The Dangers of Judicial Presumptions with Attorney Charles Marshall and Investigator Bill Paatalo

California Attorney Charles Marshall and Investigator Bill Paatalo will discuss the dangers of judicial presumptions.

Magical presumptions prevent the homeowner from defending a case and guaranteeing a win for a so-called beneficiary under a deed of trust.

The first magical presumption erroneously applied in foreclosure litigation has been on the doctrine of “judical notice.” Judges have been erroneously ruling that once a judicially “noticed” document is admitted into evidence, everything in it represents a proffer of evidence which is accepted by the court into evidence. 

The second magical presumption erroneously applied in foreclosure litigation has been some sort of doctrine of concoction on standing to defend.  This is a nonsensical doctrine in which the homeowner may not defend the case using a defense that the party ostensibly foreclosing has no right, justification or excuse for doing so.

In Yvanova, the California Supreme Court inexplicably held that the homeowner can sue for damages for a wrongful foreclosure based upon false instruments and lack of authority but that the homeowner could not stop the foreclosure itself.   If a homeowner has a right to damages because the foreclosure should never have been conducted, then exactly how could the homeowner be prevented from stopping it in the first place?

Please see: https://livinglies.wordpress.com/2017/07/27/ca-5th-dca-magical-presumptions-are-not-enough/

Charles Marshall, Esq.

cmarshall@marshallestatelaw.com

619.807.2628