<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: New Jersey &#124; Denbeaux TILA Defense Deutsche Bank vs. Dominguez and Status of BOA v. LImato	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://4closurefraud.org/2011/07/14/new-jersey-denbeaux-tila-defense-deutsche-bank-vs-dominguez-and-status-of-boa-v-limato/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2011/07/14/new-jersey-denbeaux-tila-defense-deutsche-bank-vs-dominguez-and-status-of-boa-v-limato/</link>
	<description>- Fighting Foreclosure Fraud BY SHARING THE KNOWLEDGE</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:24:32 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.7</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty, Foe of Tyranny		</title>
		<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2011/07/14/new-jersey-denbeaux-tila-defense-deutsche-bank-vs-dominguez-and-status-of-boa-v-limato/#comment-39217</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty, Foe of Tyranny]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:24:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://4closurefraud.org/?p=27916#comment-39217</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In addition to the TILA claims note that in the latter portions of the court&#039;s order the court relies heavily on the rules of evidence as its primary mean for dismissal. Inadmissible hearsay testimony, lack of personal knowledge, lack of competent fact witnesses, impropriety of the attorneys testimony, etc. 

Read ALL the rule folks, of civil procedure and evidence as well.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In addition to the TILA claims note that in the latter portions of the court&#8217;s order the court relies heavily on the rules of evidence as its primary mean for dismissal. Inadmissible hearsay testimony, lack of personal knowledge, lack of competent fact witnesses, impropriety of the attorneys testimony, etc. </p>
<p>Read ALL the rule folks, of civil procedure and evidence as well.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
