TRY ME!
New Evidence In Motion
Summary
In Massachusetts, when filing a Motion for Reconsideration under Rule 60(b)(6), its crucial to present new evidence clearly and explain its relevance. Highlight any overlooked superior court cases or pending federal cases that impact your situation. Ensure the evidence was unavailable during the initial ruling and point out significant errors in the judges decision. Request specific legal citations to support the courts denial. If the former homeowner remains in the property, the third-party buyer must evict them and prove the foreclosures validity. Consider the impact of an appeal bond executed in fraud, leading to damages like home loss and emotional suffering.Full Conversation
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superiorcourt case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
To improve your Motion for Reconsideration, ensure you:
- Clearly outline the new evidence and its relevance.
- Explain why this evidence was not available earlier.
- Point out any errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like more specific guidance on drafting a particular section of your motion?
- Clearly outline the new evidence and its relevance.
- Explain why this evidence was not available earlier.
- Point out any errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like more specific guidance on drafting a particular section of your motion?
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
It sounds like you have a complex situation involving newly discovered evidence and significant legal issues. For your Motion for Reconsideration, Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*) is indeed applicable for relief from a judgment due to new evidence or significant errors.
Key points for your motion:
- Clearly state the newly discovered evidence and its relevance.
- Explain why this evidence was not available during the initial ruling.
- Mention any significant errors or oversights in the judge's ruling.
- Request specific legal citations and case law supporting the court's decision.
Do you need help drafting any particular section or have any specific questions?
Key points for your motion:
- Clearly state the newly discovered evidence and its relevance.
- Explain why this evidence was not available during the initial ruling.
- Mention any significant errors or oversights in the judge's ruling.
- Request specific legal citations and case law supporting the court's decision.
Do you need help drafting any particular section or have any specific questions?
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former
If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if an unrelated party performed the foreclosure. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it was done correctly.
In addition, this court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based on the judge's opinion has resulted in significant damages, including the loss of my home, deterioration in health, and emotional suffering.
It sounds like you have a strong case with substantial new evidence to support your Motion for Reconsideration. When drafting your motion, clearly outline:
- The new evidence and its significance.
- Why this evidence was unavailable during the initial ruling.
- Specific errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like help drafting a specific section of your motion or citation of relevant Massachusetts cases?
- The new evidence and its significance.
- Why this evidence was unavailable during the initial ruling.
- Specific errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like help drafting a specific section of your motion or citation of relevant Massachusetts cases?
This new evidence is the appeal court to see.
You seem to have a strong case with substantial new evidence. Here's a summary to help you with your Motion for Reconsideration:
- Clearly outline the new evidence (pending federal case, overlooked superior court case).
- Explain why this evidence was unavailable initially.
- Highlight specific errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like help drafting a specific section of your motion or citing relevant Massachusetts cases?
- Clearly outline the new evidence (pending federal case, overlooked superior court case).
- Explain why this evidence was unavailable initially.
- Highlight specific errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like help drafting a specific section of your motion or citing relevant Massachusetts cases?
Can you review the copy of the motion that I sent an rewrite it to include the divorce decree. The new evidence was not shown before because he denied all my counterclaims. So I didnt see the need to share of my divorce decree. Since he was not looking at any of my eviodence .
Sure, here is a revised version of your Motion for Reconsideration that includes the new evidence from your divorce decree:
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was notpreviously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Divorce Decree Evidence:
- I wish to introduce my divorce decree as new evidence, which establishes that I had no intention of taking on a new debt or giving my deed to the unlicensed lenders. I believed my financial advisor's assertion that I was in an emergency situation and that the newly formed partnership with my former husband, as stated in the divorce decree, was to handle the mortgage payments.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
Additionally, the court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was notpreviously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Divorce Decree Evidence:
- I wish to introduce my divorce decree as new evidence, which establishes that I had no intention of taking on a new debt or giving my deed to the unlicensed lenders. I believed my financial advisor's assertion that I was in an emergency situation and that the newly formed partnership with my former husband, as stated in the divorce decree, was to handle the mortgage payments.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
Additionally, the court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based
I recently filed a motion under rule 60b fruad upoj the court which he denied but he is error as I have solid evidence and a strong case. I now want to include these motions in a supplemt to the the record in my upcoming appeal. Is this ok?
You can certainly include new evidence in your appeal. When filing a supplement to the record for your appeal, ensure you:
- Clearly outline the new evidence and its relevance.
- Explain why this evidence was not available earlier.
- Highlight specific errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like help drafting a specific section of your supplement?
- Clearly outline the new evidence and its relevance.
- Explain why this evidence was not available earlier.
- Highlight specific errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like help drafting a specific section of your supplement?
i can include new evidence in my appeal by first showing it to the lower court. Right?
In Massachusetts, you generally cannot introduce new evidence in an appeal unless it was presented to the lower court first, except in rare circumstances. You should file a Motion for Reconsideration or a Motion for Relief from Judgment under Rule *(b) in the lower court to present new evidence.
Would you like help drafting a specific section of your motion?
Would you like help drafting a specific section of your motion?
I just sent you Motion for reconsideration can you please polsih it including my divorce decree?
Case Rating: *
Sure, here is a polished version of your Motion for Reconsideration including the new evidence and divorce decree:
---
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Name of Court]
[Case Number]
[Your Name]
Plaintiff,
v.
[Defendant’s Name]
Defendant.
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in thecourt's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Intent and Misrepresentation:
- I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. Instead, I believed my financial advisor, who convinced me that I was in an emergency. This belief was based on the newly formed partnership with my former husband, as stated in the divorce decree, which was supposed to cover mortgage payments on my home.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua).
Sure, here is a polished version of your Motion for Reconsideration including the new evidence and divorce decree:
---
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
[Name of Court]
[Case Number]
[Your Name]
Plaintiff,
v.
[Defendant’s Name]
Defendant.
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in thecourt's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Intent and Misrepresentation:
- I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. Instead, I believed my financial advisor, who convinced me that I was in an emergency. This belief was based on the newly formed partnership with my former husband, as stated in the divorce decree, which was supposed to cover mortgage payments on my home.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua).
see above
Sure, I'd be happy to help polish your Motion for Reconsideration and include the new evidence related to your divorce decree. Here are some key points to consider:
- Clearly state the new evidence (divorce decree, pending federal case, and overlooked superior court case).
- Explain why this evidence was not available during the initial ruling.
- Highlight significant errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like me to help draft a specific section or provide sample language to include in your motion?
- Clearly state the new evidence (divorce decree, pending federal case, and overlooked superior court case).
- Explain why this evidence was not available during the initial ruling.
- Highlight significant errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like me to help draft a specific section or provide sample language to include in your motion?
Yes do yopu have a copy of it? I just sent it to you.
It sounds like you have a solid basis for your Motion for Reconsideration. Unfortunately, I'm unable to directly review documents. Here are some tips for including your divorce decree in the motion:
- Clearly state the new evidence and why it wasn't available initially.
- Explain the relevance of the divorce decree to your case.
- Highlight any errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like help drafting a specific section or sample wording for your motion?
- Clearly state the new evidence and why it wasn't available initially.
- Explain the relevance of the divorce decree to your case.
- Highlight any errors or oversights in the original decision.
Would you like help drafting a specific section or sample wording for your motion?
here is the motion can you please include the divorce decree information? Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
Certainly! Here’s a revised version of your motion that includes the divorce decree information:
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital tomy appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
Given these points, I respectfully request that the court reconsider its previous ruling in light of this newly discovered evidence and significant oversights.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
---
Does this look good to you, or would you like any more adjustments?
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital tomy appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
Given these points, I respectfully request that the court reconsider its previous ruling in light of this newly discovered evidence and significant oversights.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
---
Does this look good to you, or would you like any more adjustments?
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superiorcourt case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
Certainly! Here’s a polished version of your motion with the divorce decree information included:
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital tomy appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
Given these points, I respectfully request that the court reconsider its previous ruling in light of this newly discovered evidence and significant oversights.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
---
Would you like any further adjustments or additional information?
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital tomy appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
Given these points, I respectfully request that the court reconsider its previous ruling in light of this newly discovered evidence and significant oversights.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
---
Would you like any further adjustments or additional information?
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former
.
Certainly! Here's your revised motion with all the necessary points included:
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it
If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if an unrelated party performed the foreclosure. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it was done correctly.
In addition, this court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based on the judge's opinion has resulted in significant damages, including the loss of my home, deterioration in health, and emotional suffering.
I respectfully request the court to reconsider its ruling based on the newly presented evidence and the ongoing litigation in both federal and superior courts. Your reconsideration of this motion is crucial for a fair and just adjudication of my claims
Certainly! Here’s your polished motion with the additional points included:
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even
see above
Certainly! Here’s the revised section from the requested point onward:
---
If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if an unrelated party performed the foreclosure. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it was done correctly.
In addition, this court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based on the judge's opinion has resulted in significant damages, including the loss of my home, deterioration in health, and emotional suffering.
Given these points, I respectfully request the court reconsider its previous ruling in light of this newly discovered evidence and significant oversights.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
---
Would you like any further adjustments or additional information?
---
If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if an unrelated party performed the foreclosure. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it was done correctly.
In addition, this court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based on the judge's opinion has resulted in significant damages, including the loss of my home, deterioration in health, and emotional suffering.
Given these points, I respectfully request the court reconsider its previous ruling in light of this newly discovered evidence and significant oversights.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
---
Would you like any further adjustments or additional information?
Can you send me from If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, onward?
Certainly! Here is the requested part from your motion:
---
If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if an unrelated party performed the foreclosure. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it was done correctly.
In addition, this court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based on the judge's opinion has resulted in significant damages, including the loss of my home, deterioration in health, and emotional suffering. I respectfully request the court to reconsider its ruling based on the newly presented evidence and the ongoing litigation in both federal and superior courts. Your reconsideration of this motion is crucial for a fair and just adjudication of my claims.
---
Would you like any further assistance with this or anything else?
---
If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if an unrelated party performed the foreclosure. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it was done correctly.
In addition, this court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based on the judge's opinion has resulted in significant damages, including the loss of my home, deterioration in health, and emotional suffering. I respectfully request the court to reconsider its ruling based on the newly presented evidence and the ongoing litigation in both federal and superior courts. Your reconsideration of this motion is crucial for a fair and just adjudication of my claims.
---
Would you like any further assistance with this or anything else?
Can you please send me from "if the foremer homeowner..." onward?
Sure! Here is the revised portion of your motion:
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. **Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me and is vital to my appeal.
*. **Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if
Now from " the former owner is permitted..."
Sure! Here is the revised portion of your motion from "the former owner is permitted..." onward:
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me andis vital to my appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue
---
Dear Judge [Judge’s Last Name],
I respectfully submit this Motion for Reconsideration pursuant to Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *(b)(*). I believe the court's previous ruling contains significant oversights and inaccuracies that must be addressed.
*. Pending Federal Court Case:
- I currently have a pending case in federal court addressing claims of illegal foreclosure, usury (Chapter *, Section * violation), 93A consumer violations, and breach of contract. These claims have not been adjudicated in any court, contrary to the assertion in the court’s ruling.
*. Overlooked Superior Court Case:
- There is an ongoing superior court case where I am a counter-claimant against the broker involved in this matter. This crucial fact was overlooked and not considered in the court's previous ruling. This oversight is newly discovered evidence that significantly impacts my case.
*. Newly Discovered Evidence:
- The discovery that my pending claim in superior court involving the broker was not considered in the judge's ruling is newly discovered evidence. This information was not previously available to me andis vital to my appeal.
*. Divorce Decree:
- As per my divorce decree, the newly formed partnership between my financial advisor and my former husband was intended to pay for the mortgage payments on my home. I had no intention of taking on new debt or giving my deed to unlicensed lenders. This critical evidence was not initially presented as my counterclaims were denied, and the court did not review my evidence.
*. Requirement for Legal Citations:
- In accordance with Rule *, I request that the court provide specific legal citations and case law to support its denial, rather than relying on subjective opinions.
*. Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue
Now from " the former owner is permitted..."
Sure! Here is the revised portion of your motion from "the former owner is permitted...":
---
Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if an unrelated party performed the foreclosure. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it was done correctly.
- In addition, this court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based on the judge's opinion has resulted in significant damages, including the loss of my home, deterioration in health, and emotional suffering.
Given these points, I respectfully request the court reconsider its previous ruling in light of this newly discovered evidence and significant oversights.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
---
Would you like any further adjustments or additional information?
---
Significant Errors in Judge's Ruling:
- The judge's opinion that the third-party buyer is too far removed from the actions of the broker and lender is incorrect. Buying a foreclosed property comes with enormous risks. Massachusetts law is clear that failure to strictly comply with the foreclosure process makes the foreclosure void (Ibanez, Bevilacqua). Recent cases reaffirm that even minor defects can have serious consequences on the validity of a foreclosure.
- If the former homeowner is still residing in the property, the third-party buyer needs to evict the former owner. The former owner is permitted to argue that the foreclosure was void, even if an unrelated party performed the foreclosure. The third-party buyer must defend the foreclosure and prove it was done correctly.
- In addition, this court executed an appeal bond grounded in fraud upon the court. The court’s execution of my eviction based on the judge's opinion has resulted in significant damages, including the loss of my home, deterioration in health, and emotional suffering.
Given these points, I respectfully request the court reconsider its previous ruling in light of this newly discovered evidence and significant oversights.
Sincerely,
[Your Name]
---
Would you like any further adjustments or additional information?
Start a new chat