Christiana Trust Lacks Standing: One More Time With Feeling

“We have repeatedly stated that a crucial element in any mortgage foreclosure proceeding is that the party seeking foreclosure must demonstrate that it has standing to foreclose,” Klingensmith wrote, citing cases from 2012 and 2015. “As always, a party must have standing to file suit at its inception and may not remedy this defect by subsequently obtaining standing.”

“If you see someone trip and fall outside a supermarket, you don’t get to sue for damages caused by the negligence of the supermarket, if there was any. Only the person who slipped and fell could possibly have any action if they can prove negligence and damages. … At some point there must be official recognition that the banks are gaming the system improperly, fraudulently, wrongfully and so are their lawyers. Intentionally thrusting unauthroized foreclosures on an overburdened court without telling the Judge about the issues of standing might be more than just grounds for dismissal of the foreclosure.” — Neil Garfield

THE FOLLOWING ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.

—————-
The Appellate Courts are getting increasingly annoyed at the banks and servicers. Multiple opinions have been issued removing all possible doubt as to whether a party without standing can file a lawsuit. The answer is “no” and has been “no” for years.
Yet banks and servicers continue to violate this black letter standard routinely. In this case the court adopted some of the attitude of irritation revealed in the Jesinoski Supreme Court decision in January 2015. It appears, like the Jesinoski court, that the irritation of this appellate court extends far beyond the banks to the trial judges and bank lawyers.
Trial judges have been on notice of this requirement for years but continue to ignore it. It is up to the trial judge to satisfy the court that standing exists and not merely that a foreclosure has been filed. Trial judges have consistently erred by straying from the basic requirement of foreclosure, which is equitable in nature. Trial judges should be scrutinizing the paperwork regardless of whether the case is contested or not.
The reason that the banks keep doing it though is because statistically speaking, it works. Since the great majority of foreclosures are uncontested, there is nobody to raise the issue of whether the Plaintiff had standing. Hence if they lose a few as a cost of doing business, they can still push through thousands of foreclosures without standing to sue.
The OTHER mistake consistently made by the courts is conflating proof with allegations. If the trust, bank or servicer makes the right allegations, they still must actually prove it. There is no presumption regarding the allegations except in a motion to dismiss. Instead Judges have routinely applied nonexistent legal presumptions and arrived at the conclusion that somehow standing was established and that the Plaintiff had standing before the filing of the lawsuit — despite all evidence to the contrary — or as in this case, despite the lack of evidence.
Christiana Trusts appear to be among the worst offenders. What the 4th DCA is saying here is that they have had enough, we must return to the rule of law,  and its time for lawyers, judges and everyone else to get on board. Unlike the trial judges who have seen their role as ministerial to “get the foreclosure done” the appellate court takes a longer view. If there was no standing at the commencement of the lawsuit, the judgment is simply void. Jurisdictional issues can be raised at any time.If the judgment was void, then so was the sale, despite Florida law to the contrary — because to say otherwise is to allow a business plan of fraud on the court in order to pursue an extreme sanction against the homeowner who frankly does not know who is entitled to payment, much less who can sue him or her for payments.
In this case Christiana failed to show that it was the owner of the debt — the most basic issue in suing. If you see someone trip and fall outside a supermarket, you don’t get to sue for damages caused by the negligence of the supermarket, if there was any. You can only sue if YOU slipped and fell. The banks know this, their lawyers know it but they are willfully ignoring it because the way our courts are working presently, the banks still win cases 20 to 1 because there is nobody showing up to contest standing or who even know what standing is. At some point there must be official recognition that the banks are gaming the system improperly, fraudulently, wrongfully and so are their lawyers. Intentionally thrusting unauthroized foreclosures on an overburdened court without telling the Judge about the issues of standing might be more than just grounds for dismissal of the foreclosure.

36 Responses

  1. Fair use:
    .. particularized, an injury must affect the plaintiff “in a personal and individual way.” … concrete, an injury must “actually exist”; it must be “real.”

    from jdsupra article about CFPB filing a supplementary amicus brief in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit in Bock v. Pressler & Pressler, LLP

  2. Okay so wordpress doesn’t like the word demo-n.
    As if I was calling someone a friend of Satan or something
    so it would not take the word demo-n-strate, and I didn’t know until I pieced out the case cite.
    So It kept me from posting the entire case in one posting.
    Now that I know what word prohibited me from posting, I will do it again
    so remove the – (hyphens) in de-mon-strate to have the proper wording in the suit.

    I would not call anyone a de-mon but there must be issue with the word..

    Here is the info again –

    A party has standing to file suit if it can de-mon-strate
    (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

  3. A party has standing to file suit if it can de-monstrate

  4. (1) an “injury in fact”,

  5. i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;

  6. (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and

  7. (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.

  8. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

  9. Standing is so important the Supreme Court discussed it and so have many other courts. A judge has immunity when they have both personal and subject matter jurisdiction.

    Absent both, they are acting ministerial or as Neil put it:
    Unlike the trial judges who have seen their role as ministerial to “get the foreclosure done…

    Unfortunately, the jurisdictional challenge has to be raised, and if most of the people don’t even show up to the court to deal with a language the do not know, and I don’t blame them; there is less likely this challenge is made, and if attempted in a language we don’t know; it may not be raised properly. Lucky for us it can be raised at any time, which at least gives us time to learn a little about the language to try to raise it, and can probably equitable toll the suit, because what you don’t have when you start, all the time in the world will not give it to you.

  10. Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

  11. To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue.
    Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.”
    High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876.

  12. Standing is so important the Supreme Court discussed it and so have many other courts. A judge has immunity when they have both personal *and* subject matter jurisdiction.

    Absent both, they are acting ministerial or as Neil put it:
    Unlike the trial judges who have seen their role as ministerial to “get the foreclosure done…

    Unfortunately, the jurisdictional challenge has to be raised, and if most of the people don’t even show up to the court to deal with a language the do not know, and I don’t blame them; there is less likely this challenge is made, and if attempted in a language we don’t know; it may not be raised properly. Lucky for us it can be raised at any time, which at least gives us time to learn a little about the language to try to raise it, and can probably equitable toll the suit, because what you don’t have when you start, all the time in the world will not give it to you.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate
    (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue.
    Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.”
    High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, State, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  13. Standing is so important the Supreme Court discussed it and so have many other courts. A judge has immunity when they have both personal *and* subject matter jurisdiction.

    Absent both, they are acting ministerial or as Neil put it:
    Unlike the trial judges who have seen their role as ministerial to “get the foreclosure done…

    Unfortunately, the jurisdictional challenge has to be raised, and if most of the people don’t even show up to the court to deal with a language the do not know, and I don’t blame them; there is less likely this challenge is made, and if attempted in a language we don’t know; it may not be raised properly. Lucky for us it can be raised at any time, which at least gives us time to learn a little about the language to try to raise it, and can probably equitable toll the suit, because what you don’t have when you start, all the time in the world will not give it to you.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate
    (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue.
    Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.”
    High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, State, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  14. Standing is so important the Supreme Court discussed it and so have many other courts. A judge has immunity when they have both personal *and* subject matter jurisdiction.

    Absent both, they are acting ministerial or as Neil put it:
    Unlike the trial judges who have seen their role as ministerial to “get the foreclosure done…

    Unfortunately, the jurisdictional challenge has to be raised, and if most of the people don’t even show up to the court to deal with a language the do not know, and I don’t blame them; there is less likely this challenge is made, and if attempted in a language we don’t know; it may not be raised properly. Lucky for us it can be raised at any time, which at least gives us time to learn a little about the language to try to raise it, and can probably equitable toll the suit, because what you don’t have when you start, all the time in the world will not give it to you.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate
    (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue.
    Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at
    876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, State, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  15. Standing is so important the Supreme Court discussed it and so have many other courts. A judge has immunity when they have both personal *and* subject matter jurisdiction.

    Absent both, they are acting ministerial or as Neil put it:
    Unlike the trial judges who have seen their role as ministerial to “get the foreclosure done…

    Unfortunately, the jurisdictional challenge has to be raised, and if most of the people don’t even show up to the court to deal with a language the do not know, and I don’t blame them; there is less likely this challenge is made, and if attempted in a language we don’t know; it may not be raised properly. Lucky for us it can be raised at any time, which at least gives us time to learn a little about the language to try to raise it, and can probably equitable toll the suit, because what you don’t have when you start, all the time in the world will not give it to you.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a
    two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76,
    101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of
    interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue.
    Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly
    traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the
    requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702,
    725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered
    from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at
    876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, State, People, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  16. Neidermeyer,
    IANAL, and think it was Dr. Graves in the jurisdictionary tutorial that said, you can file a motion, but until there is a hearing, the court will not move.
    It’s FRCP 37 that deals with Motion to Compel from failure to participate in discovery, or whatever.

    If you scheduled a hearing and it was never heard, if you are the Plaintiff, it may be stuck on you, that you did not go back to the clerk to reschedule to have it heard. If Discovery was for a specific time and not extended, because I think you move the court (motion) to extend the time to get the things you need, before time runs out.
    If you are not the moving party, you may have the opportunity to move the court, (motion) for a summary judgment on the matter as if the Plaintiff didn’t have the information to prove up their claim and so they avoided discovery.

    You can also give the other side that 21 day warning that you will ask the court for sanctions, but drafting your own motion for sanctions of (whatever your grounds are for asking), and mail it to them certified, or regular first class with a certificate of mailing, form 3817, costs about one buck and 30 cents, but a postal worker will handle that piece at the window and verify send and receive addresses, and postal stamp the form with the date they handled that piece and verified the mailing.
    It’s like a certificate of service on a legal document except the post office is giving their certificate that you did send it. The first class envelope has no markings on it, and the other side has no idea the post office certified that you sent a mailpiece to them.

    If they don’t move after that warning you will ask for sanctions, you may want to see if they’ll push back and ask for sanctions on you for not pushing the motion to compel through. [I guess sanctions can go both ways].

    Anyway, IANAL, so it’s all education and school of hard knocks experience from here.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  17. rescap/ and affiliates, in the bk of gmac, may 2012. with claims of over 500 billion. making it the largest ever bk. so they take our mortgage notes and mortgages , ( steal them ) then go out and sell them for all jacked up appraisals numbers, then they go out and borrow money on them, using them as collactateral, also from other investors, banks, then they go belly up, BK. and they all settled. no one except for the insurance company, investor, should be coming to homeowners . if that, because they have been paid many times.

    but no trust, or bank can say they didn’t get paid.

    that included .
    1
    The Debtors are: Ditech, LLC; DOA Holding Properties, LLC; DOA Holdings NoteCo, LLC; DOA Properties IX (Lots-Other), LLC; EPRE LLC; Equity Investment I, LLC; ETS of Virginia, Inc.; ETS of Washington, Inc.; Executive Trustee Services, LLC; GMAC Model Home Finance I, LLC; GMAC Mortgage USA Corporation; GMAC Mortgage, LLC; GMAC Residential Holding Company, LLC; GMACM Borrower LLC; GMACM REO LLC; GMACR Mortgage Products, LLC; GMAC-RFC Holding Company, LLC; GMACRH Settlement Services, LLC; HFN REO SUB II, LLC; Home Connects Lending Services, LLC; Homecomings Financial, LLC; Homecomings Financial Real Estate Holdings, LLC; Ladue Associates, Inc.; Passive Asset Transactions, LLC; PATI A, LLC; PATI B, LLC; PATI Real Estate Holdings, LLC; RAHI A, LLC; RAHI B, LLC; RAHI Real Estate Holdings, LLC; RCSFJV2004, LLC; Residential Accredit Loans, Inc.; Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc.; Residential Asset Securities Corporation; Residential Capital, LLC; Residential Consumer Services of Alabama, LLC; Residential Consumer Services of Ohio, LLC; Residential Consumer Services of Texas, LLC; Residential Consumer Services, LLC; Residential Funding Company, LLC; Residential Funding Mortgage Exchange, LLC; Residential Funding Mortgage Securities I, Inc.; Residential Funding Mortgage Securities II, Inc.; Residential Funding Real Estate Holdings, LLC; Residential Mortgage Real Estate Holdings, LLC; RFC Asset Holdings II, LLC; RFC Asset Management, LLC; RFC Borrower LLC; RFC Construction Funding, LLC; RFC REO LLC; RFC SFJV-2002, LLC; and RFC-GSAP Servicer Advance, LLC.

    “Causes of Action” means any and all Claims, actions, causes of action, choses in action, rights, demands, suits, claims, liabilities, encumbrances, lawsuits, adverse consequences, debts, damages, dues, sums of money, accounts, reckonings, deficiencies, bonds, bills, disbursements, expenses, losses, specialties, covenants, contracts, controversies, agreements, promises, variances, trespasses, judgments, remedies, rights of set-off, third- party claims, subrogation claims, contribution claims, reimbursement claims, indemnity claims, counterclaims, and cross-claims (including those of the Debtors, and/or the bankruptcy estate of any Debtor created pursuant to sections 301 and 541 of the Bankruptcy Code upon the commencement of the Chapter 11 Cases), whether known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen, suspected or unsuspected, liquidated or unliquidated, fixed or contingent, matured or unmatured, disputed or undisputed, whether held in a personal or representative capacity, that are or may be pending on the Effective Date or instituted after the Effective Date against any entity, based in law or equity, including under the Bankruptcy Code, whether direct, indirect, derivative, or otherwise and whether asserted or unasserted as of the date of entry of the Confirmation Order.

    EXECUTION VERSION

    TO BE SIGNED BY THE PARTIES

    IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE PETITION DATE

    SETTLEMENT AND PLAN SPONSOR AGREEMENT

    ——————————————————————————–

    THIS SETTLEMENT AND PLAN SPONSOR AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”), dated as of May 14, 2012 (the “Execution Date”), is made and entered into by and among Residential Capital, LLC and certain of its direct and indirect subsidiaries, as debtors and debtors-in-possession on behalf of each such entity and its estate (collectively, the “Debtors”),1 and Ally Financial Inc. (“AFI”), on behalf of its direct and indirect subsidiaries and affiliates other than the Debtors and the Debtors’ direct and indirect subsidiaries (collectively, “Ally”) (each of the Debtors and Ally is a “Party,” and collectively, the “Parties”).

    RECITALS

    WHEREAS, on the date hereof (the “ Petition Date”), each of the Debtors filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”) with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the “Bankruptcy Court”) commencing cases (the “Chapter 11 Cases”), which are proposed to be jointly administered for procedural purposes;

    WHEREAS, the Debtors believe certain claims exist against Ally related to the corporate relationship between the Debtors and Ally, including with respect to certain transactions between the Debtors and Ally, including equitable subordination, debt recharacterization, fraudulent conveyance, avoidance liability under federal or state laws, and other causes of action under theories of veil piercing and alter ego liability;

    WHEREAS, Ally denies each allegation of the Debtors and has substantial claims against the Debtors;

    ——————————————————————————–

    1
    The Debtors are: Ditech, LLC; DOA Holding Properties, LLC; DOA Holdings NoteCo, LLC; DOA Properties IX (Lots-Other), LLC; EPRE LLC; Equity Investment I, LLC; ETS of Virginia, Inc.; ETS of Washington, Inc.; Executive Trustee Services, LLC; GMAC Model Home Finance I, LLC; GMAC Mortgage USA Corporation; GMAC Mortgage, LLC; GMAC Residential Holding Company, LLC; GMACM Borrower LLC; GMACM REO LLC; GMACR Mortgage Products, LLC; GMAC-RFC Holding Company, LLC; GMACRH Settlement Services, LLC; HFN REO SUB II, LLC; Home Connects Lending Services, LLC; Homecomings Financial, LLC; Homecomings Financial Real Estate Holdings, LLC; Ladue Associates, Inc.; Passive Asset Transactions, LLC; PATI A, LLC; PATI B, LLC; PATI Real Estate Holdings, LLC; RAHI A, LLC; RAHI B, LLC; RAHI Real Estate Holdings, LLC; RCSFJV2004, LLC; Residential Accredit Loans, Inc.; Residential Asset Mortgage Products, Inc.; Residential Asset Securities Corporation; Residential Capital, LLC; Residential Consumer Services of Alabama, LLC; Residential Consumer Services of Ohio, LLC; Residential Consumer Services of Texas, LLC; Residential Consumer Services, LLC; Residential Funding Company, LLC; Residential Funding Mortgage Exchange, LLC; Residential Funding Mortgage Securities I, Inc.; Residential Funding Mortgage Securities II, Inc.; Residential Funding Real Estate Holdings, LLC; Residential Mortgage Real Estate Holdings, LLC; RFC Asset Holdings II, LLC; RFC Asset Management, LLC; RFC Borrower LLC; RFC Construction Funding, LLC; RFC REO LLC; RFC SFJV-2002, LLC; and RFC-GSAP Servicer Advance, LLC.

  18. Neidermeyer, hopefully you requested a schedule of the motion, otherwise it sits and the court does not move on it.
    They got it, they filed it, but you schedule it for hearing and the judge can make a decision with or without you present.

    It’s covered by your court rules, civil rules of civil procedures or federal rules of civil procedures, in the following link, you can seek Sanctions for their failure to comply, or maybe even file for a motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss, which ever direction you are trying to go.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37

    good luck

    I’m glad to see Neil says jurisdictional challenges can occur at any time.

    Standing is very important to subject matter jurisdiction.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue. Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  19. Neidermeyer, hopefully you requested a schedule of the motion, otherwise it sits and the court does not move on it.
    They got it, they filed it, but you schedule it for hearing and the judge can make a decision with or without you present.

    It’s covered by your court rules, civil rules of civil procedures or federal rules of civil procedures, in the following link, you can seek Sanctions for their failure to comply, or maybe even file for a motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss, which ever direction you are trying to go.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37

    might I suggest you check out wliyd on that web link with the words blog and talk and radio in it. Some of their audios discuss people being stuck just like you and more IANAL who for entertainment discuss ways to get past that brick wall.

    good luck

    I’m glad to see Neil says jurisdictional challenges can occur at any time.

    Standing is very important to subject matter jurisdiction.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue. Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  20. Neidermeyer, hopefully you requested a schedule of the motion, otherwise it sits and the court does not move on it.
    They got it, they filed it, but you schedule it for hearing and the judge can make a decision with or without you present.

    It’s covered by your court rules, civil rules of civil procedures or federal rules of civil procedures, in the following link, you can seek Sanctions for their failure to comply, or maybe even file for a motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss, which ever direction you are trying to go.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37

    might I suggest you check out wliyd on that web link with the words blog and talk and radio in it. Some of their audios discuss people being stuck just like you and more IANAL who for entertainment discuss ways to get past that brick wall.

    good luck

    I’m glad to see Neil says jurisdictional challenges can occur at any time.

    Standing is very important to subject matter jurisdiction.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue. Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  21. Neidermeyer, hopefully you requested a schedule of the motion, otherwise it sits and the court does not move on it.
    They got it, they filed it, but you schedule it for hearing and the judge can make a decision with or without you present.

    It’s covered by your court rules, civil rules of civil procedures or federal rules of civil procedures, in the following link, you can seek Sanctions for their failure to comply, or maybe even file for a motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss, which ever direction you are trying to go.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37

    might I suggest you check out wliyd on that web link with the words blog and talk and radio in it. Some of their audios discuss people being stuck just like you and more IANAL who for entertainment discuss ways to get past that brick wall.

    good luck

    I’m glad to see Neil says jurisdictional challenges can occur at any time.

    Standing is very important to subject matter jurisdiction.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests” protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue. Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  22. Neidermeyer, hopefully you requested a schedule of the motion, otherwise it sits and the court does not move on it.
    They got it, they filed it, but you schedule it for hearing and the judge can make a decision with or without you present.

    It’s covered by your court rules, civil rules of civil procedures or federal rules of civil procedures, in the following link, you can seek Sanctions for their failure to comply, or maybe even file for a motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss, which ever direction you are trying to go.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37

    might I suggest you check out wliyd on that web link with the words blog and talk and radio in it. Some of their audios discuss people being stuck just like you and more IANAL who for entertainment discuss ways to get past that brick wall.

    good luck

    I’m glad to see Neil says jurisdictional challenges can occur at any time.

    Standing is very important to subject matter jurisdiction.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue. Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876.

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  23. Neidermeyer, hopefully you requested a schedule of the motion, otherwise it sits and the court does not move on it.
    They got it, they filed it, but you schedule it for hearing and the judge can make a decision with or without you present.

    It’s covered by your court rules, civil rules of civil procedures or federal rules of civil procedures, in the following link, you can seek Sanctions for their failure to comply, or maybe even file for a motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss, which ever direction you are trying to go.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37

    might I suggest you check out wliyd on that web link with the words blog and talk and radio in it. Some of their audios discuss people being stuck just like you and more IANAL who for entertainment discuss ways to get past that brick wall.

    good luck

    I’m glad to see Neil says jurisdictional challenges can occur at any time.

    Standing is very important to subject matter jurisdiction.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Not one of the three, not two of the three, but all three elements establish standing. Absent that, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue. Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876. [emphasis mine]

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  24. Neidermeyer, hopefully you requested a schedule of the motion, otherwise it sits and the court does not move on it.
    They got it, they filed it, but you schedule it for hearing and the judge can make a decision with or without you present.

    It’s covered by your court rules, civil rules of civil procedures or federal rules of civil procedures, in the following link, you can seek Sanctions for their failure to comply, or maybe even file for a motion for summary judgment or motion to dismiss, which ever direction you are trying to go.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_37

    might I suggest you check out wliyd on that web link with the words blog and talk and radio in it. Some of their audios discuss people being stuck just like you and more IANAL who for entertainment discuss ways to get past that brick wall.

    good luck

    I’m glad to see Neil says jurisdictional challenges can occur at any time.

    Standing is very important to subject matter jurisdiction.

    A party has standing to file suit if it can demonstrate (1) an “injury in fact”, i.e., harm suffered by the Plaintiff that is concret and actual or imminent, not merely conjectural or hypothetical;
    (2) causation, i.e., a fairly traceable connection between the Plaintiff’s purported injury and the complained-of-conduct of the defendant; and
    (3) redressability, i.e., a likelihood that the requested relief will redress the alleged injury.
    Steel Co. v. Citizens for a better Env’t, 523 U.S. 82, 102, 118 S.Ct. 1003, 1016 (1998)

    Not one of the three, not two of the three, but all three elements establish standing. Absent that, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction

    Standing is a prerequisite to subject-matter jurisdiction, and subject-matter jurisdiction is essential to a court’s power to hear a case.
    Bland Independent School Dist. v. Blue, 34 S.W.3d 547, 553-54 (Tex. 2000).

    To establish individual standing, a party must satisfy both prongs of a two-pronged test. Branson v. Port of Seattle, 152 Wn.2d 862, 875-76, 101 P.3d 67 (2004). First, the party’s claim must fall within the “zone of interests”protected by the statute or constitutional provision at issue. Id. at 875. Second, the party must show some “personal injury fairly traceable to the challenged conduct and likely to be redressed by the requested relief.” High Tide Seafoods v. State, 106 Wn.2d 695, 702, 725 P.2d 411 (1986). In other words, the party must have “suffered from an injury in fact, economic or otherwise.” Branson, 152 Wn.2d at 876. [emphasis mine]

    Trespass Unwanted, Creator, Corporeal, Life, Free, People, Independent, State, In Jure Proprio, Jure Divino

  25. OFF SUBJECT :

    In a non foreclosure “ambulance chaser” case I’m involved in as dfdt … PLTF refuses to answer any discovery in a meaningful way. I filed MTN to COMPEL 18 months ago but got no action from the court..

    What To Do?

    I also recently filed a “Notice of Intent To Rely” ,,, on the non-answers from PLTF … does that sufficiently handcuff PLTF into not having anything to show as evidence/exhibits?

    Thanks … (and yes I know IANAL and neither are you..)

  26. Example,,,
    Bank of America knew CW was selling a paper bag and they bought it anyway? Advance Servicing Fees ?

    Partners in Crime….CW keeps the loot and BAC absorbs ..
    The Servicer,ING……

    Dirty Hands?

  27. Contract Law 101…Breech of Contract.

  28. Con me Once ?… Yes
    RECON me twice? NEVER! No Trust!

    No Servicer is a result of No Trust.
    No Servicer, No Trustee, No POA, NO ESCROW.

    NO ESCROW NO ESCROW NO ESCROW
    ESCROW DIDN’TCLOSE ..

  29. this (and any other precedent ) doesn’t work if you are in the 3rd court of appeal in florida. you can kill somebody in front of the judges and they will say you kill nobody.

    by the way if you are in florida be careful with the fraudulent factory of papers and dirty tactics from douglas c. zahm he changed its name to eXL Legal, PLLC , but is the same nasty thing .

  30. For several years running, I’ve paid my property insurance only to receive a refund check from my insurer with no explanation. When I inquire, they say the policy was paid by “xxxx” (whomever today claims to be my Servicer). I paid first. So, I tell my agent to refund their payment and accept mine, it’s my policy, and while you’re at it, remove the Servicer as benefactor of my policy (they are not the creditor). My agent tells me a refund can go only to the policy holder, so if they refunded the Servicers’ payment, it would be made out and mailed to me. Hmmm……

  31. It’s ALL FRAUD with these Banks who NEVER gave the PROPLE any $’s for their LOANS & HOMES!

    IT’s ALL FRAUD, & the REMEDY is HJR-192 and public law 73-10

    The BANKS NEVER LOANED you any money.

    “It’s your SIGNATURE that creates the money which makes you the CREDITOR, and the BANKS the DEBTOR.” 

    WAKE UP! And get out of their MATRIX of being hoodwinked & deceived by their system of deception & non disclosure.

    The courts have NO JURISDICTION over this. 

    Instead the courts try to hoodwink you with their MATRIX that you OWE the BANKS. 

    They’re on the same Team, which makes it a conflict of interest. 

    Who do you THINK that a JUDGE get paid from? 

    “A Bank, and most likely its Wells Fargo or Bank of America”

    Copy and paste the link below, and WAKE UP ALL that had their homes stolen.

    FIRE, and disband the WHOLE COURT system, and their fake PRIMA FARCIE LAWS…

    http://www.redeemthetruth.com/hjr–192-and-public-law-73-10.html

  32. The way I did it: First, I called the office in my county where property taxes are collected. I did send in my taxes, but I was trumped because the servicer paid it before I could. I called the Property Tax office again, and a woman (obviously with years of experience) told me that the servicers always pay in December. If I pay in November, I would beat them to it. Then, after that, I would receive the bill, and it would not go to Corelogic.

    Next, I called the insurance company who provides the homeowners’ insurance. They told me that per my request, I was to be the only person who receives the bill for the home insurance, not the servicer. My file was also flagged so that no one could call and inquire about anything with regard to my file WITHOUT MY SOLE PERMISSION.

    That’s my plan, and I am sticking to it.

  33. Shadowcat, how does one pay taxes if the servicer pays them thru escrow balance ??

  34. Manual Spell Checker Please..hahaha

  35. Excellent!!! Excellent!!!
    Christian Trust Braggers only have standing if you give it to them!

    Pay those Taxes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Redeem Redeem Redeem

    How Much does KC owe?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: