Judging De Minimis: Does the Judge in Your Foreclosure Case Own Stock in the Bank Foreclosing on You?
What would you do if you found out that the judge presiding over your foreclosure owned stock in the bank foreclosing
on you?
Michael J. Fuchs has been living through a Hawaii court process that turned into a reality show nightmare. The Judge in his case owns a lot of stock in the foreclosing bank! And that’s not all…
HBO‘s former CEO and Chairman of the Board, Michael J. Fuchs, invested over $100 million (dollars) in a Big Island Hawaii development that sank like the Titanic with the economy in 2007. The Hawaii scales of justice have not been tipped in Mr. Fuchs’ favor – apparently they haven’t even been balanced.
Hawaii attorney Gary Dubin, discovered a seriously conflicted situation with more than an appearance of impropriety and asked that the Judge, Honorable Bert I. Ayabe, recuse himself from the case because of…stock investments in Bank of Hawaii, campaign donations to a U.S. senatorial candidate… a law firm first representing Fuchs and then representing the opposing parties… whose lead attorneys were law school chums of the judge, the judge’s wife may have performed legal work for the developer… and the list goes on.
Check out the rest here…
~
We are victims of a wrongful foreclosure and were never in arrears. We paid almost $40,000 in legal fees and the Judge made a judgment not based on the facts of law. How do I find out if the Judge owned stocks in this bank. Our case is unlike any you have ever seen. We had a preponderance of evidence and the bank could not and did not prove that they even had a legal right to collect our payments, none of which were applied to our principal. Our closing never came to fruition according to UCC 3-305. We were never in possession of our Note and we were never given any of the required document to satisfy the terms of a legal contract. Our home was sold without our knowledge and we were not in arrears. The bank never sent a Notice of intent to foreclose nor was the illegal sale ever published in the newspaper. The bank attorney had no proof of sale, no memorandum to satisfy the statute of fraud. No money ever switched hands. There is so much more to this story and I am not giving up until all the involved are exposed.