Skip to main content
Foreclosure Defense Florida

Pino v. Bank of New York, YOU CAN'T FIX FRAUD…..Recording of The Oral Arguments…

A Youtube Link to the arguments….for everyone that missed the arguments live.




  • Raptor says:

    Wow–great rebuttal from Lundergan, especially the part about inequity between banks and homeowners. Thanks for letting us watch with ya, Matt!

  • Mary says:

    I could not hear fully, due to backround noise, comments Mr. Weidner, please.

  • Andrew says:

    I hope the hearing got better for Pino. From what I heard, his atty was getting pummeled by the lady Justice. That was early and then I had to go. Hopefully, the atty was able to land some blows herself.
    Interested to get your feedback as well.

  • Patel says:

    Some Nuggets:
    1. “Ms. Sanctity of the Court” Pino’s Counsel’s did n’t
    had her TGI friday moment till,rebuttal.
    Once the court has obtained jurisdiction over both party,
    the court shall have a discretion to retain that,
    notwithstanding voluntary dismissal.
    2. Justice Pariente, telling banker lobby, we have your
    powerful Insurance lobby, who when faced with fraudulent
    PI claims, wants us to do what Matt Weidner passionately
    believes the court to do, i.e. punish fraud. Do you
    wish to continue to let fraud on the court go unpunished?
    ( Hint: How many PI attorney firm will survive sanctions
    when fraudulent medical bills are uncovered )
    3. Much hyped Bruce Rogow was dud.
    4. Justice Quince appeared to be an affirmative action
    appointee, rather than substance.
    5. Chief, I just killed the man, but did not obtain
    any relief, can I voluntarily withdraw and go home?
    The “harm” to me as a lay person begins when I pay attorney fees
    and cost to protect my constitutional right to the property
    against a fraudster AND allege specifically( as in Rule 1.540(b)3
    rather than generally)…..duh

  • KSinCFL says:

    As I understand the Supreme Court in these arguments, this is only foreclosure. WTF ever. BUT they still feel it’s ok, so long as non one wa harmed??? WTF ever again. Basically, if this was a murder case, where the defendant was tried using falsified information, IT’S OK, so long as the defendant isn’t harmed..ehhhmmm, found guilty with fraudulent evidence? This is Bull Hockey.

Leave a Reply