The Neil Garfield Foreclosure Show: The Differences between Information and Evidence

Thursdays LIVE! Click in to the The Neil Garfield Show

Or call in at (347) 850-1260, 6pm Eastern Thursdays

Neil Garfield will discuss the difference between Information and  Evidence as a preview to the upcoming Evidence seminar to be held February 2, 2018 at 1pm (look for an upcoming announcement).

Anyone who is litigating a foreclosure case needs to listen to this show!  Anyone who is preparing a forensic report without the proper credentials needs to listen to this show. Hint: No report from either side is admissible without proper foundation. Without foundation the report will be and should be excluded from being included in evidence for the trier of fact to consider.  Opinions that are often included in reports often diminish the credibility of the report unless the writer has been qualified as an expert witness. All testimony, reports and opinions will carry very little weight with the courts unless they are not only credible but are also persuasive.

Homeowners often believe that they have all of this information that shows the foreclosure is a scam, that the trust owns nothing, that the certificate holders own nothing, and that the banks and servicers are bad actors. How do you use that? Is information evidence?

In trial preparation and discovery knowledge is used for one of two things:

  1. Eroding the foundation or credibility of the prima facie case against the homeowner.
  2. Proving who is who and what is what. See our article to be released on 1/18/2018

Every successful strategy for winning a foreclosure defense case rests on the ability to blow up the robo-witness and deny the foreclosing party the ability to get documents (hearsay) into evidence. — or the ability to make the testimony or document less credible than it would appear at first blush.

Listen to this show if you want to know why lawyers pay for consultations with me to prepare discovery or trial strategy.

Pro se litigants: If this is too technical for you then you should not be litigating without a lawyer.

One Response

  1. Hmmm. I think I know what you are trying to say, but don’t agree with the way it is said here.

    First, one should always attack the authentication of documents by corporate officers who have no knowledge of them. One should object the documents are therefore hearsay. And one should attack “robowitnesses'” knowledge. But I can count on one hand the number of times that has worked.

    And I disagree that it must work in order to have a successful wrongful foreclosure case. In fact, I think that if the basis of one’s case requires that a Court refuse to admit the basic loan documents (note, deed of trust, assignments) into evidence, then that is a case that one should think long and hard before bringing in the first place.

    If that is too technical, then call me.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: