Capital One v. Peck and Gilliam v. Bank of America — Unraveling the Ancient Mysteries Behind Contemporary “Standing” Disputes in Foreclosure Courts

Your Host: Attorney Gary Victor Dubin
with
Co-Host:  Former Hawaii Governor John D. Waihee 

Foreclosure Workshop #61: Capital One v. Peck and Gilliam v. Bank of America — Unraveling the Ancient Mysteries Behind Contemporary “Standing” Disputes in Foreclosure Courts

For centuries, one of the most important yet confusing concepts in American Law has been that of the “standing” of a party to pursue claims and defenses in court.

Without “standing,” claims and defenses will be dismissed in court, which makes “standing” one of the most powerful weapons in foreclosure litigation especially.

Foreclosure defense concepts by themselves have traditionally remained confusing enough, as our listeners know, varying from jurisdiction to Continue reading

Advertisements

THE 3 STOOGES OF MERS – DISORDER IN THE COURT

MERS 3-STOOGESA landmark decision was made this week in Culhane v. Aurora in the United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit without a complete set of facts set out before what  appears to be its clueless judges.

The case decision, an APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS was to some degree based on the merits of standing answering the question: “Whether a mortgagor has standing to challenge the assignment of her mortgage — an assignment to which she is not a party and of which she is not a third-party beneficiary — is a matter of first impression for this court.” Continue reading