Posts Tagged ‘Florida Supreme Court’
Monday, May 21st, 2012
When I was a kid growing up in the Bronx the U.S. Supreme Court always seemed to be above reproach.
Maybe my friends and I were naive, but I think maybe times have really changed. The Supreme Court, once a glaring symbol of constitutional democracy, has now been pulled into the day to day mudslinging of the political process.
To me, as a lawyer that is a true shame. The aura of neutrality around the Supreme Court has evaporated, and now the American public views it through the same partisan-colored glasses as it does the other two branches of government.
A new survey out this month shows the Supreme Court ‘s approval rating at a 25-year-low. The Pew Center for the People and The Press surveyed over 3,000 Americans, and just over half of them (52%) gave the Court a favorable rating. That is down from 58 percent just two years ago, and down from a high of 80% in 1994.
Why? Because the rule of law is no longer the only thing that matters inside the courtroom.
For me it starts with the Court’s ruling on Citizens United vs. FEC. A flurry of Super-PACs and their so-called ‘secret money’ now dominate the national political landscape, because of the 2010 decision that now ratifies their existence and equates corporations with people. If elections are taking an even more negative tone than usual, the court must accept some level of blame.
Some of the language from the recent hearing on health care seemed more appropriate at a Tea Party rally than at our nation’s highest court. Another survey by Bloomberg shows 80 percent of Americans believe that politics, and not the cases’ legal merits, will decide the outcome of Obama’s healthcare legislation.
(more…)
Tags: aura, Chaos, citizens united vs. fec, clarence thomas, congress, court, descend, Florida, Florida Supreme Court, Obama, pew center, political, Political Process, roman pino, State Supreme Courts, super pac, supreme court, supreme court of canada, supreme court of the united states, u.s. supreme court
Posted in Florida Supreme Court, US Supreme Court | 4 Comments »
Friday, May 11th, 2012
I’m not a reader of tea leaves, so I am not about to guess how the Florida Supreme Court will ultimately rule on Roman Pino vs. The Bank of New York.
But listening to the justices attack Amanda Lundergan, Roman Pino’s attorney, while seemingly going much easier on Bruce Rogow, the bank’s very well-respected lawyer, was at best, discouraging.
It’s common for the justices to try to poke holes in an attorney’s case, and it does not always mean that you can predict what their decision will be.
But with the thousands surely watching Thursday’s hearing, I was hoping the Court would have been a little more sensitive to the perception that they were most certainly creating, that the banks already have this one in the bag.
As a whole I found the Supreme Court judges flippant to the obvious fraud that Bank of New York has brought before the court in this case.
And for the Court to downplay the importance of that fraud, and what it means to the integrity of the judicial system, was offensive.
If you were an average homeowner watching yesterday’s hearing, I am pretty sure you came away with a feeling that the playing field is not level, and there are two different sets of rules for the banks and for the rest of us.
That is truly unfortunate.
The Supreme Court has to be above the fray, and they must not abdicate their responsibility to police their own system.
Which is exactly what would happen if the Court allows the phony documents, the fraudulent backdating, the bogus notes and assignments to be brought before them without penalty.
(more…)
Tags: amanada lundergan, bank of new york, banking, bruce rogow, case, court, Florida, Florida Supreme Court, florida supreme court ruling, Ice Legal, integrity, new york, pino, roman pino, romans, supreme, supreme court, supreme court judges, supreme court of the united states, the bank of new york
Posted in Florida foreclosures, Florida Law News, Florida Supreme Court, Roman Pino Vs Bank of New York | 6 Comments »
Wednesday, May 9th, 2012
The banks are terrified they might actually be held accountable for their actions!
If you haven’t already heard, there is a monumental case that was heard Thursday morning in the Florida Supreme Court, and every single homeowner should be paying close attention to this case.
To watch a replay of the oral arguments, please click here.
The case is Roman Pino vs. Bank of New York. It involves all the customary fraud I have seen in countless cases.
Missing documents, fraudulent assignments, fraudulents notaries, and forged documents, and a bank once again trying to shuffle it’s dirty deeds under the rug like loose dirt.
When Bank of New York first tried to foreclose on Pino, a regular working guy from Greenacres who fell behind on his mortgage when his business dried up, there was no assignment of mortgage.
So Bank Of New York’s lawyers tried to re-file with a new assignment, one which was fraudulently backdated (AKA robosigned).
The bank’s original lawyers, by the way, were from David J. Stern’s office. You know their story.
When our good friend and colleague Tom Ice, Pino’s lawyer, challenged the documents, Bank of New York suddenly decided they didn’t want to foreclosure anymore, dropped their lawsuit and scurried back into their hole.
End of the story??
Not even close. Ice continued to dog Bank of New York like a pitbull, because he, believe it or not, also thinks the banks need to actually be held accountable! (Remarkable I know.)
He tried to have the voluntary dismissal overturned, so that Bank of New York could face sanctions for the forged documents they tried to use to swindle Roman Pino and the court.
(more…)
Tags: 4th district court of appeals, attorney, bank, bank of new york, banking, banking industries, banks, case, court, David Stern, district court, Florida, Florida Supreme Court, foreclosure, foreclosures, landmark, mortgage, new york, pino, real property law, roman pino, romans, supreme court, tom ice
Posted in Bank Fraud, Florida foreclosures, Florida Law News, Florida real estate, Florida Supreme Court, Roman Pino Vs Bank of New York | 3 Comments »
Monday, December 19th, 2011
The Oppenheim Law editorial team found this ironic: A drug dealer has more constitutional rights to protection from the government in his home than your average homeowner in foreclosure.
In a case being appealed to the United States Supreme Court, the Florida Supreme Court recently held that because the “home” has a long standing history of receiving additional constitutional protect
Interestingly enough, the U.S. government, through Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, is the single largest investor of residential mortgages. So what this really means is that the government can steal your house through bad loan paperwork and fraudulent foreclosure practices, but the local drug dealer is safe from a sniff by Franky the Drug Sniffing Dog.ions, using a drug sniffing dog outside the front door of a drug dealer’s house constituted an illegal search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment. Yet this same court has allowed banks and investors to use the lower courts in Florida as their own private collection agency.
This is yet one more example of the absurd turn that this country has taken during the real estate crash and subsequent foreclosure crisis, putting the government into the position of protecting the sanctity of a home owned by a drug dealer violating criminal laws, while stripping the same protections from one who is just down on his financial luck, in part due to the banks themselves.
The English belief that “every man’s house is his castle” formed the basis of the Fourth Amendment, and yet now has been convoluted to only protect criminals from prosecution, while leaving homeowners in foreclosure high and dry against a system that steamrolls their constitutional rights in the interest of protecting big banks, Wall Street, and now Uncle Sam.
(more…)
Tags: constitution, constitutional rights, drug dealer, drug dealers, drug sniffing dogs, drugs, fannie mae, Florida, Florida Supreme Court, foreclosure, foreclosures, fourth amendment to the united states constitution, Freddie Mac, government, homeowners, law, mortgage, Oppenheim Law, personal finance, politics, protect, Real Estate, real property law, Roy Oppenheim, search and seizure, u.s. government, united states constitution
Posted in Florida Law News | No Comments »
Thursday, July 1st, 2010
The Miami Herald is reporting the flood of South Florida foreclosures is receding in the first five months of 2010 as foreclosure filings have fallen sharply and efforts to ease the courts’ backlogs are kicking in. But Oppenheim Law isn’t so sure the decreases are going to last and believes the next big wave of filings will come soon.
Foreclosure defense attorney and legal blogger Roy Oppenheim shared his thoughts on the Florida Supreme Court’s mandated mediation process with Miami Herald writer Harris Meyer in an article published on Sunday about Florida foreclosures.
“I enjoy mediations and find them very effective,” Oppenheim said. “But I won’t mediate unless the bank has done its homework.”
Oppenheim went on to explain mediation can be successful for homeowners and the banks only if the mediator is skilled, the lender has read the documentation and also knows the value of the property and the holding costs.
Oppenheim’s comments follow the news that foreclosure filings in Broward have fallen from 51,670 in 2009 to 17,565 in the first five months of 2010. However, as Oppenheim Law explained on the South Florida Law Blog in May, this decrease in Florida foreclosure filings can probably be attributed to the new rules promulgated by the Florida Supreme Court requiring every residential mortgage foreclosure complaint must be verified and prove that the plaintiff is the actual owner and holder of the promissory note.
Oppenheim Law wrote, “Until now, banks have been abusing a Florida statute allowing them to file a foreclosure based on a “lost note.” The problem: the notes aren’t lost; the banks are just too lazy to look for them. This new rule is halting foreclosure filings in their tracks, as banks scramble to find the notes so they can foreclose.”
(more…)
Tags: Florida Supreme Court, Foreclosure Defense, foreclosure filings, foreclosure mediation, Harris Meyer, Miami Herald, Oppenheim Law, promissory note, Roy Oppenheim, South Florida Law Blog
Posted in Florida Law News, Florida real estate, Florida Supreme Court, Foreclosure Defense, Miami Herald, Roy Oppenheim, The Miami Herald | 3 Comments »
Wednesday, May 26th, 2010
Taking a page from Cuba Gooding, Jr. in the movie Jerry Maguire, a new rule in South Florida courts has homeowners and foreclosure defense attorneys screaming: “SHOW! ME! THE! NOTE!!!”
Until now, banks have been abusing a Florida statute allowing them to file a foreclosure based on a “lost note.” The problem: the notes aren’t lost; the banks are just too lazy to look for them. This new rule is halting foreclosure filings in their tracks, as banks scramble to find the notes so they can foreclose.
Before, foreclosure mills were simply filing a complaint and claiming a ‘”lost note,” without actually ever looking for it. Now, the courts are requiring attorneys to prove the banks have at least attempted to find the note. Prior to this rule, banks would file the complaint, and the note would always mysteriously appear four months later IN ALMOST EVERY CASE.
An article published today in The Sun-Sentinel found foreclosure filings have dropped 36% since last month in South Florida. Local attorneys and judges are attributing this to the colossal mess at the banks, as they scramble to find the notes.
Before, they had plenty of time to look for it. Now, they can’t do anything without it. While this might seem like good news for the overwhelmed court system, in reality it is simply delaying the inevitable. Like the receding waters before a tsunami, we can expect a substantial increase in filings once the banks begin finding these “lost notes,” and then the entire system could drown.
Anthony DiMarco of the Florida Bankers Association sees it a bit differently, claiming the decrease in filings is due to the banks’ increased number of loan modifications, and an increased willingness to approve short sales.
(more…)
Tags: Anthony DiMarco, Florida Bankers Association, Florida real estate, Florida Supreme Court, foreclosure defense attorney, foreclosure filings, Lost Not Ruling, Oppenheim Law, Roy Oppenheim
Posted in Florida foreclosures, Florida Law News, Florida real estate, Florida Supreme Court, Foreclosure Defense, Sun Sentinel | 3 Comments »
Thursday, March 25th, 2010
Enough is enough.
Oppenheim Law, along with a team of lawyers, recently brought a series of class action suits against various banks alleging the banks charged improper fees at closing. Specifically, these banks have been accused of the unlicensed practice of law for charging documentary preparation fees in connection with their mortgages.
Interestingly, the Florida Supreme Court recently heard arguments concerning this practice and we invite you to watch fellow counsel argue this case.
Ultimately because the state and federal government have woefully failed to regulate banking institutions, in part because of their cozy relationship between the banks, lobbyists, regulators and politicians, these class actions will send a strong message to the banks that their morally bankrupt conduct needs to change.
As Oppenheim Law continues to defend Florida foreclosures, we will invite you to participate in various class actions where together we identify systemic, unfair and deceptive trade practices by the banks.
If you believe you have a set of facts that arises to the potential of a class action, we invite you to contact us by email.
Tags: class action, closing fees, documentary preparation fees, Florida foreclosures, Florida Supreme Court, Oppenheim Law
Posted in Florida Law News, Florida real estate, Florida Supreme Court, Foreclosure Defense, Roy Oppenheim | No Comments »
When I was a kid growing up in the Bronx the U.S. Supreme Court always seemed to be above reproach.
