Comments on: OUTRAGEOUS! Foreclosure Rocket Docket Judge Entering Final Judgments Against Homeowners BEFORE Hearings

By: cindy

cindy — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 08:00:53 +0000

HOW MANY ATTORNEYS DO I HAVE TO PAY TO DO NOTHING? Norman Newhouse out of Redwood City, California took my $5,000 cash. I was looking for an attorney to handle where my prior attorney left off when he was arrested and put in jail for forging the judges signature on another case. He filed my case in Federal Court and left me. The existing judge allowed me time to hire another attorney as she prepared herself for retirement from the bench. She order the government paid attorney at the Federal ProBono Project to locate an attorney for me. A week later, the Federal ProBono Project attorney (paid from our taxes), Rachel Nunes (fyi, her husband is the DA if I’m not mistaken so it’s all in the family in Santa Clara, Calif). Rachel sent an email to a couple of law firms and they declined for conflict of interest. WTF? Why would she send an email to firms that were connected to the bank? Anyways, lucky me, I found schmuck (Norman Newhouse) that was apparently on a 2yr leave for stealing client funds but I was not aware of that until after (my dumbness). He said he could handle my case so I wouldn’t be pro per. For 9 months, he refused to put his name on the pleadings and he said after he continued to take funds from me that he wasn’t representing me at the end. My case was dismissed in favor of the bank. The judge granted my motion to amend and if I missed the 21 days then she would order a dismissal. Three months after I filed my timely (but faulted) amended complaint, I filed a motion to dismiss since the bank failed to reply. The bank failed to reply to the courts demand for a status update timely and I also motioned to that. It didn’t matter, the judge completely protected the bank. In fact, the judge and the bank (defendant) stood there and discussed how the case could be remanded back or dismissed. My attorney, Norman Newhouse sat in the back waiting for me to give him money but he said he wasn’t approved yet to practice after his 2 year probation. Last week I found out from one of member response on this site that Norman Newhouse was able to practice in the Northern District of California in San Jose and he lied to me. I also found out that Norman Newhouse represents the banks in the unlawful detainer. Norman Newhouse wrote my 2nd amended complaint and added additional causes of actions dispite the order from the judge prohibiting that and when I questioned it, he assured me it was ok and told me what to tell the judge. He keep asking me to give him $500 at a time after the initial $5000 and he didn’t give me receipts. Because of him, I am now in a horrible position. This is a bank who proceeded to evict me without first performing a foreclosure.

Is there an attorney in northern california that can represent me? I have had 4 attorneys take my money and do nothing with exception to the attorney who is now in jail. He did do something and he cared but the bank take care of him.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 26 Sep 2011 12:57:47 +0000

These judges all have pensions or perhaps own banking stocks. The pensions all have financial securities within the mutual funds. A conflict of interest is surely at hand. If the banks lose judgements the judges lose in their pensions.
ALL judges hearing cases of foreclosure or bank fraud need to prove they have no vested interest in the outcome of these types of cases. Is it possible? How about some feedback?

By: Lit Gant

Lit Gant — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 23:13:23 +0000

My words for Judge Campbell are not very nice. I think she represents robo-court-vigilantism. This woman should be taken in by the Florida Bar on its own initiative and reduced to a paralegal. This is the shame of the Florida judiciary. It claims its members are honest, follow the rule of law, and would never, never be a part of any miscarriage of justice or assessory to a crime. To say all these fraudulent documents are not a crime is plain out stupid. And this judge was prejudice against a Pro Se Defendant. This is a mockery of the Florida judiciary system. That a conformed summary judgment was performed before the hearing is fraud by the Court, not fraud on the Court. If I was that Defendant I would be filing complaints against her in every place I could. I would go after her even with a law suit. She is not above the law in this case in my opinion. I do not believe she has judicial immunity. I think she needs whipped out of the court-temple along with the other money changers whose tables she is working as an employee. Mrs. Cambell, if you read this: have the clean moral courage to resign. Take off that black robe. You are a disgrace to the legal profession. Florida Bar, don’t just act like this did not happen. Show this organization is honorable.

By: chichi

chichi — Sun, 28 Nov 2010 19:41:20 +0000

I have witnessed this first hand…I was observing some foreclosure cases in Palm Beach County…just to kill time the judge & his attorneys (FDLG) started talking about sports & upcoming games…now it’s 2:10p.m. & defendants case scheduled 2:45…judge said, well defendant probably won’t show up…granted final judgement 2:10 before scheduled time…i was sick to my stomach.

By: Equity G Free

Equity G Free — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 20:59:32 +0000

WOW , Just when I thought it was safe to get back into the water this comes out . We answered Pro Se to our complaint because we were trying to talk to, negotiate with , the servicer at the time . We wanted our day in court . Approaching retirement and never in court , ( traffic court once) we thought we would meet with them , resolve this and move on . We held these financial firms in good faith and believed they were morally and ethicly honest . In one year we learn that the loans they created and profited from were designed to fail . There is enough info on this every where .
Secondly we learn of the foreclosure mills making up fraudulent documents than excellerating the summary judgements through the courts . (Just 2 months ago) We knew that many , if not the majority of borrowers left their homes w/o a fight . We assumed the courts did their jobs and looked at the note, the documents ,for obvious defects . I read the NYTimes piece on the little judge from Brooklyn who was doing just that .
We have a second lawyer representing us now , and I applaud the bravery , honesty and moral stand by this lawyer and others who are upholding the law .
Outragious is a understatement . This judge is a disgrace , but seeing one of these loans (designed to fail) for the first time as they evicted the borower , the courts are aiding and abetting this fraud . I’m gonna try the Mozart way , not sure if its strong enough right now …

By: ForeclosureHamlet

ForeclosureHamlet — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 11:39:27 +0000

Today I will listen to Mozart’s requiem in honor of The Constitution of the State of Florida Section II and Section IX. Due Process.

Lisa
ForeclosureHamlet.org

By: ForeclosureHamlet

ForeclosureHamlet — Sun, 22 Aug 2010 08:33:26 +0000

And when the foreclosure crisis is done and over, the Street Gang will have purchased themselves a nice judiciary.

Rumors abound about the Florida Legislature “encouraging” the Florida Supreme Court an edict that 62% of foreclosure case backlog is to be cleared in the next few months. Oh, and the legislature might have “reminded” the Honorable judges that the Legislature is voting next year on the judge’s pensions & salaries………..

By: Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty - Foe of Tyranny

Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty - Foe of Tyranny — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 19:35:46 +0000

In reply to lisamarie.

Alternative language:

“… creating a stench in the nostrils of Lady Justice.”

I don’t recall where I read/heard that but it doesn’t come from my mind.

By: lisamarie

lisamarie — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 19:12:32 +0000

Thats exactly what I’m doing. They need to remove the Judges showing favor to the banks and putting the axe down on the homeowner before he can even defend hisself. Its not Justice, its a slap in lady justices’ face.

By: Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty - Foe of Tyranny

Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty - Foe of Tyranny — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:42:17 +0000

Hmm, another wrinkle I hadn’t considered in my case.

I attended a hearing in a different case in late July. Before the hearing concluded both counsel met with the judge in chambers. During this in chambers conference the judge made disparaging comments about the arguments I had put forward in my case, to the effect of “I don’t like any of his arguments.”

I have wondered to make of this, or whether anything can be made of this.

I have been in continued contact with defendant’s counsel in that case. I think I will a) try to obtain an affidavit of those events from defendant’s counsel and b) read the ethics rules that bind my local jurists.

I am presently in very good shape in my appeal and anticipate a reversal and remand for trial. Summary was granted in spite of there being no evidence of either indorsement or delivery of the p-note. Because there is only one judge in my circuit I’ll be in front of the same one. A recusal, or better yet a disqualification, would be a wondrous thing.