The Wolves and Catholic Bandit Blanks State Foreclosure Nonsuiting to Go PHH Judge Shopping in SDTX

For nearly four years, a Houston-area widow has been entangled in a relentless legal battle against the foreclosure wolves of Texas, including PHH, Comerica, and their legal counsel.

This ordeal began in April 2020, and rather than concluding the original case, the foreclosure entities engaged in a strategic dance of non-suits and re-filings, prolonging the widow’s distress.

Recently, they escalated their tactics by nonsuiting the case in state court and promptly mirroring the complaint in federal court on the same day.

The timeline of this legal saga is noteworthy, reflecting a calculated and persistent effort to achieve their desired outcome – the foreclosure of the widow’s homestead.

In a concerning twist, the state court judge, unyielding to their pursuits, denied a default judgment.

Subsequently, the wolves have been conspicuously lackadaisical in pursuing their own scheduled hearings, raising questions about their commitment to the legal process.

In a move that further raises eyebrows, the foreclosure wolves have replaced their assigned associate, Ester Delores, with the Catholic Bandit, Mark Cronenwett, and his trusted sidekick Nick Frame.

This maneuver is blatant judge shopping, a tactic where litigants seek a more favorable judicial environment for their case. By shifting from state to federal court, these foreclosure mills know they will obtain the foreclosure judgment they seek, regardless of the merits presented by the distressed homeowner.

The issue at the core of this narrative is the apparent abuse of the legal system by foreclosure mills, exploiting the option to move cases from state to federal court.

This strategic relocation, commonly perceived as judge shopping, is seen as an attempt to secure a judgment of foreclosure, with little regard for the facts presented by the homeowners.

This case underscores the broader challenges in states like Texas, where the foreclosure process can be prolonged, leading to extended pain and suffering for distressed homeowners.

Critics argue that creditor rights lawyers, representing Wall Street interests, manipulate rules and exploit loopholes to secure victories at any cost.

In contrast, some states, such as Illinois and New York, have implemented measures like a one-time allowance for foreclosure, aiming to provide a more equitable and efficient resolution for all parties involved.

As this legal saga continues, it raises important questions about the balance between protecting homeowners and ensuring a fair and just legal process, and which is unattainable in Texas.