Category Archives: failing arguments

Sanctions Pummel Neil Garfield Legal Theories

Neil Garfield’s frivolous filings and bogus legal theories have already cost at least one client, Zdislaw Maslanka, a wad of attorney fees in an utterly frivolous action to get his house free even though he remained current in his mortgage payments.  As the docket entries below show, the Florida 4th District appellate panel affirmed the […]

Read more

Fla Court Destroys Garfield Arguments in Maslanka

Maslanka could owe over $100K in his adversaries’ legal fees because his lawyer (Neil Garfield) propounded lunatic arguments in a lawsuit against a mortgage lender and creditor. If Maslanka gets a mortgage examination, he might have the evidence to prove that Garfield committed legal malpractice. Garfield is a total embarrassment to the legal profession; and […]

Read more

USDC Opinion DESTROYS Neil Garfield Legal Theories

The Tennessee western USDC denounced most if not all of the arguments Garfield made in his recent ridiculous postings on LivingLies blog. Jones v. SELECT PORTFOLIO SERVICING, INC.,  Dist. Court, WD Tennessee 2016 – Google Scholar https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2270799973752803209&scilh=0 Here see just a few of Garfield’s idiotic postings: Down to the Nitty Gritty: Holder vs Owner of […]

Read more

Cal. Supremes Opine Yvanova May Sue on Void Assignment

Cal. Supremes Opine Yvanova May Sue on Void Assignment http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/mainCaseScreen.cfm?dist=0&doc_id=2078551&doc_no=S218973 The Myth Mongers will come out in force saying this opinion means assignment snafus can void an otherwise perfectly just non-judicial foreclosure. In fact, it says that Yvanova may sue to undo a non-judicial foreclosure on the basis that the foreclosing party did not own beneficial […]

Read more

SCOTUS: Borrower Lacks Standing to Challenge PSA Violations

By Bob Hurt, 4 November 2015 Introduction The 2 November 2015 US Supreme Court denial of certiorari in Tran v Bank of New York settled once-and-for-all the spurious assertion that borrowers can challenge putative violations of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (PSA) creating a securitization trust. Borrowers, encouraged by Glaski v BOA, a California appellate […]

Read more

The Vapor Money Theory

Courts across the land have trashed the Vapor Money Theory – the idea that the borrower’s note funded the loan, or there’s no real money and so the lender never actually gave money in the form of a loan.  I provide some court opinions, and a host of related citations. http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020100615B54/BARNES%20v.%20CITIGROUP%20INC. MICHAEL J. BARNES, Plaintiff(s), […]

Read more