Wells Fargo is now subject to a Demand for Summary Judgment after failing to rebut sworn affidavits, thereby admitting—by operation of law—to fraud, dishonor, and lack of standing. Under California law, summary judgment is mandatory when no triable issue of fact exists, and Wells Fargo’s silence serves as a legal admission of liability. This case highlights the bank’s documented history of foreclosure fraud, echoing past rulings where courts have dismissed their claims with prejudice.
This case law summary outlines essential legal principles regarding jurisdiction, standing, and procedural requirements in financial and mortgage disputes. Courts consistently invalidate judgments lacking proper jurisdiction and stress the necessity for plaintiffs to establish legal standing. Instances of fraudulent lending practices, including breaches of federal regulations, have resulted in dismissals with prejudice. Rulings curtail corporate overreach by banks, prohibiting lending credit and ultra vires contracts. Evidentiary standards highlight the importance of adequate affidavits and the duty to disclose information to prevent fraud. Contract principles reaffirm the voiding of agreements founded on illegal consideration.
Explore the secret ties between major entities like Bank of America, Chase, Wells Fargo, and the IRS, all controlled under Northern Trust Corporation. Learn how these financial powerhouses, alongside the American Bar Association, work together to dominate the legal and financial systems. Delve into their interconnected influence and how it shapes the role of government agencies and banks in America. Uncover the truth behind this corporate web and its impact on society.