FRAUDCLOSURE | MOTION TO DISQUALIFY “ROBO-JUDGE” PETER DUBENSKY

“It is clear to Defendant and his undersigned counsel that the Judge is, with all due respect, a “robo-judge” when it comes to foreclosures. That sounds pejorative, but it is clear the Judge predetermined (in this case and many others) that he was going to grant summary judgment or set trial.”

~

Dismiss Cases? Or Cram Through Judgments?

By contrast, I am filing this Motion to DQ Judge because I’m so troubled at what happened in today’s hearing in a different case. This judge took it upon himself to issue an Order setting a hearing on the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (not setting a hearing on any of my client’s motions). After denying summary judgment (where plaintiff’s counsel was unprepared to proceed), the judge immediately set a trial, refusing to listen to my arguments or read my case law about why trial could not be set. In fact, when I asked to be heard, he pointed at the door, basically telling me I could leave if I didn’t agree.

In my opinion, it was clear this judge had pre-determined that he was going to grant summary judgment or set trial, regardless of the facts of a foreclosure case. Summary judgment or trial, that was it (on a case, mind you, that the judge took it upon himself to prosecute by setting a hearing). Respectfully, is that really appropriate?

You tell me – which approach do you think is better? Dismissing cases where the law authorizes, or judges taking it upon themselves to set a plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment for hearing, then either granting that motion or setting a trial (without regard to any arguments or case law about the propriety of a trial date)? I know which approach I think is proper/better.

Mark Stopa

www.stayinmyhome.com

Check out Mark’s post in full here…

PDF copy of the motion below…

~

4closureFraud.org

~

Motion to DQ Judge

Comments
5 Responses to “FRAUDCLOSURE | MOTION TO DISQUALIFY “ROBO-JUDGE” PETER DUBENSKY”
  1. Stormy 17 says:

    Now, we are getting to the root of the problem – the judges/courts. One way or the other they are in thr Banks pockets. In Polk County, Fl. The judges only rule on the banks’ behave. Judges have deaf hears (& sightless) to defendants responses & motions.

  2. To Tell The Truth says:

    Good question…also, from my observation over the years of these fraudclosures and myself as prose initially, I noted that the judges and some attorneys seem to feel slighted and upset that a citizen dare to try to defend himself without an attorney especially when the pro se shows extensive knowledge sometimes above that of the attorneys/judges since the pro se will go the extra mile to research in order to save his castle…after all, he is only another case to the legal scholars and nothing more as it now appears that the process of law and due process is now on the brink of annihilation…

  3. MARGETTA LANGLOIS PRO.SE says:

    THESE JUDGES ARE TOO COMFORTABLE IN THEIR SEATS THEY NEED TO DO A CLEAN SWEEP

    OF “DIRTY” JUDGES IN PASCO COUNTY……THEY DON’T ABIDE BY THE RULES & STATUES, IF AN

    ENTITY NEVER EXISTED IN FLA. LEGALLY, “NO” FORECLOSURE SHOULD “PREVAIL” BUT IT DOES THEY

    ARE BIAS , PREJUDICE & HATE “PRO.SE’ PEOPLE EVEN WHEN YOU HAVE ALL THE EVIDECE.

  4. qny81 says:

    We need to support Mr. Stopa by calling in that county.

  5. Bobbi Swann says:

    I have just one question: what judge will act on this filing? Will it be the judge that Mark is now disqualifying? I mean, if this Judge is that forthright in not abiding by due process what is to stop him even though there’s this disqualification filed?????

Leave a Reply