[00:00:00] Speaker 00: Inre Lucchese, Darlene Lucchese, Appellant in Pro Se, Joseph Delmont, Council for Appellee, US Bank, NA. [00:00:37] Speaker 00: Good morning, Your Honors. [00:00:41] Speaker 00: I'd like to split my time. [00:00:42] Speaker 02: Just for the record, remind us who you are, although we all know. [00:00:46] Speaker 00: I'm so sorry. [00:00:47] Speaker 00: It's okay. [00:00:47] Speaker 00: I'm Darlene Lucchese. [00:00:49] Speaker 00: Okay, nice to see you. [00:00:49] Speaker 00: Pro se. [00:00:50] Speaker 00: Okay. [00:00:51] Speaker 02: You want to reserve some time? [00:00:52] Speaker 00: Yes. [00:00:53] Speaker 00: I'd like to reserve the majority of my time to answer questions, but I'd just like to brief shortly. [00:00:59] Speaker 00: I don't know how many minutes it might take for what I have prepared. [00:01:04] Speaker 02: Totally up to you. [00:01:05] Speaker 00: Okay, so whenever I read what I'm prepared, then I would like to say the rest or answer questions. [00:01:13] Speaker 02: Should I just give you a heads up at five minutes if we get to that point? [00:01:16] Speaker 02: Is that fair? [00:01:17] Speaker 00: Yes, please. [00:01:17] Speaker 00: That would be wonderful. [00:01:18] Speaker 00: Okay. [00:01:18] Speaker 00: Let's do that. [00:01:18] Speaker 00: Okay. [00:01:18] Speaker 00: Very good. [00:01:19] Speaker 00: You bet. [00:01:19] Speaker 00: Okay. [00:01:20] Speaker 00: So, Your Honors, I briefly address the court issue and reserve the remainder. [00:01:25] Speaker 00: The central issue is whether the bankruptcy court granted relief from stay [00:01:31] Speaker 00: without ever determining that an enforceable obligation or lien existed in the record. [00:01:36] Speaker 00: So the court assumed that the original maturity date was still controlling, but the record shows the obligation was accelerated in 2007 under the expressed terms of the Deed of Trust, specifically Section 22, [00:01:52] Speaker 00: And that acceleration fixed the date of performance. [00:01:57] Speaker 00: I also like to point to the record where the deed of trust is, is in Appleby's excerpts, the deed of trust is at page 68 and 69, section 22. [00:02:09] Speaker 00: And the original note is at page 50 and 53 for the terms of the note and the deed. [00:02:17] Speaker 00: So that acceleration fixed the date of performance [00:02:21] Speaker 00: and this the same record further shows that no extension of preservation of any lien was recorded and the notice of default recorded on February 5th 2024 that was a new that was on a different property on the property where I live the other bankruptcy had to do with the different property altogether so the notice of default that was [00:02:43] Speaker 00: came in and recorded February 5, 2024 that caused me to file this bankruptcy. [00:02:49] Speaker 00: Those exhibits A, B, and C are in docket 40 and docket 30 and also the accelerated note that's recorded now in the county recorders. [00:03:01] Speaker 00: These facts were before the court but were never analyzed. [00:03:05] Speaker 00: The [00:03:08] Speaker 00: Also to say the bankruptcy discharge was June 15, 2015. [00:03:14] Speaker 00: No reaffirmation and no new agreement. [00:03:16] Speaker 00: So the ongoing harm that this order has caused is that they're using this to assert that a debt and a judgment and they recorded it in the county recorders and are now claiming a debt and that the lien is enforceable under that NRAAM order. [00:03:32] Speaker 00: And so the bankruptcy court never analyzed [00:03:38] Speaker 00: the acceleration clause of the deed of trust. [00:03:42] Speaker 00: So no extension was ever recorded as per the Markable Records Title Act, CCP 360.5, and without an enforceable right in the record, the order should never have been granted and cannot stand. [00:03:57] Speaker 00: So that would be my time to save for questions. [00:04:06] Speaker 02: I have just one for you and you've probably heard this more than once. [00:04:11] Speaker 02: Relief from stay is a uniquely summary proceeding under in reveal which is a decision by one of our predecessors here at the bankruptcy appellate panel many years ago. [00:04:23] Speaker 02: All you need for most standing questions like this is a colorable claim. [00:04:30] Speaker 02: And what the cases tell us is we do not have relief from stay [00:04:33] Speaker 02: get into arcane questions about enforceability of a debt and so on. [00:04:40] Speaker 02: You can do that in state court. [00:04:41] Speaker 02: In fact, you've done that in other courts and gotten answers to that. [00:04:44] Speaker 02: So why was it a mistake for the bankruptcy court here not to get into the questions that you're suggesting they should have? [00:04:51] Speaker 00: Well, I filed a bankruptcy because I was actually cornered to file it, pressured. [00:04:57] Speaker 00: And when I filed it, I thought I could just do [00:05:00] Speaker 00: Typical what I believe the bankruptcy would have offered to object to the claim To status to just get rid of this finally and have it be gone if somebody tell you you can't do that Yes, because I keep getting dismissed soon as I walk in as soon as I say I don't have the debt It seems like it throws everything off. [00:05:18] Speaker 02: Well, what would take that back to really from stay argument? [00:05:21] Speaker 02: Okay, tell me why the bankruptcy judge is required to rule on your arguments and [00:05:27] Speaker 02: about enforceability of the debt in the context of a relief from stay motion. [00:05:31] Speaker 02: They have documents. [00:05:32] Speaker 02: They present the documents as evidence. [00:05:34] Speaker 02: The judge looks at them. [00:05:35] Speaker 02: The judge says that's a colorable claim. [00:05:38] Speaker 02: Many cases tell us that's all you do at that stage. [00:05:40] Speaker 02: If you have other arguments, I mean, seriously, you can preserve them any way you want. [00:05:46] Speaker 02: But at relief from stay, it's not terribly relevant. [00:05:48] Speaker 02: So help me out with that part. [00:05:49] Speaker 00: Well, the relief from stay said that they were a creditor and they're not, they lack standing as well. [00:05:55] Speaker 00: So they can't be a creditor to gain relief of stay when they didn't have any, there's not even an assignment from the deed of trust from the creditor, from the original creditor to any parties that later are now claiming. [00:06:09] Speaker 00: There was a break a long time ago and because of the earlier break, [00:06:15] Speaker 00: They just started restating and stating that I owed the debt again and I owed, and they confused the discharge order as if that was the reason, when absent the discharge in the first place, the time already ran and nobody preserved their right. [00:06:29] Speaker 00: So there was no right to enforce and pressure me into filing anything, but I had to enter the court somewhere. [00:06:38] Speaker 00: I had called an attorney and hired attorneys. [00:06:42] Speaker 00: But the motion for relief to stay now is harming because it's now recorded as if it was a determination or a judgment for a debt. [00:06:50] Speaker 00: It's not standing the way even the judge below said that it would, that it wouldn't cause harm, but it's absolutely causing the harm because it's recorded and it's recorded as a debt and it's recorded and now they're threatening a sale again. [00:07:10] Speaker 02: I don't have any other questions at the moment. [00:07:11] Speaker 02: Anybody else? [00:07:12] Speaker 00: No. [00:07:12] Speaker 01: You want to reserve the rest of your time? [00:07:14] Speaker 02: You've got eight minutes plus. [00:07:16] Speaker 00: OK. [00:07:17] Speaker 00: And then if I could ask one other mistake, there's two mistakes that the court relied on on dismissing and for granting. [00:07:26] Speaker 01: So you're going to keep arguing now? [00:07:28] Speaker 01: OK. [00:07:29] Speaker 00: Yes, for the mistake part of it that he believed I was in bad faith because he thought this was a property that had been before stopped by a bankruptcy and that's also not true. [00:07:41] Speaker 00: And so in that light of that, in the reporter's transcript, it shows there as well, sorry where's my notes, it shows that, [00:07:57] Speaker 00: on page 30 and 31 and that has to do with the date of the hearing which was November 21st, 2024. [00:08:09] Speaker 00: So that was a mistake because that wasn't, so I only just filed the bankruptcy first time for the property. [00:08:17] Speaker 00: So that's another reason. [00:08:20] Speaker 02: Okay. [00:08:20] Speaker 02: All right. [00:08:20] Speaker 02: Thank you very much. [00:08:21] Speaker 02: Okay. [00:08:21] Speaker 02: You want to reserve? [00:08:24] Speaker 00: Yes, I'll reserve on the time left. [00:08:39] Speaker 03: Good morning, Your Honors. [00:08:40] Speaker 03: Joseph Delmont, Counsel for Appellee, U.S. [00:08:44] Speaker 03: Bank as Trustee, may it please the Court. [00:08:48] Speaker 03: Your Honors, as you noted at the outset, you're sufficiently familiar with the briefs. [00:08:54] Speaker 03: I don't believe Appellant has raised any arguments that were not already thoroughly analyzed in our brief and addressed therein, so I'm just going to make a few quick points and I'll reserve the rest of my time to answer any questions you might have. [00:09:08] Speaker 03: The first is that appellant's primary argument rests on a misinterpretation of the applicable law. [00:09:14] Speaker 03: There's multiple references to the California Civil Code section 882.020. [00:09:19] Speaker 03: The case law and statute itself are clear that the recording of a notice of default or letter of acceleration does not change the maturity date for purposes of determining the expiration of the period in which you can enforce the power of sale provisions of the date of trust. [00:09:36] Speaker 03: However, as the court pointed out, that's not even relevant if the bankruptcy court relied solely on the fact that this is a summary proceeding. [00:09:44] Speaker 03: So it could have stopped just there, which I believe it mostly did. [00:09:48] Speaker 03: Determined that this was a summary proceeding, all that appellee needed to show was a colorable claim, which it did by virtue of its status as the assignee of the deed of trust with the power to enforce the power of sale provisions in the deed of trust, which is property of the estate. [00:10:05] Speaker 03: Regarding the mistakes appellant mentioned that warranted vacating the in rem order, I think it was reasonable for the court to conclude that based on the five prior filings and dismissals that there was in fact cause to grant both relief under 362D1 and 362D4 based on a bad faith scheme. [00:10:27] Speaker 03: I believe our brief adequately addresses all of the other issues, so if the panel has any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. [00:10:35] Speaker 02: I mean, I would just ask you to confirm something, which is that I think it was... [00:10:42] Speaker 02: pointed out in the briefs and maybe also in front of the bankruptcy judge that the debtors' arguments about acceleration and non-enforceability have been raised elsewhere, right? [00:10:52] Speaker 02: They have been raised elsewhere. [00:10:53] Speaker 02: And they've been determined elsewhere. [00:10:54] Speaker 03: And rejected there. [00:10:55] Speaker 02: By perfectly nice state court judges who know how to do that. [00:10:58] Speaker 02: Okay. [00:10:59] Speaker 02: Right. [00:10:59] Speaker 02: Okay. [00:10:59] Speaker 02: Thank you. [00:11:00] Speaker 02: All right. [00:11:00] Speaker 01: And then just to confirm that the debtor raised, sorry, [00:11:06] Speaker 01: Pellent raised in the argument today that this property somehow wasn't involved in the other bankruptcy cases. [00:11:14] Speaker 01: Can you address that? [00:11:17] Speaker 03: I would ask a Pellent to address that argument in further detail. [00:11:22] Speaker 03: I believe it was property of the estate in the prior bankruptcy findings. [00:11:25] Speaker 03: It was listed in the schedules. [00:11:27] Speaker 03: It was listed as a residence. [00:11:28] Speaker 03: So there was nothing to suggest that it wasn't property of the estate in the prior cases. [00:11:33] Speaker 03: and something that would have prevented our client from pursuing their foreclosure remedies based on that bankruptcy filing. [00:11:43] Speaker 02: I have no other questions. [00:11:44] Speaker 02: Anybody? [00:11:46] Speaker 02: Thank you. [00:11:46] Speaker 02: Thank you very much. [00:11:54] Speaker 00: Thank you. [00:11:54] Speaker 00: I'd like to speak to those three issues. [00:11:59] Speaker 00: To first speak to the in-state, the state I filed once 2018 and 2020, there's a judgment for the issues that belong to 2012 time period, not the new facts and the new timeline. [00:12:16] Speaker 00: At that time, when the case came out in 2022 from the appellate, it relied upon the earlier timeframe. [00:12:25] Speaker 00: Not yet 10 years were recorded in the county recorders at that time. [00:12:29] Speaker 00: So that is very distinct because there's new facts that occurred when they came in with the 2024 notice of default. [00:12:37] Speaker 00: That's new facts. [00:12:39] Speaker 00: Now, the other new facts also is the proof of claim that brought in another forged note that's not recorded. [00:12:46] Speaker 00: They have a loan modification that they took a one-page addendum and used that for a new principal amount that's not recorded. [00:12:53] Speaker 00: That's in the record as well. [00:12:56] Speaker 00: And then also with the acceleration was finally recorded if it was going to make a difference. [00:13:02] Speaker 00: But the real issue was there's no extension recorded. [00:13:05] Speaker 00: So the state court has not finalized a determination right now. [00:13:11] Speaker 00: And that I'm in a case right now that I had to file. [00:13:16] Speaker 00: So that's not finalized. [00:13:18] Speaker 00: Secondly, on their claiming assignment, [00:13:22] Speaker 00: They didn't have an assignment. [00:13:24] Speaker 00: The notice of default that was filed originally with Countrywide as the lender was a notice of default in 2008 after the acceleration. [00:13:32] Speaker 00: That acceleration is the only acceleration. [00:13:35] Speaker 00: They haven't disputed that there's any dispute with the acceleration. [00:13:39] Speaker 00: They agree the note was accelerated. [00:13:41] Speaker 00: So the issue is the 2008 notice of default only had the lender Countrywide home loans. [00:13:51] Speaker 00: The merger that they claim later on, the successor by LaSalle, there's no assignment to LaSalle. [00:13:56] Speaker 00: There's no link. [00:13:58] Speaker 00: Bank of America said they've never been lender. [00:14:01] Speaker 00: I have an order, but it didn't get to the other order of the other court before. [00:14:04] Speaker 00: It was with federal judge Guilford. [00:14:07] Speaker 00: We were there for a short time. [00:14:08] Speaker 00: And he also determined there was no objections. [00:14:11] Speaker 00: At that time, it was Bank of America. [00:14:13] Speaker 00: So before the 2012 time frame, from the 2012 to 2013, transfer to SLS. [00:14:21] Speaker 00: So that, there is no proper assignment. [00:14:25] Speaker 00: Now, the LaSalle assignment, I think that, let's see, he talked about the LaSalle, he talked about the Notice of Default, oh, and the fact, no, the history was in 2015 I filed a bankruptcy, the discharge, which I actually had assets. [00:14:41] Speaker 00: I probably shouldn't have been in a seven. [00:14:43] Speaker 00: Nonetheless, I was pressured, 2016 I hired two attorneys back to back. [00:14:49] Speaker 00: Still in good faith, Judge Brand even said I was in good faith. [00:14:52] Speaker 00: You can refile an 11. [00:14:54] Speaker 00: My attorneys were incompetent. [00:14:56] Speaker 00: We had a hearing about it. [00:14:58] Speaker 00: So all the way seven years later, in 2022, on my other property only, that's what it was about. [00:15:05] Speaker 00: It was not about this property. [00:15:06] Speaker 00: I filed to stop that sale. [00:15:09] Speaker 00: which was also time barred. [00:15:11] Speaker 00: But nonetheless, that's not before the court. [00:15:14] Speaker 00: That's the case that I filed. [00:15:16] Speaker 00: Back to back, Judge Brand dismissed it believing that Judge Huell made a determination by a motion to dismiss, but that's not the reason he dismissed it. [00:15:28] Speaker 00: She thought that he dismissed it because I was in bad faith. [00:15:31] Speaker 00: He didn't say I was in bad faith when he dismissed it immediately two months in. [00:15:39] Speaker 00: That was carried forward. [00:15:41] Speaker 00: Now I file the first time. [00:15:43] Speaker 00: They file the notice of default in February 2024. [00:15:46] Speaker 00: I file the first time to stop this sale on this property where I live. [00:15:52] Speaker 00: And that was in September 2024. [00:15:54] Speaker 00: So I did not. [00:15:56] Speaker 00: He just assumed all of this. [00:15:58] Speaker 00: But that was not the events. [00:16:03] Speaker 01: Thank you for clarifying. [00:16:06] Speaker 00: If I can help clarify anything else? [00:16:08] Speaker 02: Not for me. [00:16:11] Speaker 01: Anything further? [00:16:12] Speaker 01: Okay. [00:16:13] Speaker 00: Thank you. [00:16:14] Speaker 02: Okay. [00:16:14] Speaker 02: The matter's submitted. [00:16:15] Speaker 02: We'll get you a written decision as soon as we can. [00:16:18] Speaker 02: Thank you.