No. 20-94

Martin Dekom v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC

Lower Court: New York
Docketed: 2020-07-29
Status: Denied
Type: Paid
Tags: civil-procedure court-intervention due-process foreclosure foreclosure-procedure judicial-rulemaking legal-burden rulemaking-power standing statutory-interpretation statutory-requirements
Key Terms:
Environmental SocialSecurity Securities Immigration
Latest Conference: 2020-09-29
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Can a court of its own interstitial rulemaking power supplant or replace the legislative scheme?

Question Presented (OCR Extract)

Questions Presented Acounty court in New York invented a legal process which streamlines foreclosure by removing statutory requirements and motions. Can a court of its own interstitial rulemaking power supplant or replace the legislative scheme? In New York, after a summons and complaint is served, a party cannot defend himself until he or the plaintiff files and pays for a Request for Judicial Intervention (RJI), regardless of the time set by the summons. Is this a permissible burden of Due Process? Parties. ’ “The caption contains the names of the parties to the action in the New York Court of Appeals: Nationstar Mortgage LLC, respondent, and Martin Dekom, petitioner. Decisions at issue New York State Court of Appeals No. 2018-1028, Nationstar v Dekom: The Order Denying Appeal by the New York Court of Appeals dated April 30, 2020 with Notice of Entry on July 18, 2020, is

Docket Entries

2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-09-09
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-22
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due August 28, 2020)

Attorneys

Martin Dekom
Martin Dekom — Petitioner
Martin Dekom — Petitioner