Interview with Attorney Charles Marshall on Cal. App. Massoud v JPM Chase

30:00
 
공유
 

Manage episode 263701439 series 2453550
Player FM과 저희 커뮤니티의 THE NEIL GARFIELD SHOW 콘텐츠는 모두 원 저작자에게 속하며 Player FM이 아닌 작가가 저작권을 갖습니다. 오디오는 해당 서버에서 직접 스트리밍 됩니다. 구독 버튼을 눌러 Player FM에서 업데이트 현황을 확인하세요. 혹은 다른 팟캐스트 앱에서 URL을 불러오세요.
Tonight we pick up where the blog left off. The important but as yet unpublished opinion and decision in California Appellate court in which an appellate court stated clearly and unequivocally stated that allegations do state a cause of action if the homeowner contends that Chase did not buy loans in the Purchase and Assumption Agreement on September 25, 2008 between Chase, FDIC and the US Trustee in Bankruptcy. Is the court signaling that it is willing to accept the premise that at least some claims for collection and foreclosure are false? The Court agreed that if Chase was claiming ownership and authority over the loan under those it was a false claim. Charles Marshall succeeded where others had failed. Tonight we discuss how he did it. []=0

317 에피소드