One of the outcomes of PATH would be the right of the technocrats to stop current legal standing of the homeowners in court with regard to foreclosure litigation. Without this provision, the homeowner cannot sue to stop the foreclosure, nor can new complaints be filed with the courts. But one of the biggest advantages of PATH would be for the technocrats to reopen foreclosure litigation that was ruled on in favor of the homeowner. Just as with criminal law, the right of protection from being retried for a “crime” is protected under Jeopardy clause. The civil version of the Jeopardy clause works much the same of the criminal counterpart. Jeopardy can terminate “in four instances: after acquittal; after dismissal; after a mistrial; and on appeal after conviction.” What this means for PATH and the NMDR is that a homeowner who previously won a suit against the bank and kept their home, would now be under threat of having the case reopened under the new evidence argument. The bank could simply open a new case in light of PATH that would empower them bring this law in as evidence (should the law be passed). This would also allow the banks to circumvent the Ex Post Facto clause. By using PATH as the reason to bring old litigation to new light, this scheme would serve to give the banks a way to acquire those properties anyway. It is a three-fold win for the technocrats thanks to Henserling and the HFSC. • Future foreclosure litigation is halted because of lack of legal standing for the homeowner • Current foreclosure litigation would be halted because of lack of legal standing for the homeowner • Past litigation could be reopened and tried in court for the purpose of taking the property from the homeowner and possibly suing for damages and interests incurred by the original suit.
Posted on: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 07:31:58 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015