10/05/2012 - Myclipp

Bizjournais/ - News, Qui, 10 de Maio de 2012
CLIPPING INTERNACIONAL (Supreme Court)
Roman Pino foreclosure attorney: Banks
should face sanctions
Florida Supreme Court justices were a little testy on
Thursday during arguments in the high-profile
foreclosure case Bank of New York Mellon vs. Roman
Pino.The case has attracted statewide attention
because the court is considering sanctions against
banks in cases where they submitted fraudulent
documents, also called robo-signing.Justices fired
questions at the attorney representing Pino, Amanda
Lundergan, sometimes cutting her off. They were a
little less challenging toward Bruce Rogow, attorney
representing BNY Mellon.“It seems like to me you’re
just looking for a gotcha to get out of the mortgage. Am
I wrong?” said Chief Justice Charles
Canady.“Absolutely wrong,” said Lundergan of Ice
Legal in Royal Palm Beach.BNY Mellon tried to
foreclose on Pino’s mortgage, but withdrew the case
voluntarily when it was determined its documents were
falsified with fraudulent dates. Because it withdrew
voluntarily, the bank could refile.But the Supreme
Court was hearing arguments Thursday about
whether the case could be reopened to consider
motions to sanction the bank and have the case
dismissed permanently.Pino ended up settling with the
bank and now owns his home.The attorney whose firm
handled Roman Pino’s case, Thomas Ice of Ice Legal,
said he’s not discouraged by the tough
questions.“Sometimes appellate judges ask tough
questions of an attorney when they are planning to rule
their way,” Ice said.In fact, Ice said he now thinks his
firm didn’t go far enough, and that they should seek a
much bigger sanction against the bank, based on a
percentage of the bank’s revenue.Rogow suggested in
his arguments that reopening a case after the plaintiff
withdraws would have destabilizing impact on the
home lending market and on other litigation. Rogow
said there are other remedies available to the court,
including sanctions in a future case or referral to the
Florida Bar. "The court cannot seek to undo a
voluntary dismissal," Rogow said.To watch the
proceedings, see the WFSU website “Gavel to Gavel”,
click here.
8