Last edited Fri May 1, 2026, 02:34 AM - Edit history (1)
... for fraud and violation of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing (among other things), up through the New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division -- a case that was then taken to the NJ Supreme Court by the Seton Hall Center for Social Justice, I am well aware of the high bar ordinary people face. Federal judges may take oaths to "do equal right to the poor and to the rich", I think every person who lives within the borders of this nation knows that is utter crap. In practice, the "guarantee" of equal protection is laughable.
That said, I should note that as pro se litigants, we were treated with a great deal of respect and given a LOT of guidance by staff in the clerk's offices. The staff of the judge in General Equity was respectful, but useless. Staff of the bankruptcy judge were wonderful.
One lesson I learned is that there is a world of difference between the quality of the judge where we started, in NJ Chancery Division, General Equity, and the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of New Jersey, where I ended up. The latter held hearings and asked pointed questions, and then issued written decisions that actually addressed the issues raised. The former did not hold ONE hearing. Every decision was the same: parrot some point made in the foreclosure mill's filing, completely ignore every issue raised in our filing, and conclude with dismissing the motion, and ultimately dismissing our affirmative defenses (our counterclaims were never adjudicated at all as a consequence of errors on the part of the judge and errors on the part of the plaintiff -- namely, failure to serve key notices that would have made it clear that the case was erroneously proceeding as "uncontested" (with no notice to us) even as we were in court, clearly contesting.
Anyway, my point is that it is not outside the realm of possibility for ordinary people to take a stand for themselves in court. And sometimes, when you do, somebody notices -- like the Seton Hall Center for Social Justice did in our case. Ultimately we lost, but the fact that "real lawyers" -- incredibly busy lawyers -- took note of our case, believed we were correct on the law, and took it to the next level, meant a hell of a lot. After starting to think we must be nuts, that was incredibly gratifying.
P.S. The biggest problem with our case is that in 2009, we were "ahead of the curve." The extent of the fraud was not fully exposed, or believed by courts, until the 2010-11 Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission (FCIC) conducted its investigation. By the time we made our way to the NJ Supreme Court, that court had "had it." A moratorium on foreclosures had ended and the political winds were seriously against us as the primary goal was to just "dispense with" any remaining cases, the actual broken laws be damned.
= new reply since forum marked as read