Call in and ask questions:
https://mail-attachment.googleusercontent.com/attachment/u/0/s/?view=att&th=13f8fedaa7af0881&attid=0.1&disp=attd&realattid=769b2943-c02d-4305-a586-1356d0456696&safe=1&zw&saduie=AG9B_P_DCkgli0FzdgKNROgb7CGn&sadet=1372509323342&sads=1tTrekRDYIBgvYQNSfys6ACI9N8&sadssc=1
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/senkalive/2013/06/30/you-can-write-off-our-homes-but-were-still-here-1
LISTEN: Danielle Kelley is rapidly ascending to the position of one of the leading foreclosure defense attorneys. She is a partner in Garfield, Gwaltney, Kelley and White a law firm based in Tallahassee, the state capital of Florida. The firm is expanding its presence throughout Florida and provides extensive litigation support to attorneys throughout the United States.
Sunday, June 30th at 1:00 pm EST
Danielle Joyner Kelley: An attorney from FL who is fighting her own foreclosure case and also assisting homeowners who are facing foreclosures, evictions. Attorney Kelley testified before the House Committee against Florida House Bill 87 which has since passed and been signed into law.
She also said: ”Don’t discount these foreclosure victims, you can write off their home with a foreclosure judgment but they are still there, as are their stories, and they will be told.”
Darrell and Jennifer Neilander (CT) are fighting the servicers SLS and the alleged fake creditors pro se in Federal Court under the FDCPA statues charging that these servicers and creditors are 3rd party debt collectors. They are the only Plaintiffs in Federal Court in Connecticut challenging these entities.
70 thoughts on “DANIELLE KELLEY, ESQ. ON BLOGTALKRADIO.COM 1P.M. Sunday, June 30”
http://deadlyclear.wordpress.com/2013/07/09/an-open-foreclosure-defense-letter-to-all-governors-wake-up/
Egg,
Points well taken. However, what i question is people who had a 13 year-long in court, got one of the worst possible ruling not just in the substance but in the form and stick around, just to bitch and moan non-stop, with no pending action, no strategy, nothing other than complaints, complaints, complaints and insults, insults, insults.
Come on! That language used by the judge is quite telling. I bet no ruling or judge decision in your case contained the words frivolous, vexatious or bad faith. This is as damning as it gets! I bet no opposing attorney begged you to get counsel. That too is damning: it tells me that both judge and attorneys felt Lane was incapable of focusing and/or following the rules.
i don’t excuse the court and I understand decisions are not fair. But as most say, we don’t have courts of justice. We have courts of law. Learn the laws, dammit! You did, didn’t you? And you have no qualms telling your story and admitting what you could have done differently. You have no problem telling people what didn’t work in your case. And you’re smart enough to get away from insulting and blaming everything and everyone for what happened to you.
Are you pissed? I bet you are! I never read anything in your posts about “commies”, “nazis”, “fascists”, “satan”, “evil” and such nonsense! It doesn’t add to the debate, doesn’t bring any info to the table, doesn’t serve any purpose other than inflame for the sake of inflaming. Childish and moronic.
Life is 10% what happens to you and 90% what you do with it. What does she do with it? Anything constructive? Even that unpublished book she allegedly wrote is an exercise in accusation and blame directed at one person. Where is the analysis of the situation? Look at the (alleged) title! Is there any real book out of the ordeal or is this just a bitching session like all the ones here? Anything that might give real information?
Zurr, ask yourself why so many people don’t post here anymore. And look at the answers she posted. Quite telling too, isn’t it? Stripper and her are two of a kind. Commiserating with each other while insulting everyone who doesn’t agree with their inane rehashing of TV. If it is representative of America, that’s pretty sad. Then I don’t wonder what went wrong: it is completely obvious.
Just to point out–I have signed up for a Word Press account and my user name is “eggsistense.” I normally post here under the nom de guerre “zurenarrh.”
I never felt that tnharry or Patrick Pulatie were particularly helpful. They struck me as bank shills trying to discourage people with their “realism.” I agree with you, Christine–pro se litigation isn’t for everybody. You really have to commit to it, and as you say, learn the rules of whatever court you’re in (including local rules and standing orders) or at least have them handy for quick reference.
That’s what I did in my case. I learned the hell out of the rules. I learned them so well that whenever I pointed out to the judge that Bank of America wasn’t following the rules, he would agree but always add that their failure to follow the rules did not prejudice me. That happened at least 2 or 3 times, maybe as many as 4 or 5 times (been a while since my case was dismissed so don’t remember exactly). It really got to be ridiculous, because by its very nature, the act of not following the rules results in prejudice. Otherwise, why have rules at all?
The judge himself did not follow the rules. There was a local standing order in my district that judges that held stock in any company that was a party to a suit over which they would preside had to recuse themselves automatically when first assigned the case. My judge did not do that-he held Bank of America stock and the case involved Bank of America. The lawyer I had at the time did not call the judge on that. What the judge DID do was put a stay on the case a couple months after it was assigned to him (and after he had denied our remand to state court), then at the end of that year (2009) he sold his Bank of America stock.
As Marilyn points out, the reason attorneys often don’t want to take on these cases is because they have to make a living and if they piss off the judges and opposing attorneys by really fighting for homeowners, their lives can be made really difficult even when they aren’t fighting foreclosure fraud. That’s why, as Marilyn says, pro se litigants are so important and in fact, necessary.
When I dumped my lawyer and proceeded pro se, I amended my attorney’s namby-pamby, punch-pulling complaint and went for the jugular. The only reason I lost was because they cheated–manufactured an endorsement on a note right at the end of case, two weeks before the scheduled trial that never happened. The judge went so far as to say in writing that had that note not suddenly appeared, I would have won at least the quiet title portion of the case.
One last thing about whether or not a lawyer and good pleadings really make or break a case: at the summary judgment hearing I had, Bank of America’s lawyer got up and the first words out of his mouth were “Your honor, I have done a very poor job of presenting the facts in this case.” He then went on to produce the fake endorsed note, without a shred of authentication, which led to the case dragging on for another five months because of my motion to strike that note. And the judge bought his whole sob story! If lawyers and pleadings are so important, why didn’t the judge just tell the BoA lawyer to go fuck himself? That’s what he would’ve told me!
But the point is, a Bank of America attorney threw himself on the mercy of the court and pretended that he had done a bad job! I never once did that! In fact, at the hearing there was a good bit of discussion about notes and mortgages and how they are transferred and so forth–the judge at one point turned to me and said, “Don’t you think you might be a little confused about how these documents move?” I looked him right in the eye and said “No, your honor, I am not confused at all. The mortgage follows the note and an assignment of the mortgage or deed of trust alone is not permissible.” The judge even agreed with the first part of that statement in his final order dismissing all my claims with prejudice. He then went on to contradict himself in that same order by saying that even though the mortgage follows the note, it is perfectly acceptable for Fannie Mae to be the note holder at all relevant times while the mortgage/DOT is transferred via MERS to BoA.
And come to think… There used to be some serious people on this site. A few attorneys were regulars and gave pretty good advice. or came up with decent analyses. Tnharry, DCB, Bob, Patrick, others who’ve been gone for so long, I forgot the names. Homeowners who had gone through it and had the humility to say: “It didn’t work for me. Here is what I did and where i believe i went wrong. Don’t do it.” Anonymous was a regular and although we didn’t see eye to eye on everything, she was (and still is) fighting with the strategy she chose for herself.
What’s left of all those people? They’re gone. Still doing what they did but… not here. There is a reason for that: this site has become the meeting point of losers, chronic complainers, maladjusted and weirdos who systematically refuse to take action, can’t get over what they went throughy or are simply here to create mayhem.
Maybe this country is simply getting what it deserves after all. One thing is sure: until it stops looking for the past and starts seeing the opportunity in what is currently going on while taking responsibility for its future, this country will never get out of it slump. ‘Cuz every time you look back at what was (and will never, ever be again. Deal with it and move on!), you turn the back to your future. So, go back to CNN, MSN and Kudlow if you wish. The world is moving very fast with or without you. It ain’t gonna move without me!
And incidentally… the reason this country is becoming a police-state is because of the excesses of all those morons who have “rights” but won’t assume their responsibilities. You destroyed your country by being spoiled, ignorant, bigotted and closed-minded. Deal with it. And see what the future holds for you.
” Actually, filing a suit pro se should be an advantage because according to US Supreme Court precedent, judges are required to liberally construe the pleadings, briefs and allegations of pro se litigants” My point exactly.
When a judge use the language in that Astoria case, you can bet your boots that the pro se’s conduct was such in court and out that she was pissed. Likewise for attorneys asking her to get representation. They couldn’t deal with her antics. I have seen it often with mental cases!
Now, instead of recognizing it, ML has been consistently been blaming everybody but herself for having tackled something she wasn’t capable of. I wouldn’t mind if people took responsibility for their actions and tried to understand the results they got. To flat out blame everyone all the time for everything they got is ridiculous and insane. To further come here and insult anyone who ever so slightly questions her is even worse! She lost and she has no way of regaining anything. She has nothing to contribute to people who are deeply into the fight. And especially she has no right to come here and bitch all the time if whe won’t admit that she goofed. It’s called human decency.
I agree–the in-fighting here is hard to take. Christine, the way we know that pleadings don’t matter a whole lot is that even lawyers (who presumably write pleadings superior to a pro se litigant) regularly lose. Just read Matt Weidner’s site. He talks about it all the time (well, not all the time, but you know what I mean).
That’s how we know the judges are the problem. Actually, filing a suit pro se should be an advantage because according to US Supreme Court precedent, judges are required to liberally construe the pleadings, briefs and allegations of pro se litigants (Haines v. Kerner being one example of such precedent).
i remember the first time i noticed Christine on this site when she she wrote this country is done with, get used to it. and I thought what an attitude -the enemy from within.
and the more i read from her the more my first instincts about her are correct.
my case is a good example of what we are all up against in this foreclosure fight.
Years back when the corrupt attorneys from the bank hid four of my mortgage checks, judge Miller of nysc gave me fourteen counterclaims against the bank for Fraud, malfeasance etc. When the attorneys got to
her she reversed herself and i went to the ny District Attorney. Looking
at my evidence they said you did a good job of catching her and report Judge Miller and the attorneys. I did. and judge miller retired. Because the fraud was perperetrated by a Federal Bank they sent me to Janet Reno .
The attorneys who are fighting the corruption in the Courts have alot to lose, they could lose their license. pro se Litigants can bring the bullying and fraud of the corrupt judges out without as bad of a consequence as for an attorney
The courts are doing everything to get the pro ses out of representing themselves. We are a problem to them. let me repeat going pro se is certainally not for everyone. As annoying as Stripes and I appear to some of you, this is the relentless fight you need in you to go pro se.
you are all lucky when you have an attorney. you can duck behind him
or her. when the shots come flying from the courts.
i still own my two condos and only lost possesssion of them. Judge Schlesinger and Judge David Saxe among other judges I imagine are watching the whole fight going on on the internet. and i don’t think they ever thought i would be in on it cause in the court room although i am very direct in presenting my facts, i am very quiet, polite and subduded.
Christine is an enemy and a plant on this site .
I suggest you read and look for the fact that my case was under Federal jurisdiction on the date a ny judge Carol Arbor signed the two void foreclosure judgments.and you will see what brought judge Schlesinger and judge Saxe to rally together against my fight that the Court obey the rights given all of us in the Constitution.
if this illegal ruling by judge Schlesinger stands it destroys The Supremacy Clause of our Constitution and the March 3rd 1875 Act of Congress which states; It was the duty of the State Court to accept a petition and PROCEED NO FURTHER IN SUCH SUIT C137,Sect.3 Stat., pt 3 P 470. The Record vested the Federal Court with complete jurisdiction.
rbtfnomore,
True. And bad advice that hurts homeowners should be called for what it is. Too much of that has been spread on this site already and if homeowners get a bad rap, it didn’t happen overnight.
The real fighters need to know what doesn’t work in order to learn not to repeat it. Too many people on this site lost and come back here, not to share what they did poorly or what didn’t work but to bitch and moan against lawyers and judges and to berate and argue with those who are in still the fight.
Nothing happens in a vacuum. Reread Schlesinger’s decision. Tell me it wasn’t incredibly damaging for homeowners as a group.
I hate to say it… But I’ve grown tired of the petty back and forth on this blog. KC, stripes, Marilyn, Christine, and Poppy: please remember we share the same mission. Don’t belittle others’ efforts, nor downplay the enormous undertaking it is to fight the behemoth banks to save our homes. We may each approach it differently, but what is important is that we SHARE our successes and failures with each other. In this way, we can help each other move up the learning curve more quickly, thus leading to more wins! A win for any homeowner is a rarity – we know the cards are stacked against us from the onset. However, even the battles we lose sometimes provide invaluable affidavits and depositions which make the next homeowner’s battle a little easier. Please remember the purpose and mission of the site when commenting. This isn’t a platform for personal political beliefs. This injustice we are facing (foreclosure, bank fraud, etc.) spans all parties, regions, races, socio-economic levels… It should unite us in our purpose. United we stand, divided we fall! I personally applaud every one of you for taking up the fight in the first place. 🙂 but please stop ruining this site with negativity and in-fighting.
Darn it, I left out the best! I would be tempted to call this… juicy!
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/30/us-usa-eu-spying-idUSBRE95T09C20130630
Martin Schulz, president of the EU Parliament and also a German, said if the report was correct, it would have a “severe impact” on relations between the EU and the United States.
He told French radio the United States had crossed a line.
“I was always sure that dictatorships, some authoritarian systems, tried to listen … but that measures like that are now practiced by an ally, by a friend, that is shocking, in the case that it is true,” Schulz said in an interview with France 2.
Some EU policymakers said talks for a free trade agreement between Washington and the EU should be put on ice until further clarification from the United States.
“Partners do not spy on each other,” the European commissioner for justice and fundamental rights, Viviane Reding, said at a public event in Luxembourg on Sunday.
“We cannot negotiate over a big transatlantic market if there is the slightest doubt that our partners are carrying out spying activities on the offices of our negotiators,” Reding said in comments passed on to reporters by her spokeswoman.
The European Parliament’s foreign affairs committee head Elmar Brok, from Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats, echoed those views.
“The spying has taken on dimensions that I would never have thought possible from a democratic state,” he told Der Spiegel.
“How should we still negotiate if we must fear that our negotiating position is being listened to beforehand?”
How to speed up the demise of a once-great countries and make permanent enemies of the few allies you had left…
Nope. I don’t see how war monger US could possibly start a new one at this juncture. Very optimistic indeed about our future. Not so much about this country.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/30/us-usa-eu-spying-idUSBRE95T09C20130630
EU confronts U.S. over reports it spies on European allies
BRUSSELS/BERLIN | Sun Jun 30, 2013 4:07pm EDT
(Reuters) – The European Union has demanded that the United States explain a report in a German magazine that Washington is spying on the group, using strong language to confront its closest trading partner over its alleged surveillance activities.
EU High Representative Catherine Ashton said on Sunday the U.S. authorities was immediately contacted about a report in Der Spiegel magazine that the U.S. spy agency had tapped EU offices in Washington, Brussels and at the United Nations.
“As soon as we saw these reports, the European External Action Service made contact with the U.S. authorities in both Washington D.C. and Brussels to seek urgent clarification of the veracity of and facts surrounding these allegations,” Ashton said in a statement.
“The U.S. authorities have told us they are checking on the accuracy of the information released yesterday and will come back to us as soon as possible,” she said.
France also asked for an explanation.
“These acts, if confirmed, would be completely unacceptable,” Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said.
The U.S. government said it would respond through diplomatic channels.
“We will also discuss these issues bilaterally with EU member states,” a spokesperson for the Director of National Intelligence said.
“While we are not going to comment publicly on specific alleged intelligence activities, as a matter of policy we have made clear that the United States gathers foreign intelligence of the type gathered by all nations.”
Der Spiegel reported on Saturday that the National Security Agency bugged EU offices and gained access to EU internal computer networks, the latest revelation of alleged U.S. spying that has prompted outrage from EU politicians.
The magazine followed up on Sunday with a report that the U.S. agency taps half a billion phone calls, emails and text messages in Germany in a typical month, much more than any other European peer and similar to the data tapped in China or Iraq.
It also uses data from Internet hubs in south and west Germany that organize data traffic to Syria and Mali.
Revelations about the U.S. surveillance program, which was made public by fugitive former NSA contractor Edward Snowden, have raised a furor in the United States and abroad over the balance between privacy rights and national security.
The extent to which Washington’s EU allies are being monitored has emerged as an issue of particular concern.
“If the media reports are correct, this brings to memory actions among enemies during the Cold War. It goes beyond any imagination that our friends in the United States view the Europeans as enemies,” said German Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger.
“If it is true that EU representations in Brussels and Washington were indeed tapped by the American secret service, it can hardly be explained with the argument of fighting terrorism,” she said in a statement.
Learn the rules of procedure. Then you can assert your rights. Imbecile.
Gawd have mercy on us. Or let them rot and lose it all.
Christine
you don’t know what you are talking about saying that i didn’t use the right procedure. ny courts sell books of proceedure. if you have another issue on a prodedural issue the clerks will help. Ihey will
NOT TELL you what your case is, you must do the research or decide your motions yourself. .
From the Appellate court up i spendt thousands upon thousands of dollars with one of ny’s finest appellate printers dollars and then fees and fed ex. so don’t tell me get to know proceedure.
you are a dodo. i am going to sleep
Imbecile. Learn the rules of procedure.
Christine there was nothing wrong my proceedure, my motions or anything else, in new york its the corruption in the Court. period.
and once money hungry JUDGE SCHLESINGER TOOK A BRIBE ALL IS IN PLACE FOR judge David B Saxe of the appellate court to defiantly rules against the law of the Constitution. But that got him nervous cause he could get caught so he changed the dates of my Federal petition in his discision..
Read it again. and again. Christine till you understand how the ny courts are run. if you speak in clear english the judge understands . When a Judges seem to not understand the issue and not rule right. 99% of the time it is not the motions it is the Court.
To all who are fighting in earnest and must do it pro se for want of an attorney:
I posted that Marilyn Lane decision for a reason. If you want to have a crack at winning, if you even want to have just a crack at sitting down at the table with the bank’s attorneys and saying your piece, if you want to be listened to and heard, if you want a crack at negotiating anything:
Follow the rules of procedure. Read them, learn them, follow them. Flapping your wings in every direction with no understanding whatsoever of how the game is played is playing Russian roulette. And if a judge, any judge, uses the kind of language Schlesinger used, in writing and in a decision that is bound to be read by many attorneys, understand that it is bad. Very bad. Very, very bad. I don’t care how corrupt judges are. Such a decision, using such a language, is terrible.
Any attorney getting that kind of decision in a case he pleaded would almost surely be disbarred for gross incompetence. Please, use discernment. Or… follow the likes of Marlyn lane and Stripes at your own risks.
UKG: do me a favor please. Run that decision by your attorney and ask her what she thinks went through that judge’s head. After you’re both done rolling on the floor laughing, of course.
It’s insane. No wonder banks have been winning all along!!!
read this before you fall Christine’s opinion
If the banks original attorneys had not hidden four checks and faked a default and obtained fraudulent judgments I never would have been in Federal court nor would I have written a book summarizing my case and sending it to Federal judges and the bank would not be out $436 million dollars and the bank would not have new attorneys..
Too bad I didn’t know of Lynn Szymoniak then. Anytime you save the government money you get a percentage. My original thought was no one is going to do this to me without a fight and what a fight it has been but I will fight on.
And Christine in not going to tell Stripes or I not to fight
Anyone in new york should be prepared for thisWIDESPREAD CORRUPTION IN THE UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM CONTAMINATED BY SOME ROTTEN APPLE JUDGES AND CROOKED, SOCIOPATH LAWYERS
June 10, 2013 By admin
New York City is one of the greatest Cities in the World. If you can make it there you can make it anywhere—So they say.
Fortunes are made and lost in NYC. Billionaires from all over the Planet come to NYC and plunk-down millions for an apartment in The Big Apple. At last count we are told that a penthouse
changed hands for over $95Million.
New
york boasts that it has the best of everything, and for the most part that is true, until someone finds themselves the subject of a NY State Court Litigation or a Surrogates Court Matter.
What the super rich from lands beyond and the not so super rich
dont usually know is the fact that the NYC Courts are polluted with some very corrupt and despicable Judges, Referees and Clerks. Of course this is not new, as Court corruption has been ongoing in NYC since “Boss-Tweed” and his Successors. The main problem is the farsical and archaic manner NY Judges are installed in such a powerful and autominous position. Worse the supposed Commission on Judicial Conduct is a toothless Tiger who takes little or no action against Judges who were installed as part of the corrupt Political Machine in NYC, Brooklyn, Nassau and Westchester, etc. They pick on local part-timers to look like they are doing something. In reality the Commission is a joke.
The Unified Court System in NYC has many fine and dedicated Judges, but they are the minority to the vicious, money hungry
sociopaths who for a bribe will target a victim litigant and with their power and ability to manipulate the Rules of Law ruin the lives of their victims.
This targeting and corruption has been ongoing in NYC for years, and has been fueled by fat-cat fixers who bribe these corrupt Judges to engage in thefts of the legal rights of others.
We now learn that the FBI and the US Attorney are finally taking more than a passing notice to the Robberies taking place in the Unified Courts. NY State Senator John Sampson we hear is singing as to how he was threatened and bribed as to covering up Courthouse corruption, thefts, bribery and frauds.
To these corrupt Judges and corrupt lawyers who fix and bribe, the US Constitution takes a back seat to the thefts of money, property and homes of innocent victims of these Courthouse scams.
We have interviewed many, and reviewed thousands of pages of Courthouse Records. We have found dozens of frauds and fixes in the Unified Courthouse in Brooklyn, NYC, Westchester all
adversly impacting the targets and all unjustly enriching the fixer and the lawyers. The Judges involved all misused the courts, allowed fraud, perjury, wrote illogical bias Decisions, targeted the Victims and robbed the rights to fulfill the fixers “Contract”. In all instances the Judges actions have been clear and convincingly fraudulent bias and taken as a whole establish that the Judge manipulated the Courtroom to rob the legal and Constitutional rights of the “Target”.
A fixed Judge will also recruit other Corrupt Judges in the Unified Court System to further target their victim. Many lawyers are intimidated by this collusion and corruption for fear of themselves
gault-we should talk one day.
email me usedkarguy@yahoo.com and we’ll swap numbers
gault, AWL never existed other than as a trade name. We have a case involving them and CW,CWHL, CWHLS, then BofA, BAC , it’s all fiction. all b.s.
Being unintelligent is not a flaw in itself. Berating others all the time while flaunting how stupid one is is simply unconscionable. Your case speaks volumes on what’s wrong with this country. Your take on it is even worse. Get yourself a shrink. I’m done.
I have enough of your nonsense i will get my papers out of the vault from when my case was docketed at the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT and show the exact words they used about the bank getting help from the Solister General of the US
Their are people who push others down so they think they appear greater. and i guess thats your philosophy
“Did you ever hear of a case where the attorneys from the opposite side didn’t want their opponents to represent themselves. Wonder why?”
Many times, moron. Many times! People like you who don’t get it! Opposing attorneys will do that when the person in front of them is so stupid and incoherent that they can’t even do their job! And that stripper engine is going to bring the same result upon herself.
Unreal! Neil, do you realize how much damage that idiot is causing to homeowners’ cause? Do you really want to give her a platform? Get her out, please! And get the stripper out too while you’re at it!
Unreal!
“…Supreme Court told the bank they could get help from the Solister [sic] General of the United States.”
Unreal! That woman is delusional. Get professional help real fast. And that, people, is why so few pro se can win. I’m done with that imbecile.
ML,
Leave me alone and don’t try your legalese on me. Unlike you, i did go to law school and I worked in that field long enough to recognize a fraud when i see one. For your information, the kind of language used by the judges in your decision is almost unheard of. Had you been an attorney, you would have been disciplined for even advancing it, for Pete’s sake! You got more breaks in your situation than most people ever do. You’re a disgrace to pro se homeowners. I hope those with serious cases here will recognize it!
I’ve seen judge call a case non meritorious, frivolous even. To call it vexatious and bad faith to boot is unbelievable. You got out easy. Get lost. I’m done with you. I knew you were marginally intelligent. In fact you’re a complete moron!
christine
What was the name of your case at the United States Supreme Court?
In fact Fidelity’s attorney Thomas Malone and David k Fiveson filed motions that they didn’t want me to represent myself.
Did you ever hear of a case where the attorneys from the opposite side didn’t want their opponents to represent themselves. Wonder why?
Atttorneys like Neil were not in new york when my case was going on.
i had no choice but to go it alone but i know whose side i was on.
judges want to control the court room with a wink of the eye, don’t go there.
So don’t bother calling Stripe and me morons etc. i am sure she is even smarter than me and i am pretty smart.
When the Bank wanted to sue me for libel for writing my first book judge Schlesinger herself said, ‘not if its the truth.’ it never entered my mind then i would write a book about her. i took her advice when I did write to be able to document the truth of everything i said.
i would not be writing anything on a blog that is not true .and can’t up with documentation.
ML,
I looked for that book on internet. Apparently not published. That tells me everything i and serious fighters here need to know. People like you have done more damages to homeowners than all the judges and lawyers together. Because of people like you and their frivolous and vexatious lawsuits, homeowners all over the states have gotten a bad rap. Because of people like you, many judges have that knee-jerk reaction against pro se homeowners. And just for the hell of it, given the little I know about your style (and it is too much already), my friendly advice would be not to publish that thing. Otherwise, you’ll open the door to a mound of trouble for yourself, including defamation and libel.
Homeowners have a lot to thank you for… You contributed to ruining the playing field for them.
Once again, what are you doing here? You have nothing to offer of value. Bob was right…
ML
I don’t often do something like that but, under the circumstances, I won’t hesitate. ML, you clogged the NY court for 13 years. A 13 year-long day in court and now, you come here to insult people who have active and meritorious cases.
Had I been Judge Schlesinger, i would have found you in contempt and assessed court costs you would still be paying by now.
You lost for good. You will never get whatever you lost back. get out of this site, you have absolutely nothing to offer. Find yourself some psychiatrist willing to listen to your angsts and leave me alone.
http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ny-supreme-court-appellate-division/1010263.html
ASTORIA FEDERAL SAVINGS LOAN ASSOCIATION FIDELITY NEW YORK FSB v. LANE
ASTORIA FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION/FIDELITY NEW YORK FSB, Plaintiff, v. Marilyn LANE, Defendant-Appellant, Frances Turner, et al., Intervenors-Defendants-Respondents.
— July 07, 2009
SAXE, J.P., FRIEDMAN, MOSKOWITZ, FREEDMAN, RICHTER, JJ.
Marilyn Lane, appellant pro se.Butler, Fitzgerald, Fiveson & McCarthy, P.C., New York (David K. Fiveson of counsel), for Frances Turner, respondent.Thomas P. Malone, New York, for Marchena respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered December 9, 2008, which denied defendant Lane’s motions to vacate two foreclosure judgments, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
We find that under the unique circumstances of this case, where the federal court found the removal petition to be frivolous on its face and where it was made in bad faith at the eleventh hour, following an unsuccessful appeal, the motion court was not required, more than a decade later, to vacate the judgments based on a claimed lack of jurisdiction. There is no question that Lane’s removal petition was frivolous. In the order summarily remanding the matter to state court, the federal court concluded that the petition showed “no non-frivolous basis for jurisdiction” and that “it clearly appears on the face of the papers submitted that removal should not be permitted.”
Moreover, Lane’s removal petition was undeniably untimely…
Lane’s bad faith in filing her removal petition is apparent. After an unsuccessful appeal and the lifting of an appellate stay, Lane filed for bankruptcy and, as a result, obtained yet another stay of the foreclosure action, which already had been pending for several years. After the bankruptcy stay was lifted, plaintiff submitted proposed judgments of foreclosure. A week later, instead of taking any action in state court, Lane filed her frivolous removal petition. The only fair reading of the record is that Lane’s actions in attempting removal were made in bad faith for the purpose of delaying the imminent foreclosures. Lane’s bad faith litigation conduct persists to this day, as evidenced by her inexcusable delay in waiting more than 10 years to challenge the judgments despite being aware of their existence within weeks of their entry.
… With no good reason, Lane waited over a decade before deciding to come back to court to challenge the foreclosures. Her abuse of the legal process, both in filing a bad faith petition and in failing to move to vacate the judgments she unquestionably knew about, cannot be countenanced, particularly in light of the harm that could befall the innocent purchasers of the properties. To hold otherwise would reward Lane for her inexcusable delaying tactics and would be entirely “inconsistent with any notion of fairness and justice” (Farm Credit Bank of St. Paul v. Rub, supra, 481 N.W.2d at 457).
Christine aPPELLATE
i still own those two condos pursuant to Elliot V. piersol. my case is not over. judge Schlesinger was paid a bribe to write an opinion against the issues decided in the Constitution. And the APPELLATE judges knowing how wrong and illegal that decidison was changed the dates that the case was docketed in Federal Court. to make apppear that they followed ther law.
i hsve wrote two books, the one about judge “Schlesigner entitled.
Sasccharin Sweet and Sleazy judge Alice Schlesinger of NY Supreme Court perpertrated Title Fraud with Thomas Malone of Fidelity national Title and David k FIVESON of a SHAM TITLE COMPANY he called Coronet.
it would not have been necessary for them change the dates except for the fact they are trying to bury the Fraud.
CHRISTINE YOU ARE A PLANT ON THIS SITE.
you have NOT grasped the law of Void Abitio judgments Christine,
No one not even you can change the history of a case. My case was docketed in Federal Court when the NYSC illegally signed judgments of foreclosure. Void ab initio. Passage of time will never make them valid – Brutum Fulman
.
I wrote a book about the original stealing of my two properties , when the bank won $436 million dollars from the Federal GovernmentThe federal judges saw the connection between their case and my fraudulent foreclosures and my book was instrumental in getting that award to the Bank reversed and vacated. You probably think you are smarter than the Federal judges.
Thirdly read the Scambuster report of the fraud that goes on in the ny Courts and now that Sen John Samson has been indicted and is talking all is coming out about the fraudulent transfers stolen properties and escrow stolen funds in the NY Courts.
The Appellate judges in fact said at the Appellate hearing to David Fiveson Did they do the judgments over when it came back from federal Court. He didn’t know. The judges knew that is exactly what had to be done to get a valid judgment. A judgment is valid or invalid. IT CANNOT BE BOTH.
Invalid void ab initio judgments have no time limit to being set aside
Bully v. First national Bank.
nemo dat no one can give away that which he doesn’t own.
I have a right to fight for what is stolen from me. And so does Stripes.
The Banksters depend on people like you to shut the Citizens up
christine a shill for Bob? who refuses to cite the law that gives the bank the right to mortgage origination fraud prohibited by Art l, para 10 Cl 1 of the US Constitution.
Starting with judge Schlesinger bubbameister decision. you don’t know half the facts of what went on but still your voicing an opinion.
i have helped the pro se movement . Reading my motions is a world of knowledge. in fact my case was docketed at the United States Supreme Court and the Supreme Court told the bank they could get help from the Solister General of the United States. But you know more than the US Supreme Court judges.
if it weren’t for the fact that the banks have so much power over the court my case would be a win for the pro se defendant.
Calvary, huh?
“my tribute to her” A idiot paying homage to a moron. Very much in character…
Unreal.
I think short of a revolution the calvary [sic] will come over the mountain.
Unreal… A clone of the stripper… Two for the price of one.
Christine
that the calvary coming over the mountain is hers and my tribute to her. ha
christine
as long as he doesn’t need her to cook and he has money they will be match made in heaven
HAHAHA!!! What a joke!
“i bet PUTIN’s COMING, to get over his wife and find an American wife”
Any idea what American women’s reputation is in the world? The guy is not suicidal.
Unreal.
Q: Does that indicate to you that not only is
there an assignment of the mortgage interest, but this
document purports to assign an interest in the note?
A: It says what it says.
……………
Q: And reading it, does it indicate to you that
there is an assignment of the note?
A: It says what it says.
…………..
Q If (such and such law firm – sic) attempted to assign a
promissory note by this assignment, would that be a violation of
MERS policies and procedures?
A No.
Q As corporate officers of MERS were members of
the (entity-sic) authorized to assign promissory notes
then?
A: There is a general catch-all in the resolution
that says that they can do whatever else they need to do
in the interest of servicing the loan……..
jg: And all this time we thought the PSA governed the
servicers responsibilities. Who knew it was MERS?
And just how does “assigning a note” fall under servicing a loan, anyway?
Q If …………….the ….. firm attempted to assign
the note, would they be acting within the scope of their
authority as MERS vice-presidents and assistant secretaries?
A It’s not a violation of our rules or procedure.
jg: MERS 1) admits liability.
2) It may not be a violation of MERS’ rules and procedures (altho the jury is still out on that one), but an assignment of a note – or anything – from one (MERS / MERS’ straw officer / anyone) with no interest a)assigns nothing and b) to record such an instrument with knowledge that it assigns nothing is to 1) record a false instrument and 2) wrongfully induce reliance on that false instrument.
.
Q What was MERS interest in the (X-sic) promissory note as of
March 14, 2008?
A As I answered twice before, I believe, we hold
the security interest for the benefit of the note holder
as an agent and to the extent that that’s an interest,
it’s an interest.
Q And that’s your answer, that’s MERS’ interest
in the note?
A …………yes.
In discussing the alleged transfer of the note in a collateral instrument assignment:
Q: “Does MERS prohibit its members from claiming
MERS has an ownership interest in promissory notes (as MERS swore it did not in MERS v Nebraska – sic)?”
A: (Hultman)
” What we have said in the foreclosure
procedures that they would NOT allege that we were the
OWNER the note and that we are only the HOLDER of the note.”
Hultman draws a distinction between an owner and a holder. Wow.
MERS claim to being the “holder”, which first of all is a legal determination not based on mere possession, is that if the servicer has an employee who is a mers’ straw officer, and the servicer (allegedly) has the note, that means MERS is the holder of the note. Is this guy for real? Anyway, MERS says elsewhere that the servicers couldn’t foreclose in MERS name unless that member (not MERS) had poss of the note.
So I give. Who has the note? The servicer? The servicer as authorized agent of its owner? MERS? The employee of the servicer-come-mers officer, so they both are holders? A non-member employee-come mers-straw officer? Anyone is / all are holders? For whom does a custodian have the note? Any one of these guys in any alleged capacity?
“Step right up! Pick a holder….any holder!”
Coming up: MERS alleged authority for assigning the note.
Christine ,judges are the ones who judge the judges. so unless we squeak to the world, the judges will sweep it under the carpet.
But the natives are getting restless. I think short of a revolution the calvary will come over the mountain. .
“i hope stripes has the right take that the calvary is coming for all of us.” Homeowners are the cavalry. Doing nothing other than post here inflammatory statements or rehashing what CNN and Kudlow say while waiting for others to act is ludicrous. Cases are won by people who fight and make jurisprudence.
Banks know that. Homeowners apparently don’t.
Christine
There is no need for me to change the law. But to allow judge Schlesinger to change the law on which Constitution Rights
depend is to render the Constitutional protections impotent. Due process has been abandoned.
My case is critical for new yorkers and beyond. NY is an important court.Because when more and more peope unravel fraudulent motgage foreclosures, refinance assistance, straw buyer and flipping scams, that cause the true owners to lose possession of their properties they should not have to have a second battle with shysters that bought the forged deeds and the Title companies who knowlingly insure forged deeds. lps docx has stolen millions from many. Forged Deeds convey nothing and yet Wm Foley now that lorraince Brown has gone to jail wants to continue on with her business of forgeries.
my fight since 2008 has not been with Astoria Federal, even though they might have caused it, they admitted they didn’t own them when they were auctioned off and they were stepping aside to let the title companys indemnify. My fight has been with the Title Companies Fidelity and a sham title company Fiveson called Coronet Title. and the Courts since both are very good at evading the law of the Constitution.
i cannot be kind to anyone not wanting to defend our Constitution.
it has made America wonderful .
George Soros is here, i bet PUTIN’s COMING, to get over his wife and find an American wifeI IF ITS SUCH A LOUSY COUNTRY why would they come here. ?
usedkarguy: re: Salvidar – There was something I didn’t like about it so I looked into the case law cited therein and didn’t find what was alleged to be there. It’s on my list, but, well, you know…. maybe you will take it on? Who will take on the other one ukg mentioned? Someone else or a group needs to take on Hogan (AZ). imo. Anyone from Mn willing to take a look at the case from Edstrom and tell us more?
Some say the judges are crooks, lying in bed with the other crooks. We argue the trust doesn’t own anything. Our arguments to courts are narrow because it would take a tome for anyone less than a genius to make the real case in less than that. But we can see to it that the judiciary is better informed. All it takes is the slightest effort and yet….?
marilyn, for whatever reason you’ve committed to send info to a judge – thanks. Hope others will. Five minutes. Five little minutes that may change the course of our lives. I confess I haven’t yet read the full case from Edstrom in MN, but I wonder what made those judges decide to abide by the law and find that the legislated privilege of non-j foreclosure requires strict compliance? Was it fine arguments from the homeowner? Was it new awareness of the scam? Everyone here is capable of at least seeing to it it’s the latter.
Q: (from homeowner’s attorney)
“When a certifying officer assigns a mortgage
and this is where MERS is the mortgagee of record, does
the certifying officer request permission of MERS before
assigning the mortgage interest?}
A: (from Hultman)
“No.”
Q:
“When the certifying officer assigns a mortgage
in MERS name, where MERS is the mortgagee, does the
certifying officer provide a copy of the assignment to MERS?”
A:
” Only TO THE EXTENT that they are an officer of
MERS. IF they have a copy and (IF -sic) they retain it for their
own files and (IF -sic) those are deemed records of MERS, that
would be the only way. They don’t send it to the corporate
office.”
ML,
I tell you what: why don’t you pack your stuff and move back into the condo sold at auction to the Chinese or the Greek guy (pick the one you really want) on the basis of that case you cite? I bet the sheriff or police will be more than happy to kick the new owner out just because you quoted that case to them.
Unreal…!
up until very recently the police’s attitude has been this is a court issue
Go to housing court. The housing Ct JUDGE STRAUSS THAT EVICTED ME AFTER HEARING THE CASE SAID’ WHAT DO YOU WANT FROM ME, I’M LOW MAN ON THE TOTEM POLE.
Sonny Shue took the wrong position and even though he was right he is no longer here. i hope stripes has the right take that the calvary is coming for all of us.
ML,
Assuming you are right, it’s still up to you to take yourself by the hand and to approach the court to have that judgment duly nullified. Telling and doing are two very different things. As far as I can see, other than come here and bitch and moan, action has been lacking.
Anyone can quote and cite any case every day of the week. The mere fact that one case exists doesn’t automatically nullify everything done for the past 6 or 7 years. Do you even have an attorney fighting for you on the basis of that one case?
You people are unreal!
JohnGault
i lot of illegal things and strange connections existed in my case and only because I POST AND POKE DOES ALOT OF THE CRIME BY THE JUDICIARY COME TO THE SURFACE, NOT JUST FOR ME but for all of you that are up against a prejudice judicial system.
What i discovered was that when trial judge Schlesinger ruled against the Constitution , the Appellate Court closes ranks around a judge and protects her instead of protecting our Constitution. In an earlier motion the Appellate Court ruled -we are defiant against the Constitution.
Chief judge jONATHAN LIPPMAN OF THE NY COURT OF APPEALS decision states …..does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitutio
(C of A is ny’s highest Ct.)
i made a motion to the Appellate Div. for a final determination
The Appellate Ct decision, “denied.”.
little by little the Fraud that has over taken some courts is now becoming everyday knowledge. That is why i like Stripes she saw a wrong and she is going to fight. and that is my position.
From all my blogging I owe one apology and that is to JohnGault
A time back I was not sure he was in foreclosure , he proved his case on the internet
to make it up to him i’m sending copys of the mers issue to some
judges it is not my issue but i certainally know what it is to lose
possession of one’s property to fraud.
You all understand that your derogatory comment to each other is one of the seven articles of propaganda, right? (substitute an attack on the man for his argument) You understand that they’re further evidence that as a species we’re incapable of self-governance, right?
“All Assignments of a Mortgage Must Be Recorded Before the Mortgagee Begins Foreclosure by Advertisement
By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.
The Minnesota Supreme Court issued a ruling requiring strict compliance with recording assignments prior to starting a foreclosure by advertisement.
Quote from the ruling:
Under Minn. Stat. § 580.02 (2012), all assignments of a mortgage must be recorded before the mortgagee begins the process of foreclosure by advertisement. Absent strict compliance with this requirement, a foreclosure by advertisement is void.
Affirmed.
Download the ruling here:
http://dtc-systems.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Ruiz-vs-1st-Fidelity-Foreclosure-by-Advertisement-must-have-strict-compliance.pdf
This is big.
http://beforeitsnews.com/astrology/2013/06/gmo-lose-europe-victory-for-environmental-organisations-by-nils-mulvad-2434110.html
GMO lose Europe – victory for environmental organisations
By: Nils Mulvad
Sunday, June 30, 2013 9:45
Monsanto will halt production of genetically modified corn in all of Europe, except Spain, Portugal and Czech republic. The agribusiness multinational states not to spend any more money on trials, development, marketing, court cases or anything else to get GM corn accepted in Europe.
”In Europe Monsanto only sells GM corn in three countries. GM corn represents less than 1% of the EU’s corn cultivation by land area. Field trials are only in progress in three countries. We will not spend any more money to convince people to plant them,” states Brandon Mitchener, Public Affairs Lead for Monsanto in Europe and Middle East, in an interview with Investigative Reporting Denmark.
The decision was taken quietly. The company found no reason to communicate it. This means that every agribusiness company has now given up on genetically modified crops in Europe – apart from selling them in Spain and Portugal.
BASF, Bayer and Syngenta halted their development of GMO potatoes in Europe in 2012, for the very same reasons as Monsanto – the battle was lost.
However green organisations are still fighting the agribusiness company – in Europe and the rest of the world.
”We are not a biotech company and NGOs campaigning against GM cultivation in Europe are beating a dead horse,” Brandon Mitchener points out.
Only Spain and Portugal face GMO-growth
In Czech Repulic the sale of GM corn declining, the only countries where it is on the rise being Spain and Portugal. Currently GM corn field trials are going on in just three countries: Romania, Slovakia and Czech Republic. They are done by academic partners of Monsanto or for EU variety registration. Totals here.
“We stopped most of the trials, including the trial in Denmark, following a strategic decision in 2011 to focus our commercial activity in Europe on high-performance, conventional hybrid seeds. Monsanto has a thriving business in Europe with conventional seeds and crop protection products. As a matter of principle, Monsanto will only seek to sell biotech seeds in countries where there is broad customer and political support for them as well as a functioning, science-based regulatory system – conditions which only apply in a few countries in Europe today,” says Brandon Mitchener.
ML,
“Auctioned off” means you lost them. What are you doing here? What do you have to teach anyone about saving properties or fighting the bank? Are you going to pull the same semantic crap as that weirdo Trespass “I didn’t lose… they were stolen from me”?
The result is that you lost. Deal with it. No sale will ever get undone. And certainly not because you spend your life here bitching, moaning and insulting everyone. You lost. Deal with it and move on.
Why is it that men get it and move on but women who lost their house have to stick around and make everyone’s life miserable? Grow up, for Pete’s sake!!!
Christine
you don’t observe our US Constitution and you don’t under stand it. When the Supreme Court of the Uniited States decides an issue it is the law of the land.
I refer you to the US case of Elliot v. Piersol
Under Federal law which is applicable to aLL, the United States Supreme Cout stated that is a Court is ‘without Authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities. They are not voidable but simply void and form no bar to recovery sought . even prior to reversal in opposition to them. They constitute no justification and all persons concerned in executing such judgments or sentence are considered in law as trespassers.
ML,
You lost your properties. I’m still in my house after 3 years. What could i possibility want to learn or even read from you? Your opinion is completely irrelevant to my life.
i still own my two properties. The bank admitted they never owned my two properties when their long gone corrupt attorneys auctioned them off to a chinese and a greek. with INVALID AB INITIO JUDGMENTS meaning all they have are forged deeds and paid judge Schlesinger of NYSC a bribe to stay in possession of them.
no rights come from void ab initio judgments. They are nullity. That goes above your head. since our Constitution and the laws of it are against your beliefs.
.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/150837051/MERS-Admits-It-Gets-No-Authorization-to-Assign-Anything
This is a link to the depo of MERS’ Hultman that I’ve linked before (quite a while ago). It’s a major eye-opener and imo wlll provide some new ammo for fighters. It will also be an eye opener for the judiciary.
I’d like to ‘cover it at length, but don’t know that I’ll get to it. Please take the time to read it. Also, I am beseeching every fighter to copy this to cd and send a cd to at least two judges in your area. I’m only one person. We need an army. We HAVE an army and I believe we can be our own salvation. It’s late and i’m tired, but I really do believe that.. Just two copies. Five minutes and a few stamps.
@Christine
Very bluntly, i think you are a communist and your postings try to push your beliefs. This is still the United States of America and I
have every right to voice my opinion
PS, Patrick, re your last sentence – that’s why I’ve suggested people ask for a more definitive statement – “are you claiming as a holder or a hidc”? there are many more affirmative defenses available against a holder v a hidc, but what one is after is the date the bankster claims its rights came to exist.
ukguy – starting to think ng doesn’t want this job anymore. Hope that’s not the case. Imo it would be helpful if a couple other people here would ignore ‘the problem”, but for some reason(s) I can’t fathom, they seem to be drawn to battle and go right down to that level with the greatest of ease.
Is the America’s Wholesale Lender issue forgotten? Just came across them and still dont get how 1) a non-entity could endorse a note and 2) how a non-entity could enter a contract with, um, say MERS.
Attn: Mr. Neil Garfield. When is “enough” enough?”
I have been hearing from many people personally who are ignoring the site because of the psychobabble and endless drivel of stripes. There are many important happenings that are being missed; discussions relevant to Erobobo and Saldivar to name two. The combination of these two rulings (and especially Saldivar) are the probably the two best decisions to date, save MA Supreme Court ruling. Your site has been hijacked. Again, act before it’s too late.
Good info, Patrick. Would have been useful with statute and cites…..
Patrick,
Theoretically you’re right. One of the many hurdles to overcome from the standpoint of the homeowner is… pleading it and pleading it right!
A few years ago, this site would have helped people with finding the arguments to advance and doing it.
No longer the case. Those with good info get insulted and their motives are being questioned. Yours have been quite a bit. It will get worse… Fear has a tremendous stronghold on people, elected officials, attorneys and the likes. By design. Look at the news. The beast is dying. it won’t go quietly.
ML,
You have just proved to everyone reading this site why you allegedly lost your properties to the banks. Think whatever you desire about me. I doesn’t impact one bit on who I am, what I know and what I do.
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the ones most adaptable to change.” It is a very sad state of affairs when one goes through a hard experience and remains stuck in it for years on end. Lots of women like that on this site. Tells me that adaptability is not their forte. Sad indeed. But you know what? There are plenty more on this planet who are adaptable and will assure that life goes on. I don’t deal with “has-been”. I deal with “want to become”. Out of your league entirely. Stick with stripper: it’s your level.
3rd party debt collectors, who work for commission or potential fees, cannot use a mortgage instrument in order to collect those as they are not secured sums under the terms of the contract. Moreover, junk debt buyers cannot use the mortgage to collect the spread because the gap between what was paid has been written off and is no longer secured by the real property.
A servicer who took the collection rights to a debt obligation after it became delinquent has no connection to a performing loan. It no longer has the presumption it acts incident to a fiduciary duty to a principal, thereby is subject to liability under FDCPA.
It’s worth investigating exactly when the servicer plaintiff took the debt for collection.
During the depression of 29 some immigrants thought they should go back to Russia and back they went to Siberia never to be heard of again.
To me Christine’s selection of reading is trying to fine tune herself to be a prison warden.
As usual, DB “is not contributing any funds toward the settlement” and “did not admit any liability or wrongdoing”. What else is new?
So, if DB doesn’t pay, what good is that settlement for? And who are the unidentified “securitization trusts that hold the properties”?
http://www.newsdaily.com/united-states/993c87958bbc2d3aebced30f37ce7c49/deutsche-bank-settles-la-claims-on-foreclosure-blight
Deutsche Bank settles L.A. claims on foreclosure blight
Saturday Jun 29, 2013 | Reuters
FRANKFURT (Reuters) – Deutsche Bank said it has settled a lawsuit with the U.S. city of Los Angeles that accused the bank of allowing hundreds of foreclosed properties to deteriorate into slum conditions and destabilize communities.
“The settlement will be paid by the (loan) servicers responsible for the Los Angeles properties at issue and by the securitization trusts that hold the properties,” the bank said in a statement late on Friday.
“Deutsche Bank is not contributing any funds toward the settlement,” it said, without disclosing any financial details.
“Deutsche Bank did not admit any liability or wrongdoing as part of the settlement, and continues to dispute the claims asserted by the City,” it added.
A statement from Los Angeles City said it has secured $10 million in civil penalties as part of settlement of the lawsuit it filed in May 2011.
During the housing boom and subsequent bust, Deutsche Bank subsidiaries acquired more than 2,000 properties in Los Angeles, according to the city’s 2011 civil enforcement action.
The city accused Deutsche of becoming one of its largest “slumlords,” allowing vacant properties to turn into nuisances, neglecting to maintain occupied properties, and illegally evicting low-income tenants to clear the way for a sale.
Los Angeles is one of many cities in the United States grappling with the problem of blighted properties after a wave of foreclosures that followed the housing bust.
It has passed a law requiring banks to fix the blighted homes they own, or pay a fine, but enforcing that has proven difficult.
In April this year a judge denied Deutsche Bank’s bid to dismiss the lawsuit, allowing Los Angeles to proceed with its case.
Off topic… to a point. The collapse is at hand. We’ll see who comes out on top. Easy to tell who won’t…
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the ones most adaptable to change.”
Submitted by Charles Hugh Smith from Of Two Minds
The very attempt to reform an unstable, diminishing-return system often precipitates its collapse.
The Rise and Fall of Great Powers
Our collective interest in the rise and fall of empires is not academic. The meteoric rise of China and the financialization rotting out global capitalism are just two developments that suggest we are entering an era where some great powers will collapse, others will remake themselves and others will gain ascendancy.
In How Empires Fall (April 17, 2013), I discussed Adrian Goldsworthy’s How Rome Fell: Death of a Superpower and an old favorite on the same topic, Michael Grant’s excellent The Fall of the Roman Empire.
Paul Kennedy’s influential book from 1987, The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers, seeks generalizations about what causes the rise and decline of great powers, be they empires or nation-states.
Kennedy avoids the temptation to extract grand theories from history, quietly mocking Wallersteins’s “world systems” and related analyses. In this he follows fellow historian Fernand Braudel, who also hesitated to draw overarching theories from the messy history of capitalism.
Kennedy proposes one mechanism that he claims does hold true over time: it’s not the absolute wealth and power of any one nation or empire that matters, it’s the economic growth rate of competitors and its wealth and power relative to theirs that matter. A nation whose economic base is growing at a lower rate than a competitor slowly become relatively weaker than its rival, even though its absolute wealth is still increasing.
He also notes a tendency for powers in relative decline (i.e. those growing less robustly than their neighbors/rivals) to spend more on military security as their position in the pecking order weakens. This diversion of national surplus to military spending further saps their economic vitality as funds are shifted from investment to unproductive military spending. This creates a feedback loop as lower investment weakens their economic base which then causes the leadership to respond to this weakening power with more military spending.
This feedback creates lags, where an economically weakening power may actually increase its military power, until the overtaxed economy implodes under the weight of the high military spending.
This dynamic certainly seems visible in the history of the Soviet Union, which at the time of this book’s publication in 1987 was unanimously considered an enduring superpower with a military that many believed could conquer Western Europe with its conventional forces.
This debate over the relative superiority of Soviet arms now seems quaint in the light of the collapse of the USSR a mere four years later, but it worth recalling that one of the most influential defense-doctrine books of the early 1980s was The The Third World War: August 1985 a novel by Sir John Hackett, about a fictional Soviet attack on Western Europe in 1985.
It was widely recognized by the late 1980s that the Soviets’ relative power was in decline compared to the U.S., as the U.S. had worked its way through the malaise and restructuring of the 1970s and re-entered an era of strong economic and technological growth in the 1980s, rapidly outpacing the sclerotic Soviet economy.
It’s also worth recalling the truly dismal status of the Soviet and Eastern Bloc economies compared to the Western economies: common inexpensive consumer items such as kitchen toasters were rare luxuries. In other words, while the Soviet economy was probably still expanding in the 1980s, the rate and quality of its expansion was considerably less than the growth of the West.
If one economy grows by 1% a year and another grows by 5% a year, in a mere decade the faster-growth economy will have expanded by more than 62%, while its slower-growing rival’s economy grew only 10.5%.
Many observers (especially on the Left, where suspicion of military spending is never far below the surface) see the U.S. as following this same path to decline and fall, as post-9/11 defense spending has skyrocketed while growth has stagnated. Despite what I see as wasteful spending on overlapping intelligence agencies and insanely costly programs like the F-35 fighter, U.S. defense spending remains around 5% of GDP (Pentagon/National Security budget is around $690 billion, GDP is around $15 trillion).
Though statistics from the Soviet era are not entirely reliable, various scholars have estimated that fully 40% of the Soviet GDP was being expended on its military and military-industrial complex.
During the height of the Reagan buildup, the U.S. was spending about 6% of its GDP on direct military expenditures. If you include the Security State (CIA, NSA, et al.), the Veterans Administration and other military-related programs (DARPA, etc.), the cost was still less than 10% of GDP.
How about America’s position relative to other Great Powers or alliances? Interestingly, America’s decline has been noted (and predicted) since the 1970s. Other nations such as Japan were growing much faster and were expected to overtake the U.S., based on the extrapolation of high growth rates into the future.
Once again the same predictions are being made, only this time it is China that is logging high annual growth rates that are being projected far into the future. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
Kennedy ends his book with a brief chapter looking ahead from 1987. He is careful not to make any outright predictions, but it is fair to say that he completely missed the bursting of Japan’s miraculous high growth economy and the implosion of the Soviet Union a mere four years later in 1991. With the benefit of hindsight, we can discern the dynamics that led to these abrupt declines of relative power. But at the time, Japan’s economy was universally regarded as superior to the U.S. economy and the USSR was widely viewed as a permanent superpower rival to the U.S.
How can we be so wrong about projecting present trends when we have so much data at our disposal? Why can’t we identify the trends that end up mattering? Reading political-economic history books written a few decades ago reinforces our humility: we cannot predict the future, except to say that projecting present trends leads to false predictions.
Virtually no one in 1987 foresaw the limited Internet of the time exploding into a globally dominant technology, yet a mere decade later the web browser, cheaper memory, faster processors and broadband cable and DSL launched a digital revolution.
In 1987, pundits were predicting that Japan’s “5th generation” computing would soon dominate what was left of America’s technological edge. They were spectacularly wrong, as the 5th generation fizzled and Japan became an also-ran in web technology, a position it still holds despite its many global electronic corporations and vast university research system.
Japan’s modern economy was set up in the late 1940s and early 1950s to exploit the world of that time. Sixty years later, Japan is still a wealthy nation, but its relative wealth and power have declined for 20 years, as its political-financial power structure clings to a model that worked splendidly for 40 years but has not worked effectively for 20 years.
The decline is not just the result of debt and political sclerosis; Japan’s vaunted electronics industry has been superseded by rivals in the U.S. and Korea. It is astonishing that there are virtually no Japanese brand smart phones with global sales, and only marginal Japanese-brand sales in the PC/notebook/tablet markets.
The key dynamic here is once the low-hanging fruit have all been plucked, it becomes much more difficult to achieve high growth rates. That cycle is speeding up, it seems; western nations took 100 years to rapidly industrialize and then slip into failed models of stagnation; Japan took only 40 years to cycle through to stagnation, and now China has picked the low-hanging fruit and reverted to financialization, diminishing returns and rapidly rising debt after a mere 30 years of rapid growth.
There is certainly evidence that China’s leadership knows deep reform is necessary but the incentives to take that risk are low. Perhaps that is a key dynamic in this cycle of rapid growth leading to stagnation: the leadership, like everyone else, cannot quite believe the model no longer works. There are huge risks to reform, while staying the course seems to offer the hope of a renewal of past growth rates. But alas, the low hanging fruit have all been picked long ago, and as a result the leadership pursues the apparently lower-risk strategy that I call “doing more of what has failed spectacularly.”
Though none of the historians listed above mention it, there is another dangerous dynamic in any systemic reform: the very attempt to reform an unstable, diminishing-return system often precipitates its collapse. The leadership recognizes the need for systemic reform, but changing anything causes the house of cards to collapse in a heap. This seems to describe the endgame in the USSR, where Gorbachev’s relatively modest reforms unraveled the entire empire.
Director Michael Apted has been filming a remarkable series of documentaries following the lives of 14 English people since the age of 7: The Up Series (Wikipedia) is a series of documentary films produced by Granada Television that have followed the lives of fourteen British children since 1964.(The titles: 7 Up, 14 Up, and so on, the latest being 56 Up.) The Up Series, eight films (Seven Up – 56 Up)
We expect those children with few advantages in life (i.e. lower-class) to do less well than those with many advantages, and this linear expectation is fulfilled in some cases. (This is the expectation of the working-class children themselves.)
But in most cases, the individuals’ lives are entirely non-linear: some decades they do less well, in others they do much better, and the dynamics that arise and dominate each stretch of their lives are not very predictable.
This series reinforces our humility about predicting the life paths of individuals.
So is there a unifying theme here? I would say yes, and it is embodied in this quote from Charles Darwin, co-founder of our understanding of natural selection and evolution: “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent, but the ones most adaptable to change.”