In More Evidence That Judges Have Had it With Banks, Yves Smith points to Phillips v US Bank, N.a., Sup Ct Carroll Cty Ga.20111102, which (assuming it is real), can only be called a epic dismissal of a complaint.
Recent Bluessky Posts- Jotwell Int'l & Comp: Erin F. Delaney, Litigation in the Shadows of Empires, JOTWELL (May 28, 2026) (reviewing Trevor T. W. Wan, Globetrotting Advocates: Foreign Barristers in Hong Kong Courts, 73 Am. J. Comp. L. 872 (2025)), intl.jotwell.com/litigation-i.... May 28, 2026 Jotwell
- Having some trouble detecting my choices here for how they share my data. May 27, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- I think Qui Tam is unquestionably constitutional if only because of its ancient pedigree, and for many other reasons too. But the Supreme Court has flirted with saying that qui tam relators do not have standing, and Scalia & Co came close to doing it in the Lujan case. Justice Kennedy prevented it. May 27, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- Isn't assaulting a Senator a federal crime? Not that our craven US Attorneys would prosecute... May 27, 2026 Michael Froomkin
- This sort of well-funded sham support to undermine Democrats by promoting terrible candidates in primaries is just poisoning the (already rather polluted) well of democracy. It's a pity shame is on life support. OTOH, given Paxton, it seems as if the GOP can shoot itself without help. May 27, 2026 Michael Froomkin
I was struck by the complete lack of legal citations in the order. That makes me skeptical that the order is real.
The lack of legal citation in an order is nothing new in state court practice. What stuck me as unusual is that the Judge would have written an order at all. If state court practice in Georgia is anything like it is here, the motion would have been heard in open court, the judge would have issued a verbal tongue lashing, the parties would have walked outside and hand-written a vanilla order with no findings of fact or legal citation, and the judge would have signed it without reading it.
As for a bank denying modification, I have handled a hand full of foreclosure cases on the defense side, and have spoken to lawyers who handle dozens (if not hundreds) of these cases. The consensus seems to be that there are two standard answers when the defendant asks for a modification: 1) “No because you make too much money and never should have fallen behind,” and 2) “No because you don’t make enough money and you can’t afford any reasonable modification.”