Glaski Court refuses to “depublish” decision, two judges recuse themselves.

And now we are learning through the patents the banks filed in the USTPO, that it was actually the 1003 loan application that began the securitization process, BEFORE the borrower signed the documents – as it was pledged/committed/sold to the investment bank (underwriters) …dipped into securitization (like being a little pregnant, wouldn’t you say?). All done without disclosure to the homeowner.

Livinglies's Weblog

Corroborating what I have been saying for years on this blog, the Supreme Court of the state of California is reasserting its position that if entity ABC wants to collect on a debt in California, then that particular entity must own the debt. This is basic common sense and simply follows article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code. If a court were to adopt the position of the banks, then a new industry would be born, to wit: spying on people to determine whether or not they are behind on any payment to anyone and then beating the real creditor to court, filing a complaint and getting a judgment without the real creditor even knowing about it. The Supreme Court of the state of California obviously understands this.

This is not really complicated although the words used are complicated. If you find out that your neighbor is behind in payments…

View original post 787 more words

4 thoughts on “Glaski Court refuses to “depublish” decision, two judges recuse themselves.

  1. What is the 1003?

    On Feb 27, 2014, at 5:42 PM, Deadly Clear wrote:

    WordPress.com Deadly Clear posted: “And now we are learning through the patents the banks filed in the USTPO, that it was actually the 1003 loan application that began the securitization process, BEFORE the borrower signed the documents – as it was pledged/committed/sold to the investment b”

  2. Two of the judges recusing themselves sounds like the judges are aware of the importance of the public knowledge and the financial disclosures of the judges being part of the trust, that they needed to recuse themselves or are decent judges knowing they had to recuse themselves. Guessing of course. Hopefully recusing themselves due to they have integrity and are honest judges. Would like to think this is true for some of our judges. I dont have much faith in the federal judges in most states. Very disappointed in our over all judicial system. But glimmers of hope are coming out of the higher courts and some of the lower courts.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s