased. There’s a whole peanut gallery out there of vested interests who scoff at things like debtor injury, fairness, human rights. Failure to comply with the terms of the PSA potentially means that the party claiming ownership of a loan may not in fact have obtained those rights, and there we go.

  6. Barb says:

    The banks and the Federal Reserve (which is NOT a Federal entity but owned by the largest banks) have stolen from the American people and have made Billions of dollar at our expense. It’s time we fight back! If you want to read a book that explains the whole mortgage fraud and deception, purchased “Clouded Titles” by Dave Krieger. You will be shaking your head wondering how this ever happened and how they are still getting away with it. And they will until we stick together and FIGHT BACK!

Trackbacks/Pingbacks


Leave a Reply

GARY DUBIN LAW OFFICES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HAWAII and CALIFORNIA
Advertise your business on StopForeclosureFraud.com

Archives