…ME: NO WAY!

THE COURT: Well, then, in that case, it seems
1 to me that they have an obligation to prove that
2 they are the, you know, the plaintiff. It’s a very
3 fundamental standing issue that, you know, is pretty
4 simple.
5 I don’t know, you know, if this is the kind of
6 thing that should be subject to just a mulligan
7 or — you know, it seems to me that continuing it is
8 hazardous at best.

MR. WEIDNER: I’m certainly not conceding
24 anything.
25 THE COURT: Well, then, in that case, it seems
1 to me that they have an obligation to prove that
2 they are the, you know, the plaintiff. It’s a very
3 fundamental standing issue that, you know, is pretty
4 simple.

5 I don’t know, you know, if this is the kind of
6 thing that should be subject to just a mulligan
7 or — you know, it seems to me that continuing it is
8 hazardous at best. I’m going to be back here
9 periodically, but I’m not always going to be here,
10 so.
11 MR. WEIDNER: Let me respond to that,
12 Your Honor, because we’ve had two recent opinions
13 which addressed that point. What is the harm to
14 saying, “You’re not entitled to final judgment on
15 this case”? There is no real harm. They get to
16 re-file.

17 THE COURT: There’s no prejudice is what you’re
18 saying.

19 MR. WEIDNER: Correct. Bartram and Evergreen
20 are the two recent opinions that have come out.
21 It’s very simple. They re-file the case, attach the
22 note, attach the mortgage and prove it with another
23 case.

24 So you ask, “Is it a mulligan?” Essentially,
25 it is a mulligan. You just find that they are not
1 entitled to judgment based on the trial here today.
2 They get to re-file, pay a new filing fee, get
3 everything right and start again, get it correct the
4 second time around.

3 THE COURT: Well, I don’t know. If you want to
4 take a writ, I guess you can. But it seems to me
5 that, given all the litigation and the way that this
6 thing turned around, that the reasonable thing to do
7 is just continue the trial, allow him to reopen the
8 evidence so we can get past this issue, which is
9 really a non-issue. It’s just a matter of — you
10 know, there’s no real question that Bank is
11 there, but there has to be a record to show it.
12 MR. WEIDNER: Your Honor, it’s not just that.
13 That’s the point I wanted to make, is that —

14 THE COURT: Well, you know, what difference
15 does it make?

16 MR. WEIDNER: What difference does it make,
17 Your Honor, is this is my client’s house and you’re
18 going to throw an old person —

19 THE COURT: Your client is in that house.
20 Okay? He’s not going to be in it any shorter
21 because we — because we continue this case. All
22 right? They are going to continue in their house
23 until this case is resolved. So, what are you —
24 you know, what’s the point here?

25 MR. WEIDNER: This is his day in court,

1 Your Honor. And because they didn’t come with the
2 evidence they need, you’re giving them unfair
3 advantage. It’s just not —

4 THE COURT: What’s the advantage? Your client
5 is still in the house.

6 MR. WEIDNER: The advantage is the rules of
7 law, Your Honor. The advantage is the rules of
8 procedure and all the evidence. And even if you do
9 continue it, I, again, remind you of all those other
10 evidentiary issues.