Rich Rode, and Rode and Rode Again as Deutsche Bank and PHH Ocwen Case Surpasses 12 Year Vintage

Defendant Richard D. Rode’s Reply to Response in Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Bill of Review and Traditional and No-Evidence Motion for Partial Summary Judgment

Hearing Date; Dec 4, 2023

Amended Notice of Hearing Date on Motion to Vacate or Amend Order Granting Motion to Compel Plaintiff’s Discovery Responses

A “bill of review” is a legal term used in the context of civil procedure, particularly in the United States. It refers to a legal motion or petition that is filed with a court, asking the court to review and potentially set aside a previous judgment or decree. This motion is typically based on some alleged error or new evidence that was not available or considered during the original proceedings.

A bill of review is often used when a party believes that they have new and significant evidence that could change the outcome of the case or when there is a claim of procedural error that affected the fairness of the original proceedings. However, it’s essential to note that the grounds for filing a bill of review are usually limited, and not all cases are eligible for such a review.

The specific requirements and procedures for filing a bill of review can vary based on jurisdiction and the type of case. It’s advisable to consult with a legal professional to understand the specific rules and requirements applicable to your situation.

202248290 – ERGONIS, JOE vs. HIRSCH, MICHAEL A (INDIVIDUALLY AND LAW OFFICES OF (Court 152)

ORDER SIGNED GRANTING PLEA IN ABATEMENT

“Table funding” typically refers to a process in the mortgage lending industry, particularly in the context of real estate transactions. It involves a third-party entity, often a mortgage broker or correspondent lender, acting as an intermediary to facilitate the loan funding process.

Here’s how table funding generally works:

Loan Origination:

A borrower applies for a mortgage loan through a mortgage broker or correspondent lender.
The mortgage broker or correspondent lender originates the loan by gathering the necessary documentation from the borrower and submitting the loan application to a wholesale lender.

Wholesale Lender Involvement:

The wholesale lender is the entity that provides the actual funds for the mortgage loan.
Instead of dealing directly with the borrower, the wholesale lender relies on mortgage brokers or correspondent lenders to interact with the borrower and collect documentation.

Closing Process:

The closing process involves the finalization of the real estate transaction, where all necessary documents are signed, and funds are disbursed.
In a table funding scenario, the wholesale lender may send the loan documents and funds to the closing table through the mortgage broker or correspondent lender.

Intermediary Role:

The mortgage broker or correspondent lender essentially acts as an intermediary or middleman in the process.
They receive the loan documents and funds from the wholesale lender and then use those funds to close the loan with the borrower.

Simultaneous Transactions:

The term “table funding” implies that the entire process happens at the closing table, where the borrower, seller, and other parties involved in the real estate transaction are present.
Regulatory Considerations:

Table funding arrangements must comply with applicable laws and regulations, including those related to real estate and mortgage lending.
It’s important to note that the term “table funding” may be used in slightly different ways in various regions or contexts within the real estate and mortgage industries.

Defendants and debtors, Homecomings Financial, LLC and GMAC Mortgage, LLC (collectively, the “Debtors”), by and through their undersigned counsel, in accordance and consistent with section 362(a) of the United States Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq. (the “Bankruptcy Code”), respectfully submit this Notice of Bankruptcy and Effect of Automatic Stay, and state as follows:

1.                  On May 14, 2012 (the “Petition Date”), the Debtors and certain of their affiliates filed voluntary petitions under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, One Bowling Green, New York, NY 10004-1408 (the “Bankruptcy Court”). The bankruptcy cases of the Debtors and their affiliates are jointly administered under the Chapter 11 Case for the affiliated debtor Residential Capital, LLC, which case is indexed as case number 12-12020.

2.                  The “automatic stay” is codified in section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code. Section 362(a), inter alia, operates as an automatic stay of: (i) the commencement or continuation of a “judicial, administrative, or other action or proceeding” against the Debtors (11 U.S.C. §

362(a)(1)); (ii) acts to “obtain possession of property” of the Debtors’ estates (11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3)); and (iii) acts to “collect, assess, or recover a claim” against the Debtors arising prior to the Petition Date (11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(6)).

3.                  The above-captioned action constitutes a “judicial, administrative, or other action or proceeding” against the Debtors, an act to obtain possession of the Debtors’ property, and/or an act to collect or recover on a claim against the Debtors.

4.                  Accordingly, the above-captioned lawsuit is stayed pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(a).

5.                  Any action taken by the Plaintiff or any other party against any of the Debtors without obtaining relief from the automatic stay from the Bankruptcy Court may be void ab initio and may result in finding of contempt by the Bankruptcy Court against Plaintiff or such other party. The Debtors reserve and retain all of their rights to seek relief in Bankruptcy Court from any action, judgment, order, or ruling entered in violation of the automatic stay.

Dated: May 22, 2012

Birmingham, AL
By:  /s/ Graham Gerhardt
Bradley Arant Boult Cummings, LLP
One Federal Place, 1819 Fifth Avenue
North Birmingham, Alabama 35203
Telephone: (205) 521-8000
Facsimile: (205) 521-8800

Graham W. Gerhardt (Bar No. 24075698)
D. Brian O’Dell (Bar No. 24044319)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 22, 2012, I served a copy of the foregoing via the Court’s electronic filing system and facsimile upon the following:

Jeffrey H. Uzick
UZICK & ONCKEN, P.C.
238 Westcott
Houston, Texas 77007
Facsimile: (713) 869-6699

/s/ Graham Gerhardt
OF COUNSEL

U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Houston)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:12-cv-00390

U.S. District Court
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS (Houston)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 4:12-cv-00390

Filed 7/21/2011 and removed to S.D. Tex. federal court on Feb. 9, 2012.