Since May 2010

460,000 Visitors

Brookstone-Plaintiffs-WininngBrookstone Law Firm’s Groundbreaking Decision Making It Possible For Millions of Homeowners To Sue Their Banks

 

June 23rd, 2015

By John Wright

 

“It is ultimately the reason some legal experts are saying the Wright et al vs. Bank of America lawsuit is the most successful and high profile homeowner mass joinder lawsuit ever filed against Bank of America in United States history.”

Extra!  Extra! Read All About it!  Brookstone Law Plaintiffs involved in the Wright et al and Christina I. Petersen vs. Bank of America lawsuit won a major groundbreaking decision on December 11, 2014!  The California State Court of appeals reversed a lower court decision to have 964 plaintiffs dismissed from the Wright et al vs. Bank of America mass joinder lawsuit!  What does this mean?  It means when you believe in the impossible!  The Incredible comes true!

The Wright et al vs. Bank of America, N.A. et al., case no.30-2011-00449059-CU-MT-CXC. was filed by Brookstone Law in an Orange County Superior Court on February 9th, 2011.  The lawsuit alleges Bank of America and its subsidiary Countrywide Financial Corporation perpetrated a massive fraud that constituted unfair competition upon borrowers that devastated the values of their residences, resulting in the loss of net worth, and that BOA and Countrywide intended to deprive numerous rights and remedies for the problems they caused the borrowers.

It should be noted that homeowner mass joinders are a fairly new and controversial concept born in 2008 out of the greatest economic and mortgage disaster since the Great Depression.  There have been many people over the years who have confused mass joinder lawsuits with class action lawsuits.  However, unlike a class action lawsuit, which basically treats all plaintiffs the same and applies the same remedy to all, a mass joinder lawsuit is for individual plaintiffs jointly using the same legal arguments and applying them to their unique and individual situation.  The value of your mortgage, your specific contract, your bank interactions, and the current disposition of your individual property make you a unique plaintiff with a unique condition, requiring a unique remedy.  According to Deron Colby, an attorney at Janus Capital Law Group in Irvine, California, who also stated Law firms and attorneys depend soley on a code (Code 378) when filing a mass joinder.

The average individual homeowner lawsuit can cost anywhere between 50k and 150k or more.  Experts believe mass joinder lawsuits are more cost-effective for homeowners.  However, not only do some experts believe mass joinders are more cost-effective, but many experts also believe that “too big to fail” banks are more intimidated by mass joinder lawsuits.  This is especially true once you consider that there is a clear difference between one homeowner suing Bank of America and nine hundred and sixty four homeowners suing Bank of America.  This is not to mention that many legal experts say mass group paying into a mass joinder allows a law firm to have access to more financial resources while taking on some of the largest financial institutions in the world.  Therefore, Brookstone Law attorneys successfully predicted Bank of America would try and have the Wright lawsuit dismissed by attacking the mass joinder status.

orange_county_superior_court_wrongful_death_lawyer_attorney-300x233On October 5, 2014, in a California Superior Court, the Bank of America attorney in the Wright lawsuit, Stuart Price, attacked the core proposition that these types of homeowner mass joinders could even be brought against the banks.  The Bank of America attorney’s motion attacked the overall concept of adding multiple plaintiffs into what has become commonly known as a homeowner mass joinder lawsuit.  Unfortunately, for the plaintiffs involved in the Wright mass joinder, on October 5th, 2015, Judge Andler agreed with the Bank of America attorney and dismissed 964 plaintiffs from the Wright et al vs. Bank of America lawsuit.  It was a major win for the banks.  The decision effectively eliminated homeowner mass joinders of this type from being filed in the future.  The Brookstone Law plaintiffs appealed the decision.

Court-of-AppealsThe California Appeals Court listened to oral arguments on June 17th, 2014 regarding the Brookstone Law plaintiff appeal, in what was known as the Christina I. Petersen vs. Bank of America complaint. — Case # G048387 Christina I. Petersen was the second plaintiff listed in the Wright lawsuit and one of the 964 plaintiffs dismissed from the mass joinder.  The three California Supreme Court judges listened to oral arguments from both the Brookstone Law and Bank of America attorney, and announced a decision would be given within sixty days.  Subsequently, all eyes were on the Wright et al mass joinder and Christina I. Peterson complaint awaiting this landmark appeal decision.  Therefore, practically every attorney and law firm and judge in the United States eagerly waited to see whether history would announce the “too big to fail banks”, or the “too big to fail homeowners”, as the winners making case history regarding the future of homeowner mass joinders.

Then one day the California Appeals Court finally posted the decision. Welcome home Wright lawsuit plaintiffs! That is because in a groundbreaking and landmark decision, the California Court of Appeals ruled in favor Brookstone Law plaintiffs, and ordered the plaintiffs be put back into the Wright et al vs. Bank of America mass joinder lawsuit. — Read California Court of Appeals judgment opinion.

Brookstone_Logo_-_Square_-_Blue“This is a major case breakthrough, not just for Brookstone Law, but for homeowners who want to move forward in their cases against major US banks and mortgage lenders,” said Brookstone Law firm’s Managing Attorney, Vito Torchia, Jr, who made the announcement.

“The Court of Appeal, in following the spirit of the law, as written by the California legislature and interpreted by the courts, made the absolute correct decision.  To uphold the lower courts decision would go against California jurisprudence.  This decision will allow the plaintiffs to have their voices heard as a group, not leaving any plaintiffs behind, regardless of social or economic backgrounds, and having what they always wanted, getting their day in court in front of a jury of their peers,” said Brookstone Law’s Managing Attorney, Vito Torchia, Jr.

cnnHowever, on February 20th, 2015, Bank of America metaphorically pulled the BIG GUNS out.  That is because Bank America boldly took it to the Supreme Court to try and have the decision overturned but the Brookstone plaintiffs prevailed again!  This after Bank of America potentially spent nearly 500k alone just to hire; Mayer-Brown Law Firm and Bryan Cave Law Firm and four “pro hac” attorneys, to substitute in for the Supreme Court review.  It makes a person wonder who is signing the Mayer-Brown Law Firm and Bryan Cave Law Firm checks over at Bank of America. — U.S. Chamber Amicus Letter — Petersen v. BoA (CA SC).pdf  This is after you consider how many legal experts theorize it might have just been cheaper for Bank of America to settle with the Wright mass joinder lawsuit plaintiffs.

“Brookstone Law had previously won in CA Superior Court of Appeals. This Supreme Court Decision is the next step up,” said Vito Torchia, Jr.

It is important to mention that Attorney Vito Torchia Jr. is moving to New York to manage Brookstone Law’s East Coast practice.  Attorney John Mortimer will replace Mr. Torchia as a managing partner in California. Mr. Mortimer has years of experience in civil litigation and has enjoyed a great deal of success.  Attorney John Mortimer is excited to take over as the managing partner and litigate these cases in court.

What does all this mean?  It ultimately means homeowner mass joinder lawsuits are here to stay and are the wave of the future!  It also means the Wright et al vs. Bank of America lawsuit is going to trial!

It has been reported to Piggybankblog.com that law firms from around the state of California, and around the nation, have been contacting Brookstone Law ever since the huge win.  This is mainly because nearly four years later Bank of America has ultimately failed at trying to have the Wright mass joinder lawsuit dismissed.  According to a Brookstone Law insider, law firms from around the nation have been contacting Brookstone Law, because other firms are interested in their clients joining a mass joinder lawsuit that has already made it passed the demurrer stage and other legal hurdles.

Therefore, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Court of Public Opinion, it appears the Wright lawsuit is now a part of American history.  That is because the decision was not only an important HUGE WIN for the Brookstone Law plaintiffs who left every single “too big to fail” bank licking their wounds for many years to come.  It was also a HUGE WIN for law firms and homeowners around the nation.  That is because law firms and homeowners now have the option to consider bringing a mass joinder lawsuit against the apparently “not too big to lose” banks in the future.  It is ultimately the reason some legal experts are saying the Wright et al vs. Bank of America lawsuit is the most successful and high profile homeowner mass joinder lawsuit ever filed against Bank of America in United States history.

Welcome home Wright et al vs. Bank of America plaintiffs!

PiggyBankBlog Courtroom Bailiff: “All Rise! .The Honorable Judge John Wright has left the Courtroom of Public Opinion!”

.