Matt Weidner Takes on Robo-Court Orders

OUTRAGE OF THE DAY- Exactly Who Runs The Courtroom?

April 20th, 2011 · Foreclosure
I have to take many deep breaths before I write this and really restrain myself. I started to write this right after it happened this morning, but I’ve learned that I must exercise some restraint unless I’m ready to pay the ultimate price for exercising my rights to free speech. Even when you’re speaking the truth, reporting facts and standing up for much larger and critically important constitutional issues, I’ve learned that one cannot rely on the quaint and naive notion that such controversial speech is protected or that my attempts to stand up for the larger good will go unpunished.

So with that as the preamble, the story begins that I headed off to battle early this morning in a courtroom outside my home territory. Because I had done my homework, I knew I was headed into hostile territory. One of the most open-minded of my colleagues had recently gone to this particular courtroom with an example of crystal clear, undeniable fraud which was just totally ignored, dusted off, disregarded and dismissed by the court. This particular attorney was not exactly a partisan fighter. He was not exactly a true believer of all the well-documented stories of fraud and impropriety. He was more or less an agnostic…at least until his last experience in this particular courtroom where he presented crystal clear, undeniable fraud that was just totally ignored, dusted off, disregarded and dismissed by the court….and that just pushed him totally over the edge. (Welcome to the very, very dark side of your profession my good colleague.)

Anyway, with his experience fresh in my mind, I knew I would have to really be on my game in order to protect my client’s rights. So I got to court way, way early. One of the things I learned long ago was how important it is to arrive early. The first chapter of the Art of Foreclosure War says, Survey the battlefield. Size up the opposition and get a read on the interpersonal and subtle dynamics of the battlefield. (although truthfully the Fraudclosure Rocket Docket Courtrooms are not really like battlefields, they’re more like World Wrestling Federation Octagons)

So I picked out a neutral spot in the courtroom and sat and waited for my case to be called. While I’m waiting, in rolls the Jackals from the Fraudclosure mills..I say roll because they don’t walk into court like real soldiers. They wheel in their putrid piles of lies and fraud in cases with wheels built right in. These troglodytes cannot muster the strength to carry their weapons into battle, they wheel their manure in and because they’re way, way to comfortable they don’t select neutral real estate, they just consume and infect the prime real estate right up in the front of the courtroom spreading all their toxic filth all about wherever they please like a prisoner spreading…(okay, I’m getting too heavy on the hyperbole here). Anyway, if you’ve never seen what I’m describing, here’s kinda what they looks like:

So first up was a “trial”. The troglodyte moves right through it all lickety split and before you know it…BAM! Foreclosure Granted! But she wasn’t done yet, there were several other cases that she might have had something to do with….there was some amount of confusion because once she started talking about “her” cases another troglodyte stood up and she was apparently there on the same cases as well. So the whole courtroom sat there while these two sorted out who was on first and what was on second…at this point in time I drifted out because I’d seen this movie before…..remember in Star Wars when Han Solo was in the bar….it was this weird., otherworldly scene with all manner of unsavory characters:

But wait, I’m mixing way, way too many metaphors here. The point is at some point in time I emerged from the worm hole I slipped down and when I did, the Trial Attorney from the Fraudclosure Mill had rolled her wheeled black box back behind where the clerks and the court personnel live and planted herself right there among them. All her files and documents were spread out on the court’s desk and she was pumping away…feeding documents here, there and everywhere. She owned and consumed all that real estate….the court’s real estate, the people’s real estate…what should be neutral territory.

But here’s what really got me…in a courtroom, the judge has a big, serious imposing mechanical stamp…it’s HIS OFFICIAL STAMP!…. In my mind it’s like the king’s stamp. It’s sacrosanct….it’s holy. But in this courtroom, the troglodytes were just passing this thing around like….well, I could only come up with a profane metaphore, so I’ll just say, they were just kachuning away, “signing” orders and I didn’t like it. The whole scene felt like some acid trip scene straight out of The Big Lebowski…

but it wasn’t….it was a courtroom….sort of. It took me several minutes, but after a while, I became convinced that I had not been drugged and that what I was seeing was actually….occurring right in front of my eyes. The foreclosure troglodytes were stamping and kachunking orders and stuffing envelopes and it was all just chugging along….not the court….the troglodytes.

So now I was awake and alive and acutely aware of what was happening in this courtroom. My case had not been called, but I wanted to jump over the rail, out of my neutral territory, I wanted to stand up and say, ‘WAIT A MINUTE. STOP! HOLD ON! WHAT’S HAPPENING HERE?!”…remember that scene out of “The Wall”….

But I’m already facing real trouble for daring to speak out against the machine. So I sat there and watched the meat grinder grind away….but I did not like it. I thought to myself, “what would a pro se person think of this courtroom?”, “What would any one of our white haired founding forefather’s think of this courtroom?” But still I sat there, snorting and huffing and squirming on the Group W bench. I tried to rally some outrage from the other guerrillas who were in the room, but they explained to me (under their breath) that this was the way things operated here.

And then, finally my case was called. The case was sounded and I stepped forward. I spoke, and the court replied, “SUMMARY JUDGMENT GRANTED!” but then I said, “Your honor, I’m here for the defendant”, to which the court replied, ‘YOUR MOTION IS DENIED”. So then I explained, it’s the court’s order I seek to enforce…and my motion was granted.

I should have just turned around and headed back to the office… I won. I’m already in enough trouble for caring enough about things and people that I’m not paid to represent…..but somewhere in my fighter’s mind, I remembered that Oath I took. I spoke up….I bowed…I curtsied, I begged, I deferred….

“May I approach your honor? May I speak? Thank you. Your honor, as an officer of the court, begging your pardon, pleading for your mercy. I have a real problem with what is occurring right over there beside us. Forgive me, but it just strikes me as a bit inappropriate when parties are taking your stamp and kachunking orders. What would this look like to the general public? Is this what our forefathers had in mind when they conceived of our fair and independent judicial system?”

To which the court replied (more or less):

“You’ll have to take that up with the legislature….we don’t have proper funding and we cannot bother with your concerns. We don’t have staff. We’re doing what we have to do here….move along please.”

And so it goes, and so it goes. And all of this in the shadow of a very significant lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union that more or less documents with excruciating evidence and particularity, the claims and allegations that I describe in this post. I will suffer for daring to publish these facts and for sharing these thoughts, but is this not the very highest calling of my profession?

If you have not done so already, please read the lawsuit that has been filed by the ACLU:


Please log onto their website and take in the full specter of the fight that they ACLU has picked. Please share this with criminal attorneys, with family law attorneys, with press and with anyone who cares about what they think they know about our court system.

” They” are going to come after me for this post (how dare I speak the truth), but there are far bigger and more important issues at stake….I’m in this for the long haul and the deeper fight. Bring It On.

36 Responses

  1. @ dying truth thank fpr your defense. we can not be enemies to each other thats what the banks want. we need to give out detail and help each other. it is just insane this is happening us while our elected officials sit back and do nothing. so tnharry i should sit back ans watch case after case be for the banks while families are put on the street. i posted the article about the bribed judges hope you opened it . this is not an isolated incident. i do not want to have it be my turn and the judge hears my case from lawyer and say “you could not pay your mortgage then back to the bank it is” i do not want that. i want my arguement heard loud and clear. wells fargo and all other banks can not play around and lose our financial paper work, hack files to move info so we go to foreclosures and their investors get their derivitives paid off. this shoudl be illegal. tell me this mr tnharry why is it when each one of us applie dfor the mortgages we are so call forclosing on they never lost our paper work????????

  2. tnharry,
    I got evidence that State and Federal Judges are receiving bribes from the Fanks.

    So is it still just slander for anyone to make those accusations?

    You need to shut up with instigating provocations. Do you have any proof that no Judges are being bribed?
    How about proof that they’re not aiding and abetting in Racketeering?
    How about if any homeowner actually owed any money for an actual loan they received and weren’t paying, can you prove that?

  3. tnharry,

    Not bribes — just power and influence. The “stupid” people against powerful representation by attorneys “in black suits.”

    Somewhere along the way – we lost “Blind Justice/Lady Justice”

  4. @leapfrog – pretty much the same as you i imagine. the articles are informative and useful. I’m no more a troll than the commenters making random, rambling, incoherent statements or the others making uninformed statements fueled by nothing more than ignorance of the law/process and anger. Claiming that the judges are being bribed is simply slander. Citing a fringe blog as proof of that statement doesn’t enhance the credibility of the statement at all. I’ve posted as many comments supporting statements and articles as I have calling folks out on random, irrelevant comments.

  5. @tn harry: Why are you here? What do you have to offer anyone besides inance comments and ridicule? Go troll elsewhere, please.

  6. Great comments. I’ve been following Matt and Mark Stopa for awhile and wondering WHAT we, the people, can do to turn this around. I like the idea of the undercover camera in court. I like the idea of a group of people attending hearings and putting the judge under some pressure. I am willing to be a part of that, or of any other action that will help. Would it help to get a petition going and publicize it? You know, Wisconsoners have been able to recall 5 elected officials recently. That’s people taking a stand and making a difference. We need to organize in a manner that will be most likely to make a difference. Who is willing to join me and what do you suggest?

  7. @ tnharry
    please see this post before you yell at me. i new there had to be something going on when we have banks losing our paper work, robo signing, and appraisla fraud yet the house go back to the bank?????
    do you live in a vacuum? we need somthing big here to happen and help us. our families are suffering

  8. When countries are at War with one another, what do they do to eachother?

    Invade enemy territory, expand to, occupy and seize control of it and drive out the indigenous enemy population.

    Civilization and Technology has advanced to the point that there are so many non-conventional ways to wage War, i.e. Cyber Warfare, Chemical Warfare, Nuclear Warfare, Intelligence Warfare.

    Why can’t anybody recognize that ECONOMIC WARFARE is being waged upon us and the Federal Government, instead of protecting us from this hostile invasion, is giving aid and comfort to our foreign and domestic enemies. Which last I checked qualifies as Treason, which last I checked only requires the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act to convict. Attorneys who want to make a difference can bring charges and testify against any member of any branch when they break the law and their oath in order to give material support to known enemies of the US.

    Continue to operate within the limits and rules that the judiciary defines for you when judges aren’t restrained at all, then you become apart of the problem. The one thing that is incorrectly assumed by everyone is that the Constitution grants the judicial branch the power of interpretation. GUESS WHAT? IT DOES NOT. Judges feel some way or have a personal opinion on how they think the law should govern, good for them. Just like Free Speech everyone is entitled the their own opinion, but just because that opinion comes from a judge does not make it “the law”, especially when it’s in contravention with the actual “Law”. Were it otherwise, our Forefathers would not had wasted their time establishing a Constitution and would have ordained and established a Rule of and under a Judicial Dictatorship instead, which is what these Gavel Jockeys are trying to go for. People will keep doing things you don’t like or that are wrong until you stop them, by not correcting the problem you enable it.

  9. i am just a consumer, which is facing a foclosuer on my home .i have tried to deal with the banksters of america.( ie fake loans mods) ( that are a joke ) i have called and talked to at least a half dozen, attorneys, in my state of mass.. and they all say im all done to just file bankruptcy. we have been trying to remedy this problem since 2007 we got a subprime loan, that was designed to fail and when my wife lost her job and fail it did. i have researched everything i can find on the laws of m ystate wrote letters to my attorney general and not one person, will even try and help me .and now readinf what you have just written. my hope to save our family home is fading fast looks like the courts just dont want to do what they are supppose to be for of the people and by the people .it is crimminal what these banks have done to people like me .an have not much of a recoarse thanks for your post .

  10. @enough – you don’t get to sit behind your computer and make blanket statements that the judges are being bribed. have you seen this? do you have any proof other than a bias against anyone involved in the process? anger and derision at the players and the process is one thing, slander is quite another…

  11. United We Stand, Divided We Fall. The biggest Problem all of us that are fighting for what’s right have, IS WE ARE ALL UNORGANIZED AND ARE LACKING OVER-ALL COMMON GOALS TO SHARE AND TAKE PART IN.

    You wanna know why we’re all losing and the Banks/Government’s winning? It’s because they’re organized and work on things together as a TEAM (albeit a corrupt one with the worst possible intentions, but nonetheless still effective), WE DON’T. That flaw is the only real obstacle keeping us from achieving what needs to be. Until we overcome that, things will continue to get worse for all of us.

    It’s Simple Look > T.E.A.M.


  12. yes we also are getting the ole wells fargo run around. the lost a package in feb sent by fed ex , i presented the tracking # and signee. but they sent me to a foreclsoure mill anyway to a lawyer that has less them 1 yr experience. I complained to OCC in detail all what wells fargo has done since 2009 and all OCC did was give then a slap on the hand and tell them to write the homeowner. and what exactly does that do?? so i get this letter from wells fargo with a copy sent to the OCC. not one mention about the lost paper work, the lost package, and the hacked file of the loan processor working on my loan in 12/210. yup she called me up frantic that her piasscode was hacked and my file was moved. still to this day still not approved for hamp. but now we all know the truth abou the hamp mod. but regarless these tid bits of info were left out. so isnthis blatant fraud in the inducement. lieing to the entity that over sees them to their benefit.?????????????

  13. The $2 billion battle has begun in New York!

    When the Suffolk County Legislature meets again next week, the county’s share of an estimated $2 billion in fees big banks saved with their electronic record-keeping system — bypassing paper mortgage records in county clerks’ offices — will top the agenda for legislator Ed Romaine.

    In his previous job as county clerk, Romaine fought in court against the Mortgage Electronic Registration System, or MERS, for several years in the early 2000s and lost. But he’s taking another run at it now as the firm’s shaky legal foundation is cracking and so many ordinary homeowners are suffering from questionable foreclosure actions involving MERS.

    “We lost revenues, and they’ve acted wrongly,” said Romaine, who estimates MERS has drained more than $100 million that rightfully belongs to his cash-strapped county. “Filing paper assignments prevented some of the abuses.”

    Romaine’s move is part of a growing wave of serious legal challenges to MERS — moves that ordinary homeowners like Noreen and Kevin Tuminski are praying might help them in loan modification negotations when other options have failed.

    The Staten Island couple has been getting the runaround from Wells Fargo — which just announced record first-quarter profits of $3.8 billion — for nearly two years in negotiations on a loan modification after falling 30 days behind on a single payment in 2009.

    The bank has recently made a move to take the case out of foreclosure, but the Tuminskis are still left high and dry without a sustainable loan modification so they can keep their home.

    When The Post began asking questions about the Tuminskis’ struggles, Wells Fargo’s press officers suddenly promised to provide the couple with one person to talk to who has decision-making power. Wells’ spokeswoman also insisted the bank is eager to work out a sustainable modification for the parents of three.

    All that was news to the Tuminskis, whose lives have been upended by Wells. The bank slapped them with foreclosure action last summer, after they had made payments for six months in good faith on a HAMP trial modification.
    Wells was asked why it had not worked out a deal already if it’s been so keen on a deal since 2009.

    “Our response is, we’re working with them,” said the spokeswoman for America’s fourth-largest bank by assets, which is based in San Francisco.
    What happens to MERS matters a lot for ordinary homeowners, since MERS has an estimated 60 percent of the nation’s $10.5 trillion in residential mortgages outstanding.

    In New York State, MERS has $252 billion in home mortgages, or about 1.3 million loans, based on estimates from Inside Mortgage Finance provided to The Post.

    “We fought it because we didn’t want to lose the fees for our county, and we felt there was a [value to having] a hall of public records,” Romaine said.

    “I fought this, never thinking how banks would bundle mortgages, securitize them and break them up so [now] it’s almost impossible in foreclosure to get the underlying documents. They’ve created a disaster which was a prelude to the housing collapse.”

    The Tuminskis had never heard of MERS until they found themselves unexpectedly in foreclosure. Trouble for the Tuminskis began in 2009, when a series of illnesses caused Kevin to be late with a single mortgage payment to Wells Fargo, their lender since a 2008 refinancing deal.

    Eager to keep their home of 17 years, the Tuminskis contacted the bank and were offered a forbearance, and then a HAMP modification, which they signed off on.

    Their credit has suffered because of Wells’ action. The Tuminskis cannot even get a car loan without paying usurious penalty interest rates.

    They have had to raid their retirement savings to rent a single car for their family of five. Kevin, 57, is on disability now, and he knows the foreclosure will dog him when he returns to the job market.

    “I’ve got to worry about this stuff every single minute of the day,” said Kevin.

    He learned his mortgage is a MERS loan after conferring with Staten Island Legal Services. The Tuminskis are representing themselves in court, with assistance from attorney Joseph Sanders.

    MERS purports to have assigned the loan back to Wells Fargo, but the Tuminskis allege the necessary legal proof of that authority is missing.

    Foreclosure Sucks!

  14. A version of this article appeared in print on April 24, 2011, on page BU1 of the New York edition with the headline: A Crack In Wall St.’s Defenses.

    A few weeks ago, the pair was awarded a total of $54.1 million in a securities arbitration case against the Smith Barney unit of the company — the largest amount ever awarded to individuals in such a case, according to the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority.

    This legal dust-up involved supposedly conservative municipal bond investments that Smith Barney had peddled to its wealthiest clients. The investments, which were big money-makers for Smith Barney, turned out to be anything but safe for the firm’s clients: various portfolios lost between half and three-quarters of their value during the financial crisis.

    Arbitrators rarely, if ever, discuss such cases, and the materials turned over by both sides are kept under wraps. But the outsize award, which included $17 million in punitive damages, is not the only thing that is noteworthy. The arbitrators appeared to reject — resoundingly — three defenses that Wall Street often employs when clients sue:

    No. 1: We didn’t blow up your portfolio. The financial crisis did.

    No. 2: If you’re wealthy and sophisticated, you should have understood the risks.

    And, No. 3, the most common defense of all: The prospectus warned that you could lose your shirt, so don’t come crying to us if you do.

    The investors who prevailed here are Gerald D. Hosier, 69, a wildly successful intellectual-property lawyer, and Jerry Murdock Jr., 52, a prosperous venture capitalist. Mr. Hosier and a trust he set up for his adult children received $48 million. Mr. Murdock got about $6 million.

    The men, neighbors in Aspen, Colo., suffered $27 million in out-of-pocket losses on their investments. The big clunker was a municipal bond arbitrage strategy that their Smith Barney broker had characterized as safe, according to the men’s complaint. The deal was supposedly designed to eke out more income than a simple portfolio of bonds would generate.

    Not only did the men recover all their losses in the award, they also received damages. Mr. Hosier was awarded $15 million in punitive damages and $6.3 million in market-adjusted damages. The arbitrators also awarded $3 million for the men’s legal fees.

    Alexander Samuelson, a Citigroup spokesman, said: “We are disappointed with the decision, which we believe is not supported by the facts or law.” He noted that the bank had won a number of arbitrations involving such leveraged municipal bond strategies and said that the bank was considering its legal options in this case.

    Mr. Hosier invested in the bank’s municipal arbitrage strategy from 2002 through 2007. Requiring a minimum investment of $500,000, the deals employed the wonders of leverage, borrowing 8 to 10 times the value of the municipal bonds in an underlying portfolio to generate higher income. Calling the strategy conservative and ideal for investors’ safe money, Smith Barney sold the trusts to wealthy investors.

    But Smith Barney and its brokers were the prime beneficiaries of the strategy, which generated fees not only on the money that had been borrowed to juice the returns but also through the life of the investment. Clients paid 0.35 percent annually on the portfolios, plus a fee of 20 percent of all income earned by the investors above a 5.5 percent threshold each year.

    Smith Barney’s sales representatives kept 40 percent of the total fees paid by their investors, far exceeding what they would have earned selling ordinary municipal bonds. This arrangement encouraged Smith Barney to lever up the portfolios, Mr. Hosier’s lawyers argued, putting the interests of their clients and those of Smith Barney at odds.

    Investors who bought these deals agreed to lock up their money for two years and had to pay a substantial fee if they redeemed their holdings during the next three years.

    Mr. Hosier was the single biggest buyer of Smith Barney’s municipal arbitrage deals, with $26 million invested over time. But four different portfolios in which he invested raised almost $2 billion from all investors. All of the portfolios performed badly.

    “Citigroup mismarketed this product to high-net-worth investors as an alternative to municipal bonds with a slightly higher return,” said Philip M. Aidikoff, a lawyer at Aidikoff, Uhl & Bakhtiari in Beverly Hills, Calif., who represented Mr. Hosier and Mr. Murdock. “Our clients never knowingly agreed to risk a significant loss of principal for a few extra points of interest.”

    AS for Citigroup’s three defenses, Mr. Aidikoff, along with the co-counsel Steven B. Caruso, at Maddox, Hargett & Caruso in New York, demonstrated that municipal bonds did not suffer catastrophic losses during the period. This squelched the bank’s argument that the financial crisis did in the strategy.

    Regarding their clients’ sophistication and wealth, the lawyers agreed that both men were comfortable taking risks in certain circumstances, but not with the money they had given to the bank. “Citigroup misled their wealthiest clients and then tried to blame them for relying on what they were told,” Mr. Caruso said.

    Arguing that the risks were laid out in the prospectus also seems to have run into a stone wall. Mr. Hosier’s lawyers produced seven different notices on the topic published by Finra and its predecessor regulator since 1994, including a notice from 2009 that states: “Providing risk disclosure in a prospectus or product description does not cure otherwise deficient disclosure in sales material, even if such sales material is accompanied or preceded by the prospectus.”

    Mr. Hosier’s victory is particularly noteworthy, given the nominal amounts typically extracted by regulators in cases against major banks. The punitive damages awarded to Mr. Hosier, for example, are more than triple the $4.45 million penalty levied against Wachovia Securities by the Securities and Exchange Commission this month in a suit that the S.E.C. settled with the bank. The S.E.C. accused the bank of selling about $10 million of mortgage-related securities to investors at above-market prices and at excessive markups. Wachovia, now part of Wells Fargo, neither admitted nor denied wrongdoing in the settlement.

    The arbitrators in Mr. Hosier’s case seemed keen to hold Wall Street accountable. And his win against Citigroup does not appear to be an anomaly. Since April 2010, his lawyer, Mr. Aidikoff, has argued 16 other arbitrations involving the same type of investment. Mr. Aidikoff and the lawyers who assist him have won every one.

    In an interview, Mr. Hosier said the experience had opened his eyes to the disturbing ways of Wall Street.

    “Instead of the financial world being the lubricant for business, they are out there manufacturing products with no utility whatsoever except for generating fees,” he said. “Somebody’s got to do something about Wall Street. It is destroying the country.” 

  15. Cuyahoga County Court of Common Please Judge John O’Donnell has replaced county foreclosure Chief Magistrate Stephen Bucha on cases involving the no longer existing Chase Mortgage Company with subordinate magistrate Tom Vozar

    following the initiation of a mortgage fraud investigation two weeks ago by county prosecutor Bill Mason, though O’Donnell has not recused himself from the cases since he supervises Bucha and allegedly directed him on the alleged illegal activity.

    Magistrates are manually assigned to foreclosure cases by the 34 judges of the general division of the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas, which is led by Chief Judge Nancy Fuerst, but are under the supervision of the judges, who are ultimately responsible for the case outcomes and the actions of the magistrates, whether legal or illegal.

    At issue is the attempt by attorneys for Chase Mortgage Company, which merged and became Chase Home Finance in 2005, foreclosing on homes of Black people when foreclosure rules adopted by the Federal District Court of the Northern District of Ohio in 2007 require that all foreclosure complaints initiated before 2005 by Chase Mortgage Company must be dismissed and refiled by Chase Homes Finance, the company that bought Chase Mortgage Company. And upon refiling the mortgage company cannot ask for legal fees. This holds true for any other foreclosures where during the litigation the mortgage company changes hands.

    In 2009 the Ohio Supreme Court in Wells Fargo vs. Jordan upheld a decision by the Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals that says that foreclosure plaintiffs that no longer own the mortgage for any reason including because the mortgage company has changed hands via either a buyout or merger lack standing to foreclose and that Ohio trial courts thus lack jurisdiction to proceed and must dismiss the cases, a decision that O’Donnell obviously seeks to unethically ignore to help rich and corrupt mortgage companies.

    “A person lacking any right or interest to protect may not invoke the jurisdiction of the court,” the decision reads is part.

    Though O’Donnell has replaced Bucha, an indication, some say, of wrong doing, he still refuses to dismiss the foreclosure cases as required by federal court foreclosure rules and Ohio case law where he has no jurisdiction to hear them since Chase Mortgage Company no longer exist, lacks standing to litigate foreclosures because Chase Finance and not it owns or holds the mortgage notes, and is essentially dead. That, say activists, is because he is corrupt and hates Black people and thinks he is above the law because he is White, male, and a member of the Cuyahoga County Democratic Party. To date some 50 party affiliates have pleaded guilty to corruption related charges via an ongoing FBI investigation.

    Bucha’s office has allegedly advised Black homeowners that the illegal sales would go forward anyway and threatened them to file for bankruptcy or to face O’Donnell’s wrath, a wrath that has been protected in spite of the filing of affidavits of prejudice to remove him from cases.

    To O’Donnell’s aid was former Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Moyer, who was accused of denying sound affidavits of prejudice filed by Blacks and women and sanctioning the illegal activity. He died last April and the seat is now held by Chief Justice Maureen O’Connor, a respected jurist elected to the court in 2002 and to the chief justice seat in Nov.

    And Cuyahoga County Sheriff Bob Reid is refusing interior home appraisals for foreclosures as required by state law, coupled with deflating home values in Cuyahoga County suburbs on foreclosure sales by more than 60 percent allegedly so that mortgage companies and politically connected people can by them back at reduced prices and then slap the former homeowners with the bill.

    In one case a home that the Cuyahoga County Recorder’s offices appraised for some $120 thousand just last year is up for sale for some $36 thousand per Reid, and with the sanctioning of Bucha, O’Donnell and county mortgage fraud investigator Tim Lea, who is accused of backing off of mortgage fraud investigations for corrupt Whites involved with the activity and urging Black homeowners to settle to their detriment rather than fight, a conflict of interest, some say.

    And one homeowner alleges that she was told that unless she would agree to a loan modification pushed by Lea and Chase Mortgage Company attorneys, Bucha,O’Donnell and others they would allegedly bribe county appraisers to reduce the home value so that the mortgage company or whomever they direct would buy it and benefit at Reid’s illegally reduced sale price, a claim supported by the $36 thousand reduction at Reid’s direction. Those appraisers, whom O’Donnell approved payment for their illegal activity, are Kevin Kelly, Patrick Walsh and John Lynch, all White men.

    Whether Reid, O’Donnell and Bucha are receiving kickbacks for doing in the Black community and others with their foreclosure schemes is not known, though those buying the illegally reduced foreclosures include Cleveland City Council members.

    To perpetuate the alleged fraud lawyers for Chase Mortgage Company, namely Bricker and Eckler and Lerner, Sampson and Rothfuss, are falsifying notices of foreclosure sale to Bucha, O’Donnell and Reid and leaving off the name of Chase Mortgage Company because they know it no longer exist, and this is after the mortgage company lawyers file a second suit before Cuyahoga Judge Carolyn Friedland with Chase Hone Finance as the plaintiff.

    According to case dockets, Friedland goes along with it but dismissed the second suit in a particular case filed by Chase Home Finance while an original suit filed by Chase Mortgage Company against the same homeowner was pending before O’Donnell after grassroots activists complained, and after Cuyahoga County Clerk of Courts Gerald Fuerst allegedly harassed the homeowner with numerous summons of the illegal second suit, and deputy sheriffs from Reid’s office were allegedly sent to harass her at her home to deliver them.

    And even after Friedland dismissed the suits, Fuerst is accused of still harassing the homeowners with continual summons. He even went so far as to put on case dockets the date of the required response, though no such response was required since Friedland had dismissed the cases after being exposed.

    And though Chase Mortgage Company does not exist anymore Reid is still scheduling foreclosure sales to hurt Black homeowners, saying they must contact O’Donnell to stop it. And he is doing so even without the interior inspections required by state law, and after his chief deputy leaves telephone messages to the homeowners saying that Mason’s office said an interior appraisal is required by state law prior to any foreclosure sale.

    O’Donnell staff attorney Alexa Beeler referred questions to the foreclosure department.

    Mason’s office did not respond to a request for comment on the mortgage fraud investigation.

    Bricker and Eckler was hired by county officials to investigate potential malfeasance of county employees, a questionable gesture since its attorneys are simultaneously participating in potential mortgage fraud against Black homeowners without county officials saying a single word.

    Since County Executive Ed Fitzgerald has adopted ethics rules for county employees like Reid and Fuerst, who are not elected but appointed by Fitzgerald and the Cuyahoga County Council, questions have arisen as to why he and the 11-member county council are permitting the activity to the detriment of the Black community and others.

    Fitzgerald campaigned on honest county reform, a campaign that some say has fallen on death ears where Black and other homeowners are concerned, and are seemingly at risk for ongoing mortgage and foreclosure fraud.

    Fitzgerald did not return phone calls seeking comment.
    Posted by Journalist Kathy Wray Coleman at 2:26 AM

  16. It’s always been my position that foreclosure victims and concerned citizens should mobilize and attend these court hearings as a unit. Each term of court should consist of a full house from calendar call until the baliff is recessed. For the People, By the People will help keep them honest, especially the elected officials. United we stand, Divided we fall

  17. Please see this comment:

    “Nearly 2 years into the case, “original” Note filed, not in name of SunTrust, with no indorsement”

    Do you mean filed with the court in the record? Has it been inspected? Chain of custody clean?

  18. Bravo Matt, you are an example of what a good lawyer is you uphold the oath you took for seeing justice as it should be seen, and for following the rules of the court. You speak up for what is right and fair, if every lawyer, attorney, of of judge follow the rules according to the law they are supposed to uphold, this crime would not be taking place, our country would be in a much better shape, and the banks would have been put in their place. You did the right thing and that’s appreciated by all of us, we just wish and hope that more lawyers have the guts to follow suit! we need strong honest law leaders and judges that respect themselves and their benches enough to do the right thing as well! Thank you and God bless!

  19. I’ve chatted enough with Matt to know that he is a stand up guy ,, someone to be trusted and that’s saying a LOT when you look at many in the profession… I didn’t ask whose courtroom this occurred in but whatever circuit it is we need to help each other out and the best way to do that is to embarass the court into behaving properly through covert videotaping and publicly posting the video ,, clear concise video showing exactly what is alleged ,, plaintiffs passing around the judges signature stamp like a bottle at a frat party… judges disallowing any argument frm the defendant to be heard … etc. etc.

    Matt , if you need anything in Ninja9 let me know ,, I’ll save you the drive time.

  20. Well said! I’m still on my feet with this battle of endurance with Wells Fargo and Phelan Hallinan and Schmieg. My first Pro Se masterpiece was a Motion to Dismiss. I sat there in disbelief while the judge asked the attorney if he had all the original docs. HE SAID yes and she said “I believe you. You’re a professional and I know you wouldn’t say anything that wasn’t true.’ Then she looked at me and said ‘Your motion is DENIED.’
    Yes, this really happened!

  21. Ann

    Yes. “why isn’t anyone looking at this????””

    Answer — deregulation — they do not have to.


    April 24th, 2011 · Foreclosure If a bank owns and holds a mortgage and has a right to foreclose, why then are so many banks deeding properties between themselves after the Certificate of Title has been issued? This is a question that everyone should have been asking, but it is particularly important given the OCC Settlement Agreements and the promises by some groups, including ProPublica to monitor cases where the banks did not have the right to foreclose. Forget about all the robo signer stuff, this issue is much easier to document (it’s all right there in the public records for all the world to see, and the magnitude dwarfs everthing else.

    Best of all you don’t have to wait around until the (ahem) “independent consultants” hired by the banks discover and disclose those cases where they did not have the right to foreclose…you can start “independently consulting” right from your own computer. Here’s how it goes…..

    Log onto any county, take Pinellas County for instance Now, pick a bank, any bank and search for deeds from that bank beginning in say 2009. What you will find is page after page of deeds transferring properties, for no consideration, between all the banks. If the foreclosing bank owned and held the note and had the right to foreclose, we wouldn’t see all these transfers.

    I believe the huge numbers of intra-bank deeds is clear evidence that the banks did not have standing, ownership or holder status from the beginning. I believe that in perhaps tens of thousands of cases, the named plaintiff in the lawsuit was nothing more than a fiction, a place keeper, a straw party used to get title. Someone would figure out later who might actually have some right to that mortgage or they will just transfer properties and obligations around among the institutions. After all, no one was looking and no one cares, right?

    Why isn’t anyone looking at this?

  23. With all due respect to Matt Weidner and alot of respect.

    He needs to get a large law firm with lots of clout to take this on if possible. or maybe a team of 4 lawfirms to take this on.

    Just a thought

  24. Kudos to Mark Stopa Esq. Another Florida Foreclosure Defense Hero.

    I had a hearing earlier this week on a Motion to Substitute Party Plaintiff. It’s the type of motion we’ve seen all too many times – one fraudster bank wants to remove itself as the plaintiff and allow a different fraudster bank to substitute in its place. Unfortunately, these motions get granted all of the time, often ex parte, without notice, and without hearing. Many times, I don’t even know these motions are filed until the Order is signed, as the plaintiff’s lawyers submit Orders to the judges without copying me. I’ve complained about this process repeatedly, yet judges all seem to think this conduct is okay – not ideal, but a byproduct of insufficient budget funding.

    At my hearing on Monday, this process reached a new low.

    SunTrust Bank had at least six such motions pending, trying to substitute Nationstar in its place as the plaintiff, all at the same hearing time. At a rocket-docket, I watched four such motions be granted without opposition. When my motion came up for hearing, I wasn’t terribly optimistic, but I felt my argument was sound. After all, Florida procedure authorizes a substitution of the party plaintiff in the event of a “transfer of interest,” but in its motion, SunTrust alleged no such transfer. Here was the sequence of events:

    1. Lawsuit filed by SunTrust, alleging lost Note, no copy of Note attached to Complaint.

    2. Assignment executed and recorded, purportedly conveying to SunTrust.

    3. Nearly 2 years into the case, “original” Note filed, not in name of SunTrust, with no indorsement.

    4. Assignment filed and recorded from SunTrust to Nationstar.

    5. Motion to Substitute Party Plaintiff filed, alleging an Assignment of Mortgage had been recorded.

    As I see it, the second assignment, to Nationstar, was irrelevant and insufficient without more facts, particularly since SunTrust lacked standing at the inception of the case. At minimum, SunTrust should have alleged some facts in its motion, something to the effect of:

    The Note and Mortgage were transferred to Nationstar on X date, so Nationstar is now the proper Plaintiff.

    This motion didn’t even have that much! It pointed to the assignment (two years into the case, from a company that was not on the note and obtained its own assignment after the suit was filed), and that was it. But what does the assignment really tell anyone without an allegation that the Note and Mortgage were transferred after the suit was filed? Absolutely nothing.

    Quite candidly, this is not the strongest argument I’ve ever made. It’s technical. I think I’m right, but I’m not going to criticize a judge for ruling against me. The problem was that I was about 45 seconds into my argument, and had clearly not finished my argument, when the judge interrupted, said “you can argue all of that later in the case, the motion is granted.”

    I immediately asked if the Order could so reflect, and he said “No, I’ve already signed the Order.”

    At that point, I was pissed. It wasn’t a matter of whether I was right or wrong on the merits of the motion. It was a matter of the judge not even being willing to let me make the argument before making a ruling. It’s not like I was rambling on and on, either – I had talked for less than a minute, with a very coherent argument, when he interrupted me (and signed an Order).

    Aggravated at the obvious denial of due process, I began to argue more. The judge refused to listen, saying the hearing was over.

    I moved to disqualify him, arguing he refused to let me be heard. He refused to rule on the motion to disqualify him, instead saying I was “out of order” and telling the bailiff to remove me from the courtroom.

    With all due respect, is this what it’s come to in our courtrooms? Judges sign Orders without letting one side be heard? Then refuse to let that party finish a brief argument? Then tell the bailiff to remove the lawyer who moves to disqualify them?

    I don’t expect to win every hearing. But I absolutely do expect that I will be given a fair chance to be heard at every hearing. For this judge to take that away is offensive and degrades the entire system of justice. If this is happening to you, fight. I’m filing a written motion to disqualify this judge, and I’m going to word it in a way that it’s impossible for him to (lawfully) deny it. And if he does deny it, I’ll go to the Second District.

    As lawyers in the foreclosure crisis, we all need to stand up for our right to be heard. I’m not saying to pick a fight. I’m not saying be argumentative. I’m saying to not allow our basic rights to due process to be trampled. If a judge refuses to listen, make him/her. If the judge refuses, complain about it (respectfully, but without backing down). If it takes getting thrown out of court, I’ll live with that. What’s the alternative? If I give up, then our system of justice will continue to erode, piece by piece, and pretty soon, they’ll be nothing left at all.

    Mark Stopa

  25. Matt Weidner Esq. is my Hero.

  26. The alleged splitting of attorney fees between foreclosure law firms and third-party mortgage servicing providers is the subject of another lawsuit, bringing the number of cases filed on this issue to five within the past seven months, said Nick Wooten, an Alabama-based plaintiff’s attorney involved in all of the cases.

    By mid-May, Wooten said he expects to file 10 to 12 additional cases, making similar allegations about what he claims are illegal, split-attorney fee arrangements between mortgage servicing outsourcers and law firms. The cases are concentrated in the Northern District of Mississippi, the Southern District of Alabama and the Northern District of Florida-Pensacola division.

    The latest case involves plaintiff, Susan Marie Harris of Florida, against Lender Processing Services (LPS: 28.41 +0.11%), its subsidiary LPS Default Solutions Inc., and the Ben-Ezra & Katz law firm.

    Harris, who is seeking class-action status of her lawsuit, claims the defendants violated bankruptcy code by creating contractual agreements that allowed them to “illegally split attorney’s fees” with law firms that signed up to join LPS Default Solutions’ attorney network.

    Harris alleges the defendants set up a contractual arrangement in which attorneys in the LPS network compensated LPS Default Solutions by splitting attorney’s fees with the outsourcer. Because of this compensation model, the plaintiff contends LPS was able to offer its clients — namely large mortgage servicers – some services free of charge, expanding its competitive positioning in the default servicing marketplace.

    Harris filed her complaint in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Florida — Pensacola division.

    A spokesperson for LPS said Friday the company does not comment on specific ongoing litigation matters, but “has been successful in disposing of similar allegations in the past and is confident it will do so in the future.”

    Ben-Ezra also is named as a defendant in the case as the law firm under contract by LPS in this case. A spokesperson for the Fort Lauderdale, Fla.-based firm was not immediately available for comment.

    When asked if every in-network law firm working with LPS Default could face litigation, Wooten said “at some level, it is likely that each of those law firms will have to address their relationship with LPS.” He estimates that more than 200 firms have contracts with the mortgage servicing outsourcer.

    Harris contends in her suit that “LPS Default and the network (law) firms attempt to disguise what are in fact attorneys’ fee sharing and referral agreements by characterizing the fees paid by the attorneys to LPS Default as administrative fees.” Harris alleges that when a bankruptcy court is wrapping up one of the cases handled by LPS and one of its in-network law firms, the law firm applies for attorney’s fees and does “not disclose to the courts that a substantial portion of the fees requested will be paid to LPS Default.”

    The result, Harris claims, is a situation where LPS Default and its network law firms “fraudulently mislead the bankruptcy courts, the bankruptcies and their attorneys as well as the bankruptcy trustee as to the actual amount of attorneys’ fees incurred by the creditors,” the complaint states. The complaint accuses LPS, LPS Default and Ben-Ezra with abuse of the bankruptcy process, fraud on the court, contempt of bankruptcy code, contempt of federal rules of bankruptcy procedure, breach of the uniform mortgage covenant, unauthorized practice of law and civil conspiracy.

    The Harris case filed in Florida this week resembles existing cases filed by Nick Wooten, where large mortgage servicing outsourcers are facing the same claims.

    The issue of fee-splitting isn’t new. It arose in a 2008 Houston bankruptcy case involving Ernest and Mattie Harris. The couple said its loan servicer, Saxon Mortgage Services, never told the court it had hired Fidelity National Information Services as its agent. (LPS was spun off from Fidelity in 2008.) The borrowers claimed that Fidelity’s involvement resulted in higher legal fees. Fidelity steadfastly denied wrongdoing in that case, arguing that its business model created efficiencies that lowered costs for all. HousingWire Magazine wrote about the case in its inaugural issue, in September 2008.

    Wooten’s first bankruptcy-related case, filed last year in the Northern District of Mississippi, makes similar allegations against Prommis Solutions Holding Corp., its majority owner Great Hill Partners, and the law firm of Johnson & Freedman. The suit also names Lender Processing Services, and its subsidiary, LPS Default Services, as defendants.

    Another case filed in the Bourbon Circuit Court in Kentucky involves a homeowner who counter sued Wells Fargo (WFC: 28.54 -1.01%) last year in a foreclosure action. The plaintiff alleged the company did not own his mortgage by assignment. In addition, the plaintiff accused the Manley, Deas, Kochalski law firm, LPS and LPS Default Solutions of illegally splitting attorney’s fees as part of their contractual arrangement.

    Wooten filed two other cases this month. In the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Alabama, a plaintiff named Katrinn Bowden Meeker accused LPS, LPS Default Solutions and the firm of Sirote & Permutt of reaching “an arrangement to illegally split attorney’s fees.”

    In yet another case, plaintiffs in the Northern District of Mississippi made similar allegations against LPS, LPS Default and the firm of Morris and Associates.

  27. Matt Weidner Esq is one of the few practicing attorneys, brave & honorable enough to expose and report abuses of the court concerning foreclosures.
    If the Bar Association in Florida and the other states,did their job, could this be happening?
    How does the judge know what documents are being stamped with his stamp?
    The judge, wisely not named in his post should be removed from the bench.

  28. Tresspass…time to pass that bong buddy!

  29. Matt Weidner, so many have accepted the mark, (forehead – oath, pledge, etc) (hand – signing false documents, lies, fraud).

    I greet you in Light and Love, Namaste.
    (The Creator in me recognizes the same Creator in you).

    You did well. You were the “Creator within” providing a spiritual record of their deeds and their awareness of what they were doing in their court of ‘law’ (whoever law they were enforcing even as they acted as a God and cast judgment)

    You could have walked away, yet you stayed and did a loving thing.

    They cannot say they didn’t know.

    In all this chaos, the unravel has occurred, and these are just last desperate measures. These cases appear to be the transfer of ownership or increased wealth for some, yet they can’t convey ownership of anything they don’t own. They can only hope we ‘abandon’ our claim and we have not. Years later we are still saying we have been robbed, and that has made it difficult for them to move forward with a clean slate. Thou shalt not steal.

    I cannot be compelled to perform the obligations of any undisclosed contracts entered into unknowingly, unwillingly, unintentionally. I AM the Creator within.

    Light and Love,
    Trespass Unwanted, alive, allodial, corporeal, life, live born, born alive, free, freeman, in jure divino, in jure proprio, whole blood, adult

  30. Matt Weidner is a BRAVE man and I hope everyone here supports him in his efforts to bring this FRAUD to light. Matt takes his oath very seriously and yet must live in fear for speaking the truth. How sad our world has become when truth does not set you free it may get even attorney jailed or worse disbarred to keep the truth from coming to light . Out thoughts and prayers are with you across the country Mr. Weidner. And thanks to your family who stand by you and allow you to persue the truth, they must be very PROUD of you I know I am!

  31. Good to hear this first-hand experience from a real attorney and human being.

    Keep marching for justice.

  32. there is a great risk to the Constitutional rights of all that is inflicted when budgeting issues can be manipulated to deny funadmental entitlements. Im not referring to a purported entitlement to recover a check from FICA of funds you paid in 30 years ago—–but of items in the Bill of Rights–in the Amendments to The Constitution. Like the 5th amendment “entitlement” to Due Process–extended to states–even Florida courts–via the 14th Amendment.

    It would seem to me that passing over the gavel and stamp to foreign plaintiffs [i mean out of state or maybe a German or UK bank now and then] would seem to press pretty hard on the concept.

    It is a well-worn game—-practiced by legislative bodies and special interests. In the face of legislation that responds to public interests, a pragmatic legislator on the lookout to protect his particular business constituency can “look good” to the public by voting in favor of protection of individual rights—but all the while know that he/she simply must wait till budget day to “defund” the substantive measure. The regulary world is particularly rife with this today as financial woes provide cover for de-funding regulation supported by the public. It enables the two sides Ds and Rs to always win while the public always loses.

    In the described instane here—the court probably can assert with some truth that the $$$ arent there to enable its own staff to wield the judicial power AT LEAST SYMBOLICALLY. The true affront and the real denial of due process relates to that SYMBOLIC shift of power. As the writer queries,”What wouls a pro-se think of this?”

    The answer does not require a masters degree in psychology, nor an LLM in Constitutional Law from Georgetown or wherever. The defendant is completely intimidated——–psyched out–ready to fold. At this point it would not matter to the hapless defendant if there were two claimants simultaneously demanding payment on a “copy” of a note. Or if there was an assignment of mortgage literally signed by “Joe Blow” over a signature line with Linda Green’s name printed on it–and notarized by someone asserting that he observed Linda place her signature on the document.

    The home-owner knows that the last chance at truth and review is gone-there never was a chance from the day the documents were signed.

    The horror of it is that the plaintiffs and their counsel have learned that there is no limit on the abuse-because the state has chosen not to provide funds to ensure the protection of the citizens’ rights. It cannot be blamed on the court–although some individuals in the court system may not be all that unhappy about it.

    Soooooo—what do the newest loans and borrowers look like–those whose terms are created by the Enrons and Lehmans, and WAMUs “Next Generation”. They have the benefit of institutional hindsight. The next generation of borrowers does not. They haven’t even wised up to the fact that the loan transaction should be reviewed by an attorney-and a good one at that before signing.

    They also don’t realize that to the servicers, homeowners with mortgages are really just net net tenants. Temporary occupants until the next turnover.

    There are two fundamental differences though. Tenants generally have statutory protections not afforded defaulting home-owers. A more sinister difference is that landlords do not like high turnover rates. Turnovers add costs to the landlord–a landlord has some practical economic interest in working with a tenant to get over a temporary bump.

    A landlord makes no $$$ from an empty house !!!

    In sharp contrast, the new business model for the US home loan industry is that an originator is paid large fees to create a new loan, the army of paper-shufflers that constitute “securitization” get high fees doing that, the servicer gets higher fees for a default than ongoing servicing-and a host of other hangers on make fees seizing and “maintaining” empty houses.

    In short, landlords want their houses occupied-while servicers are simply awaiting a default to “cash-in”. Investors [read public and private pension trusts] and borrowers be damned. If a little help is needed to get to that desired result-ie the default, then why not pitch in? So if a recently laid-off borrower makes a call [good luck getting an answer] and actually reaches someone, the patent answer enshrined in the servicing agreements is “You need to miss 2 months payments before we can put you on our list for modification” Now 20 years ago, your local banker would give you that 60 days sternly and firmly-but not try to induce you to default !

    That banker like the landlord suffered costs if there was a default. That is where the system has boken down in the mad rush to create products for Wall Street to skim. Today, that tiny amount of “skin” they are talking about is recovered in fees before the ink dries on the docs. After that the whole system is skewed towards encouragement of default.

    High turnover is the goal-the basic idea that the deal was to be mutually beneficial was lost somewhere–usually helped along by short statutes of limitation on predatory lending.

    Predictable defaults are even more valuable to servicers than any other asset-which is basically what servicing rights are–assets—and the opportunities to make money from predictable defaults are at the top of the valuable asset list.

    So when I opened the Washingtomn Post Real estate section today, I saw numerous ads offering the teaser rates on the front end with a 5-year reset.

    Is there anybody out there that does not expect the interest rates to jump to astronomical levels within 5 years? So we all know these new young and ignorant home-buyers are getting sucked into the same trap that Greenspan set for them in 2003-4-irrationally low interset rates to apply to teasers—to be followed by irrationally high interest rates effective for the rests. Bernanke is not new–hes using the same old game-plan.

    So what we are witnessing is a build up to another meltdown-and this time the servicers and their hangers-on know exactly what the rules are-or actually ARE NOT. There aren’t any rules.

    And as the writer here has stated-dont look for help against the foreign originators in your local court-because the 1st casualty of budget cutting has been justice.

  33. JUDGES ARE BEING BRIBED IN FRONT OF OUR EYES we do not have a chance. they do not get the jist of the fraud. the subprime fraud caused the economic fall and we are making alot less money than 5 yrs ago and we can not afford these over appraised houses. if times were good we would all sell. why do the judges not see this???? bribery it is going to conme out. i am sure they do live in a vacuum. they know whats goingon. but when they go home at tnight and cash there pay off money froim wells fargo and pay their mortgage they are happier then a pig in sh-t. “damd= deadbeats. should’ve paid their mortgage. Hehehe “

  34. WINNING!! (As in Weidner is…)

  35. […] Source: Livinglies’s Weblog […]

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: