| | |
|
JonathanWaisnorSecondPaper 3 - 15 Apr 2010 - Main.JonathanWaisnor
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="SecondPaper" |
|---|
It is strongly recommended that you include your outline in the body of your essay by using the outline as section titles. The headings below are there to remind you how section and subsection titles are formatted. | | |
Section I | |
<
< | Injunctions as a Tool For Warding Off Foreclosures | >
> | Class Action Lawsuits to Enjoin Foreclosure: An Argument for Clinical Involvement | | | | |
<
< | On March 2, 2008, the Attorney General of Massachusetts obtained a preliminary injunction against Fremont Mortgage Group, a mortgage lending firm, that forces Fremont or any company holding a part of a Fremont mortgage tied to property in Massachusetts to undergo a direct review by the AG's office to determine whether the loans are "presumptively unfair." | >
> | On March 2, 2008, the Attorney General of Massachusetts obtained a preliminary injunction against Fremont Mortgage Group, a mortgage lending firm based in California that held approximately 3,000 loans in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. This action was brought under the Massachusetts Predatory Loan Practices Act and the general consumer protection statute (Mass Gen Laws 93A). The injunction requires Fremont, or any company that purchased a loan from Fremont, to submit these loans for review to the Attorney General's office before foreclosure. Judicial bypass will only be granted on a case by case basis, and the cost to Fremont is so great that the practical effect of the law is a moratorium on foreclosures by this company, keeping 2200 people in their homes for the foreseeable future or allowing them to renegotiate the terms of their mortgages on very favorable terms. Since then, not a single mortgage involved in the lawsuit has been foreclosed upon. Investors and mortgage lenders in the Commonwealth are bracing for more lawsuits, some are threatening repercussions in the form of reduced business in the Commonwealth, in a move hearkening back to the "I'll take my ball and go home," rhetoric of the playground.
Using class action lawsuits in lieu of individual suits in order to affect this same result could potentially Whether this effect could be replicated in other states would require, aside from a willing plaintiff and defendant, (1) an applicable consumer protection or predatory lending statute to bring the suit under that provides for injunctive relief like the MA statute, (2) attorneys to bring the class action and see it through to the end, and (3) judges willing to grant class certification and injunctions.
With respect to requirement number one, Massachusetts Consumer Protection Laws are considered broader reaching and more protective of consumer rights than those of other states.
In Massachusetts, the Attorney General's Consumer Protection Office brought the suit. It is unwise to rely on similar action by attorney's general in other states. For one, banks and other lenders may spend enormous amounts of money to ensure the election of AG's who avoid these types of lawsuits. Taxpayers may not want their moeny being used to bail out people, even neighbors, who they consider to have acted unwisely.
A coalition of law school clinics, public interest firms, unemployed lawyers and law students | | | | |
<
< | This category includes all of Fremont's mortgages and the option for judicial review is on a case by case basis, so the basic effect of the law is to keep 2200 homeowners in their homes for the foreseeable future. | | | Could this strategy be used in other states to prevent foreclosures? | |
<
< | Would need: a consumer protection statute on point, is there a federal statute? Individual state consumer protection laws? Company the engaged in predatory lending practices. | >
> | Would need: a consumer protection statute on point, is there a federal statute? Individual state consumer protection laws? Company that engaged in predatory lending practices under the statute. | | | Would need a party to bring the lawsuit
Attorney General- Pros, resources, not necessarily concerned with getting payment out of the settlement/judgment, interest of the public.
Cons- Vulnerable to political change, need for political donations may prevent anti-business lawsuits.
Plaintiff's lawyers- class action.
Pros: Not beholden to wealthy corporations for donations
Cons: Logistics, getting payment, may not think it is worth anything to support a bunch of foreclosed homeowners. | |
<
< | Third Way- Legal clinics. Professors, pro bono practicioners, deferred associates working together.
Is there a way to harness the talents of the deferred associates all over the country? What about the unemployed lawyers? | >
> | Third Way- Legal clinics. Professors, pro bono practicioners, deferred associates working together. Could we coordinate clinics from schools in New York, or even the whole country? | | | Subsection A |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |