It is the premise that counts. The CA appellate court restores my faith in judiciary intelligence. Write good law, write a book, make a movie (you’re close to Hollywood) – in the long run it’ll be worth more than your stock portfolios.
| ||
| September 11, 2013
Previously published on September 10, 2013 The recent decision in Glaski v. Bank of America, National Association, et al., 160 Cal. Rptr. 3d 449 (2013), may, at least in certain circumstances, impact the ability of residential mortgage-backed security and commercial mortgage-backed security lenders to keep pooling and servicing agreements out of two-party borrower-lender disputes, and appears to place lenders on notice to verify the accuracy and effectiveness of their loan assignments. In Glaski, the borrower’s residence was foreclosed upon (due to nonpayment) by the successor to a securitized trust. After the foreclosure, the borrower filed a complaint for fraud, quiet title, wrongful foreclosure, declaratory relief and cancellation of foreclosure documents against the successor to the securitized trust, among other entities… |
View original post 697 more words
Deadly Clear 