Letter to CA Supreme Court dated 10/7/13 from Law Firm Morgan Lewis obo Deutsche Bank requesting to depublish Glaski v. Bank of America, N.A. opinion
I would call this law firm immediately and have them withdraw this request.
With GREAT thanks to Simonee Cromwell. She was able to get a friend in Fresno to go to the court, pay 50 cents a page and then go and get this faxed to her all within the last few hours. Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 101 Park Avenue New York, NY 10110-0060 Tel. 212.309.6000 Fax: 212.309.6001 www.morganlewis,com Bernard J. Garbutt Ill (212) 309·6084 bgarbult@morganlewis.com October 7, 2013 Chief Justice Tani G. Cantil-Sakauye and the Associate Justices Supreme Court of California 350 McAllister Street San Francisco, CA 94 102-4 797 Re: Request for Depublication Glaski v, Bank of America, N.A., et al., California Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District - Ga5e No. FOG455<). To; The Honorable Chief Justice and Associate Justices of the California Supreme Court We represent Deutsche Bank National Trust Company, solely in its capacity as trustee (the "Trustee") of the relevant residential mortgage-backed ("RMBS") trusts, as a defendant in the cases Rajamin, Deutsche Bank Nat' l Trust Co., No. 10-cv-7531 (LTS) (S.D.N .Y. ), on appeal, 13-1614-cv (2c\ Cir.) ("Rajamin") and Tran. v. Bank of New York, No. 13-cv-580 (RPP) (S.D.N.Y.) ("Tran"). With all due respect to the Court of Appeal, Fifth District, California (the "Court"), we write to request depublication of the Court's opinion in Glaski v. Bank Of America, N.A .. et al., 218 Cal. App. 4111 1079, 2013 WL 4037310, issued on July 31, 2013 and certified for publication on August 8, 2013 (the "Opinion"). This request is made pursuant to Rule of Court 8.1125. Background In Glaski, the plaintiff mortgagor brought a wrongful foreclosure claim against an RMBS trustee, among others, relating to the no11"judicial foreclosure upon plaintiffs mortgage loan. In sum, the plaintiff alleged that the "attempted" assignment of his mortgage loan to an RMBS trust was made after the closing date in the pooling and servicing agreement (the "PSA") for that RMBS trust, and, therefore, the assignment was ineffective. The plaintiff argued that this deprived the party that had foreclosed upon his mo1tgage loan of the standing to do so because it was not the true owner of his loan. The trial court dismissed The of plaintiff's claims. The Court reversed. ...