Legal Complaints May Ultimately Unravel the Current Global Financial Cartel Part 3

There are several Goliath “Legal Complaints” that potentially could remove the criminal institutional controls.
This report is yet another among the growing list of “Legal Complaints” slowly, inch-worming its way through the courts seeking remedy. I note that the banks have already won a small victory to get the cases filed under one single complaint, and keeping the location to a New York courtroom (Financial crime capitol), however we should remember the story of David and Goliath.
For similar lawful pursuits browse the RELATED links, and comments section. ~Ron

.

http://ift.tt/11mXrgp

“Secret Scheme To Manipulate The Price Of Silver” – Lawsuits Against Banks Proceed

The lawsuits against banks that alleges they engaged in a secret scheme to manipulate the price of silver bullion is proceeding.


Gold fixing in London at NM Rothschild and Sons began in September 1919

Manipulation of the silver market was covered in a recently released ‘Get REAL’ Special on Silver presented by Jan Skoyles. Mark O’Byrne of Goldcore.com was interviewed and the interview was an in depth look at this silver market today. 

Litigation alleging that Deutsche Bank, Bank of Nova Scotia and HSBC Plc illegally fixed the price of silver were centralised in a Manhattan federal court yesterday. The banks have been accused of rigging the price of billions of dollars in silver to the detriment of investors globally.

Lawsuits filed by investors since July over the allegations were consolidated yesterday in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, following an order issued last Thursday by the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, a special body of federal judges that decides when and where to consolidate related lawsuits.

The banks abused their position of controlling the daily silver fix to reap illegitimate profit from trading, hurting other investors in the silver market who use the benchmark in billions of dollars of transactions, according to the suit.

Investors claim, the banks unlawfully manipulated silver and silver futures.


Sharelynx

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ruled that the cases should be handled by U.S. District Judge Valerie Caproni in Manhattan, who is already overseeing similar litigation over alleged gold price fixing.

Three lawsuits were originally filed in Manhattan, and two were filed in Brooklyn. The plaintiffs in the Brooklyn lawsuits had sought to have the litigation consolidated there.

The banks had also asked that the litigation be consolidated in Brooklyn, in the Eastern District of New York. However, the multidistrict litigation panel said Manhattan made more sense because the defendants all had corporate offices there and also because the cases involved issues similar to the gold litigation.

The plaintiffs allege that the banks abused their power as participants in the silver fix, a London based benchmark pricing method dating back to the Victorian era, in which banks fixed silver prices once a day by phone.

In August, the system was replaced by a new benchmark system administered by the CME (Chicago Mercantile Exchange) and Thomson Reuters.

HSBC spokesman Neil Brazil declined to comment and representatives of the other banks did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

This follows the initiation of similar actions against some bullion banks for alleged gold price manipulation earlier this year. The three named banks, Deutsche Bank, Bank of Nova Scotia, and HSBC are alleged to have abused their position at the LBMA to profit from inside knowledge.

The fixing of the price of silver is a daily operation where banks on the panel of the LBMA agree on a price for the precious metals which are then used throughout the financial, jewellery and mining industries throughout the day.

It is alleged that some of the banks who fix the price, position themselves advantageously in the silver market before the price is made public.

“Defendants have a strong financial incentive to establish positions in both physical silver and silver derivatives prior to the public release of silver fixing results, allowing them to reap large illegitimate profits,” plaintiff Scott Nicholson told the AFP.

Separately, Bullion Desk reported yesterday that JPMorgan Chase Bank is now the fifth accredited member of the silver pricing benchmark, the LBMA has confirmed, with others parties “in the pipeline”, a spokesman said.
The American multinational bank which has been the subject of silver manipulation allegations by Max Keiser and others, took part in its first silver benchmarking session yesterday.

A spokesperson said they had completed “strict regulatory controls” for accredited members..

JP Morgan becomes the fifth member, alongside HSBC Bank USA, Mitsui & Co Precious Metals, the Bank of Nova Scotia – ScotiaMocatta and UBS AG.
Furthermore, the LBMA has confirmed that several other parties are also in the process of joining the list, subject to passing regulatory requirements.
Several Chinese banks have expressed interest in participating in the new global price setting mechanism for silver, according to the head of the LBMA.
The LBMA ushered in a new era of electronic benchmarking for London’s precious metals market in August when an algorithm was used for the first time to set the benchmark price for silver after recent scandals regarding price fixing and concerns about the nature of the gold and silver fix.

It will be interesting to see if Chinese banks partake in the new fix process as the concern is that the fixes remain the play things of certain western banks and are not representative of global physical demand and supply of actual gold and silver bullion.

Manipulation of the silver market was covered in a recently released ‘Get REAL’ Special on Silver presented by Jan Skoyles. Mark O’Byrne of Goldcore.com was interviewed and the interview was an in depth look at this silver market today.

See Video here
GOLDCORE MARKET UPDATE
Today’s AM fix was USD 1,223.50, EUR 967.58 and GBP 768.63 per ounce.
Yesterday’s AM fix was USD 1,233.00, EUR 974.55 and GBP 772.41 per ounce.

Gold climbed $0.70 or 0.06% to $1,233.40 per ounce and silver slipped $0.05 or 0.29% to $17.40 per ounce yesterday.

Silver in U.S. Dollars – 1984 to October 14, 2014 (Thomson Reuters)

Gold in Singapore fell 0.3% to $1,222.10 an ounce. The metal hit a four week high of $1,237.90 on Tuesday, before pulling back to close 0.4% lower.

Silver for immediate delivery or Swiss storage fell 1.4% to $17.19 an ounce in London. Palladium dropped 1.6% to $782.10 an ounce. Platinum lost 1% to $1,254 an ounce.

Gold fell on low volume again and futures trading volume was 40% below the average for the past 100 days for this time of day, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Volumes for the benchmark spot contract on the Shanghai Gold Exchange are about 33% lower than in late September, the latest data show however physical deliveries remain very high and are headed for 2,000 tonnes again in 2014.
Yesterday, Germany’s Economy Ministry cut its economic growth forecasts for 2014 and 2015, before the Federal Reserve releases its Beige Book on economic conditions.

See Essential Guide To Gold and Silver Storage In Switzerland

Vía Max Keiser http://ift.tt/1wFLQSY
.
RELATED:
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2013/06/14/3-billion-class-action-lawsuit/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2013/06/30/government-claims-the-people-are-the-enemy/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/02/15/another-david-vs-goliath-lawsuit/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/03/11/legal-complaints-may-ultimately-unravel-the-current-global-financial-cartel/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/04/18/legal-complaints-may-ultimately-unravel-the-current-global-financial-cartel-part-2/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/04/21/banking-fraud-under-attack/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/institutional-crime-and-legal-complaints/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/06/10/institutional-crime-and-legal-complaints/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/08/07/austrian-student-launches-global-class-action-against-facebook/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/08/04/bank-of-america-ordered-to-pay-1-2-billion-for-fraudulent-mortgages/
https://ronmamita.wordpress.com/2014/09/11/september-11-pull-it/
________________________________________________________________

About

Want Worldwide PEACE and Prosperity. We are the solution we have been searching for... Free People of Earth will solve our crisis and create an era of Creativity. Be at Peace; Be Aware; Be Creative; Be Active; Be Free and Alive; and then Share it. LOVE & Peace AMOR y Paz

Tagged with: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Take 'em to COURT
3 comments on “Legal Complaints May Ultimately Unravel the Current Global Financial Cartel Part 3
  1. RonMamita says:

    Silver Update 10/6/14 Liars And Lunatics

  2. RonMamita says:

    YET MORE BANKSTERS “SUICIDED”…

    I may perhaps be forgiven my preempting any conclusions to be argued here, by titling this article “Yet More Banksters ‘Suicided’”… In fact, it could be argued that I am making two assumptions, not only that they are being “suicided”, but that they are “banksters” to begin with. To clarify the latter point, in today’s world, where a criminal British bank keeps sending me form letters to accept their usurious credit cards, and which I keep refusing (using their return postage paid envelopes to send my angry form letters demanding that they cease and desist perstering me with their crummy offers and to participate in their criminality), I assume that banking is now more or less a “family business” rather like the Mafia, and some members of the family may be relatively isolated from the family business; others, like Michael Corleone, might be pressured by circumstances to take “a more active role.” As for so many banksters taking walks off of roofs, yes, I do think this is a pattern, and not accidental. After all, even though all the families are involved in the same criminal business, and cooperate in it to rig markets and rates (think LIBOR here folks), they also turn the guns loose on each other, make each other wear concrete boots for a walk on the river, or throw each other off of roofs, or use the old tried and true nail-gun-in-the-head method. It’s all just Venice, Florence, Genoa, and Amsterdam, updated with a bit of theatrical modern technology.

    In fact, my dot-connecting has been positively tame compared to some of the emails I receive in this regard. One gentleman nicely reminded me that M. Christophe de Margerie was the oil tycoon that reminded the whole world that petroleum did not have to be traded in dollars, and that his “death by lone nut snow plow driver” and “airplane crash” might be payback for the untimely death of David Rockefeller’s son in an airplane crash earlier this year. Well, personally, I have no idea… is Mr. Rockefeller a Michael Corleone? or is the family business run by other more “let’s loose the thugs against the competition” people, like grand-dad, the old family don himself?

    All this, of course, is prelude to the point: there are now yet more banksters who have been suicided, one of whom, M. Thierry, we have already noted. This one, however, is a former Deutsche Bank lawyer, and this one is almost, in a certain sense, too good to be true, or rather, too bizarre to be believed save as a bad plot in a bad Hollyweird B movie:

    Another Deutsche Banker And Former SEC Enforcement Attorney Commits Suicide

    more dead banksters illuminate taking care of business goodfellows style: Another Deutsche Banker And Former SEC Enforcement Attorney Commits Suicide

    Yes,you read that correctly: (1) a lawyer,(2)with the surname of Gambino, (3) working for Deutsche Bank… It doesn’t get any better….

    …or does it?

    Mr. Gambino, as noted, was found hung by a staircase banister – a bit of intriguing symbolism if one thinks about it a bit, shades of another Italian banker found hanging beneath a bridge, and other stuff – but the real question is, why would anyone want him suicided? I believe a threadbare pattern is beginning to emerge, one disclosed in the Zero Hedge version:

    “As a reminder, the other Deutsche Bank-er who was found dead earlier in the year, William Broeksmit, was involved in the bank’s risk function and advised the firm’s senior leadership; he was “anxious about various authorities investigating areas of the bank where he worked,” according to written evidence from his psychologist, given Tuesday at an inquest at London’s Royal Courts of Justice. And now that an almost identical suicide by hanging has taken place at Europe’s most systemically important bank, and by a person who worked in a nearly identical function – to shield the bank from regulators and prosecutors and cover up its allegedly illegal activities with settlements and fines – is surely bound to raise many questions.

    “The WSJ reports that Mr. Gambino had been “closely involved in negotiating legal issues for Deutsche Bank, including the prolonged probe into manipulation of the London interbank offered rate, or Libor, and ongoing investigations into manipulation of currencies markets, according to people familiar with his role at the bank.’

    “He previously was an associate at a private law firm and a regulatory enforcement lawyer from 1997 to 1999, according to his online LinkedIn profile and biographies for conferences where he spoke. But most notably, as his LinkedIn profile below shows, like many other Wall Street revolving door regulators, he started his career at the SEC itself where he worked from 1997 to 1999.”(Emphasis Zero Hedge’s).

    In other words, part of the bankster suicides have to do with market manipulation, and some of them, like the unfortunate Mr. Richard Talley, who woke up to nails in his head, were involved in mortgage titles; and against the wider context of the financial fraud and bailouts, we saw (1) a massive expansion of credit default swaps and derivatives, which collapsed with the “housing bubble”, which in turn exposed the massive mortgage fraud and hence bad paper in the system(which may have been exposed by assiduous title researchers like Mr. Talley). Interestingly, Deutsche Bank’s exposure to both is rather high, if recent Fed pronouncements are of any value. And both the mortgage fraud and the bad paper are, as readers here know, intimately related to the bearer bonds scandals (their own unique kind of bad paper), and drug traffic, and hidden systems of finance.

    So, what’s the bottom line for today’s high octane speculation? It would appear that the bankster suicides might indicate that the whole post-war system of hidden finance is in danger of coming unraveled faster than a new system can be erected, and that various people in management positions in prime banks are beginning to connect dots that were connected by a previous generation, and realizing how deep, pervasive, and fragile the whole system is. It might indicate therefore that they are realizing that the central player in the central banking model is no longer the central banks, but that dangerous alliance between the technology corporations, the intelligence apparatus, and international criminal enterprises like the drug trade. Would all the rival members of the family – the Banksterini, the Technocrati, the Intelligentsi, the Mafiosi – want to keep the thing from unraveling until a new system could be erected? Let us hypothesize further:Would they want to conceal how a new equity based system of finance was brought into existence through decades of criminality and massive fraud by burning the bad paper, and anyone who knew of it, or at least of significant parts of the story?

    I suspect you know the answers to these questions already, and I suspect you know that this means that the banksters, even the “really bad” ones in the central banks, might not be the ultimate bad guys in the play, but rather, the intelligence-technocratic corporation interface. But it is, after all, high octane speculation, the stuff of “out there” Lewis Perdue thriller novels (and a certain one were, as it turns out, very prophetic) and Hollywood B gangster movies, starring Edward G.Robinson and James Cagney and Sydney Greenstreet.

    See you on the flip side. http://gizadeathstar.com/2014/11/yet-banksters-suicided/

  3. RonMamita says:

    BAP Panel Raises the Stakes Against Deutsch et al — Secured Status May be Challenged

    Fur Further Information please call 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688

    ——————————–

    ALERT FOR BANKRUPTCY LAWYERS — SECURED STATUS OF ALLEGED CREDITOR IS NOT TO BE ASSUMED

    ——————————–

    I have long held and advocated three points:

    1. The filing of false claims in the nonjudicial process of a majority of states should not result in success where the same false claims could never be proven in judicial process. Nonjudicial process was meant as an administrative remedy to foreclosures that were NOT in dispute. Any application of nonjudicial schemes that allows false claims to succeed where they would fail in a judicial action is unconstitutional.
    2. The filing of a bankruptcy petition that shows property to be encumbered by virtue of a deed of trust is admitting a false representation made by a stranger to the transaction. The petition for bankruptcy relief should be filed showing that the property is not encumbered and the adversary or collateral proceeding to nullify the mortgage and the note should accompany each filing where the note and mortgage are subject to claims of securitization or a “new” beneficiary.
    3. The vast majority of decisions against borrowers result from voluntary or involuntary waiver, ignorance and failure to plead or object on the basis of false claims based on false documentation. The issue is not the signature (although that probably is false too); rather it is (a) the actual transaction which is missing and the (b) false documentation of a (i) fictitious transaction and (ii) fictitious transfers of fictitious (and non-fictitious) transactions. The result is often that the homeowner has admitted to the false assertion of being a borrower in relation to the party making the claim, admitting the secured status of the “creditor”, admitting that they are a creditor, admitting that they received a loan from within the chain claimed by the “creditor”, admitting the default, admitting the validity of the note and admitting the validity of the mortgage or deed of trust — thus leaving both the trial and appellate courts with no choice but to rule against the homeowner. Thus procedurally a false claim becomes “true” for purposes of that case.

    see 11/24/14 Decision: MEMORANDUM-_-ANTON-ANDREW-RIVERA-DENISE-ANN-RIVERA-Appellants-v.-DEUTSCHE-BANK-NATIONAL-TRUST-COMPANY-Trustee-of-Certificate-Holders-of-the-WAMU-Mortgage-Pass-Through-Certificate-Series-2005-AR6

    This decision is breath-taking. What the Panel has done here is fire a warning shot over the bow of the California Supreme Court with respect to the APPLICATION of the non-judicial process. AND it takes dead aim at those who make false claims on false debts in both nonjudicial and judicial process. Amongst the insiders it is well known that your chances on appeal to the BAP are less than 15% whereas an appeal to the District Judge, often ignored as an option, has at least a 50% prospect for success.

    So the fact that this decision comes from the BAP Panel which normally rubber stamps decisions of bankruptcy judges is all the more compelling. One word of caution that is not discussed here is the the matter of jurisdiction. I am not so sure the bankruptcy judge had jurisdiction to consider the matters raised in the adversary proceeding. I think there is a possibility that jurisdiction would be present before the District Court Judge, but not the Bankruptcy Judge.

    From one of my anonymous sources within a significant government agency I received the following:

    This case is going to be a cornucopia of decision material for BK courts nationwide (and others), it directly tackles all the issues regarding standing and assignment (But based on Non-J foreclosure, and this is California of course……) it tackles Glaski and Glaski loses, BUT notes dichotomy on secured creditor status….this case could have been even more , but leave to amend was forfeited by borrower inaction—– it is part huge win, part huge loss as it relates to Glaski, BUT IT IS DIRECTLY APPLICABLE TO CHASE/WAMU CASES……….Note in full case how court refers to transfer of “some of WAMU’s assets”, tacitly inferring that the court WILL NOT second guess what was and was not transferred………… i.e, foreclosing party needs to prove this!!

    AFFIRMED- NO SECURED PARTY STATUS FOR BK PROVEN

    Even though Siliga, Jenkins and Debrunner may preclude the

    Riveras from attacking DBNTC’s foreclosure proceedings by arguing

    that Chase’s assignment of the deed of trust was a nullity in

    light of the absence of a valid transfer of the underlying debt,

    we know of no law precluding the Riveras from challenging DBNTC’s assertion of secured status for purposes of the Riveras’ bankruptcy case. Nor did the bankruptcy court cite to any such law.

    We acknowledge that our analysis promotes the existence of two different sets of legal standards – one applicable in nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings and a markedly different one for use in ascertaining creditors’ rights in bankruptcy cases.

    But we did not create these divergent standards. The California legislature and the California courts did. We are not the first to point out the divergence of these standards. See CAL. REAL EST., at § 10:41 (noting that the requirements under California law for an effective assignment of a real-estate-secured obligation may differ depending on whether or not the dispute over the assignment arises in a challenge to nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings).
    We must accept the truth of the Riveras’ well-pled
    allegations indicating that the Hutchinson endorsement on the
    note was a sham and, more generally, that neither DBNTC nor Chase
    ever obtained any valid interest in the Riveras’ note or the loan
    repayment rights evidenced by that note. We also must
    acknowledge that at least part of the Riveras’ adversary
    proceeding was devoted to challenging DBNTC’s standing to file
    its proof of claim and to challenging DBNTC’s assertion of
    secured status for purposes of the Riveras’ bankruptcy case. As
    a result of these allegations and acknowledgments, we cannot
    reconcile our legal analysis, set forth above, with the
    bankruptcy court’s rulings on the Riveras’ second amended
    complaint. The bankruptcy court did not distinguish between the
    Riveras’ claims for relief that at least in part implicated the
    parties’ respective rights in the Riveras’ bankruptcy case from
    those claims for relief that only implicated the parties’
    respective rights in DBNTC’s nonjudicial foreclosure proceedings.

    THEY REJECT GLASKI-

    Here, we note that the California Supreme Court recently

    granted review from an intermediate appellate court decision
    following Jenkins and rejecting Glaski. Yvanova v. New Century
    Mortg. Corp., 226 Cal.App.4th 495 (2014), review granted &
    opinion de-published, 331 P.3d 1275 (Cal. Aug 27, 2014). Thus,
    we eventually will learn how the California Supreme Court views
    this issue. Even so, we are tasked with deciding the case before
    us, and Ninth Circuit precedent suggests that we should decide
    the case now, based on our prediction, rather than wait for the
    California Supreme Court to rule. See Hemmings, 285 F.3d at
    1203; Lewis v. Telephone Employees Credit Union, 87 F.3d 1537,
    1545 (9th Cir. 1996). Because we have no convincing reason to
    doubt that the California Supreme Court will follow the weight of
    authority among California’s intermediate appellate courts, we
    will follow them as well and hold that the Riveras lack standing
    to challenge the assignment of their deed of trust based on an
    alleged violation of a pooling and servicing agreement to which
    they were not a party.

    BUT……… THEY DO SUCCEED ON SECURED STATUS

    Even though the Riveras’ first claim for relief principally

    relies on their allegations regarding the assignment’s violation
    of the pooling and servicing agreement, their first claim for
    relief also explicitly incorporates their allegations challenging
    DBNTC’s proof of claim and disputing the validity of the
    Hutchinson endorsement. Those allegations, when combined with
    what is set forth in the first claim for relief, are sufficient
    on their face to state a claim that DBNTC does not hold a valid
    lien against the Riveras’ property because the underlying debt
    never was validly transferred to DBNTC. See In re Leisure Time
    Sports, Inc., 194 B.R. at 861 (citing Kelly v. Upshaw, 39 Cal.2d
    179 (1952) and stating that “a purported assignment of a mortgage
    without an assignment of the debt which it secured was a legal
    nullity.”).
    While the Riveras cannot pursue their first claim for relief
    for purposes of directly challenging DBNTC’s pending nonjudicial
    foreclosure proceedings, Debrunner, 204 Cal.App.4th at 440-42,
    the first claim for relief states a cognizable legal theory to
    the extent it is aimed at determining DBNTC’s rights, if any, as
    a creditor who has filed a proof of secured claim in the Riveras’
    bankruptcy case.

    TILA CLAIM UPHELD!—–

    Fifth Claim for Relief – for violation of the Federal Truth In Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1641(g)

    The Riveras’ TILA Claim alleged, quite simply, that they did
    not receive from DBNTC, at the time of Chase’s assignment of the
    deed of trust to DBNTC, the notice of change of ownership
    required by 15 U.S.C. § 1641(g)(1). That section provides:
    In addition to other disclosures required by this
    subchapter, not later than 30 days after the date on
    which a mortgage loan is sold or otherwise transferred
    or assigned to a third party, the creditor that is the
    new owner or assignee of the debt shall notify the
    borrower in writing of such transfer, including–

    (A) the identity, address, telephone number of the new

    creditor;

    (B) the date of transfer;

     

    (C) how to reach an agent or party having authority to

    act on behalf of the new creditor;

    (D) the location of the place where transfer of

    ownership of the debt is recorded; and

    (E) any other relevant information regarding the new

    creditor.

    The bankruptcy court did not explain why it considered this claim as lacking in merit. It refers to the fact that the
    Riveras had actual knowledge of the change in ownership within
    months of the recordation of the trust deed assignment. But the
    bankruptcy court did not explain how or why this actual knowledge
    would excuse noncompliance with the requirements of the statute.
    Generally, the consumer protections contained in the statute
    are liberally interpreted, and creditors must strictly comply
    with TILA’s requirements. See McDonald v. Checks–N–Advance, Inc.
    (In re Ferrell), 539 F.3d 1186, 1189 (9th Cir. 2008). On its
    face, 15 U.S.C. § 1640(a)(2)(A)(iv) imposes upon the assignee of
    a deed of trust who violates 15 U.S.C. § 1641(g)(1) statutory
    damages of “not less than $400 or greater than $4,000.”
    While the Riveras’ TILA claim did not state a plausible
    claim for actual damages, it did state a plausible claim for
    statutory damages. Consequently, the bankruptcy court erred when
    it dismissed the Riveras’ TILA claim.

    LAST, THEY GOT REAR ENDED FOR NOT SEEKING LEAVE TO AMEND

    Here, however, the Riveras did not argue in either the bankruptcy court or in their opening appeal brief that the court should have granted them leave to amend. Having not raised the issue in either place, we may consider it forfeited. See Golden v. Chicago Title Ins. Co. (In re Choo), 273 B.R. 608, 613 (9th Cir. BAP 2002).

    Even if we were to consider the issue, we note that the

    bankruptcy court gave the Riveras two chances to amend their
    complaint to state viable claims for relief, examined the claims
    they presented on three occasions and found them legally
    deficient each time. Moreover, the Riveras have not provided us
    with all of the record materials that would have permitted us a
    full view of the analyses and explanations the bankruptcy court
    offered them when it reviewed the Riveras’ original complaint and
    their first amended complaint. Under these circumstances, we
    will not second-guess the bankruptcy court’s decision to deny
    leave to amend. See generally In re Nordeen, 495 B.R. at 489-90
    (examining multiple opportunities given to the plaintiffs to
    amend their complaint and the bankruptcy court’s efforts to
    explain to them the deficiencies in their claims, and ultimately
    determining that the court did not abuse its discretion in
    denying the plaintiffs leave to amend their second amended
    complaint).

Please Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 285 other followers

The Worldwide Wave of Action
Peaceful Global TransitionApril 4th, 2014
Exercise freedom and creativity for all Earth’s inhabitants to explore ready breakthroughs in Self Organizing Communities, economics, and technology. This is a D.I.Y. project
State Sponsored Terror
The Big Day ReportFebruary 2nd, 2014
Institutions of crime Big days have come and gone (government Elections, and Tax filing). Search for what is hidden and for what is not spoken. Be Aware of the next big Day for fraudulent institutions.
RonMamita
Peace Today

Peace Today

RonMamita’s Blog
October 2014
S M T W T F S
« Sep   Nov »
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  
All posts here
Whole-Community
Audio coming soon!
%d bloggers like this: