202308672
WF VICTORIA GRANTOR TRUST, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE STRU vs. BARKER, COREY OREECE WHITE
FEB 9, 2023 | REPUBLISHED BY LIT: FEB 10, 2023
Feb 24, MAR 18, APR 19, MAY 23, 2023
It’s still restricted, the whole darn petition and now LIT’s highlighted the fact, well, we gotta just keep it as is for now sayeth the court.
Y’all Cannot Restrict the WHOLE PETITION, without a Motion and a Court Order, neither of which is present on the docket in this lawsuit, which is an Unlawful Restriction of Access to Open Courts
WF VICTORIA GRANTOR TRUST
is a Delaware Statutory Trust filed on December 18, 2015. The company’s File Number is listed as 5911463.
The Registered Agent on file for this company is
U.S. Bank Trust National Association
and is located at 300 Delaware Avenue 9th Floor, Wilmington, DE 19801.
USPS Trackin’ shows package issued from Colorado, not Texas. We’ve a good idea why that would be, just read our post 2008 articles on why foreclosure mills are usin’ out of state processin’ centers…
In the context of state district courts, “sealing” and “restricting” refer to the legal process of limiting access to certain court records. The main difference between these two terms lies in the extent of access restriction and the reason behind it.
Sealing court records involves making the records unavailable to the public and removing them from public view. This is typically done to protect sensitive information, such as the identities of minors, trade secrets, or information related to national security. Once a court record has been sealed, it can only be accessed by court order or in limited circumstances, such as by law enforcement with a warrant.
Restricting court records, on the other hand, limits access to the records by certain parties, but does not remove them entirely from public view. This is typically done to protect the privacy of individuals involved in a case or to maintain the confidentiality of sensitive information. For example, a judge might restrict access to the medical records of a party in a personal injury case, allowing only the parties and their attorneys to view the records.
In both sealing and restricting, the goal is to balance the public’s right to access court records with the need to protect sensitive information and individual privacy. The specific procedures and requirements for sealing or restricting court records can vary by state, so it’s important to check the specific laws in your jurisdiction.
The specific requirements for sealing or restricting court records in Texas can vary depending on the type of case and the nature of the information being sought to be protected. However, in general, Texas law provides for sealing or restricting court records in certain circumstances to protect the privacy and confidentiality of parties and witnesses.
To seal court records in Texas, a party must file a motion with the court and provide good cause for the sealing, such as the protection of sensitive information or to avoid harm to an individual. The motion must also specify the records to be sealed and the reason for sealing them. The judge will then review the motion and make a determination based on the circumstances of the case. If the judge grants the motion, the court records will be sealed and inaccessible to the public.
To restrict access to court records in Texas, a party must also file a motion with the court. The motion must provide a reason for restricting access, such as to protect the privacy of a minor or to maintain the confidentiality of sensitive information. The judge will review the motion and, if granted, will enter an order limiting access to the specified records to certain individuals or parties, such as the parties and their attorneys.
It is important to note that sealing or restricting court records in Texas is not automatic and requires a court order. Additionally, the specific requirements and procedures for sealing or restricting court records in Texas can change, so it’s always best to consult with a qualified attorney or the Texas State Law Library for the most up-to-date information.
Ten Buck Bandit: Lawyer Silvia Mintz Files Fraudulent Legal Docs in Harris County Real Property Records
This article will be updated once the foreclosure trustee deed is (or isn’t) posted in real property records.
Rocket Docket: Federal Court in Northern District of Texas is On Another Planet When Pro Se’s Arrive in Court
The court deceptively styled the case Abor v Frazier (3:24-cv-00777) District Court, N.D. Texas when it should lead with Planet Home Lending.
Agreeing to Foreclosure for 14 Years, Felicia Oliver Ain’t Quiverin’ About Deutsche Bank, PHH or the Wolves
With non-contested judicial orders of foreclosure in 2010, 2013 and 2019, the property is still owned in Feb. 2024, by Oliver and Williams.
