Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
I'm Eric Lanigan with Lanigan and Lanigan I want to go over how a recent case that I
had brought home to me how much the rules of evidence play in a foreclosure case. We
were waiting out in the hall to be called in for trial and right in front of me the
plaintiffls lawyer introduces herself to the so-called records custodian for the loan servicer
the person who's going to identify and validate the records and they're introducing themselves
to each other and realize that they've never met before and the lawyer actually hands the
records to the custodian and says, "here are your records."
And I thought, well now, that's interesting. The so-called records custodian is now receiving
the records that they're supposed to be the custodian of.
And I thought, well this is going to make for a great cross-examination of this person.
But then, for another evidentiary reason we never even got to that point because when
they attempted to submit these records I noticed as I expected that half of these records belonged
to the original loan servicer. The one at trial had actually taken over the case. And
that's actually a very common situation. Well I immediately objected on the basis that they
can't make someone else's business records their business records just by putting them
in the file.
Which is true and the judge although he didn't want to agree with me, he knew that he had
no choice. He sustained the objection didn't allow the business records into evidence.
Well with no records they had no case and it was dismissed.
So without a strong knowledge of the rules of evidence, those records would've come in
and the plaintiff would have gotten a foreclosure judgment.
So these kinds of cases, always keep in mind, are not necessarily decided on what the facts
are or even what they should be. But they're based on what is proven by the evidence.
I've had cases over the years, different kinds of cases, criminal cases other types of civil
cases where my client has said, "this is the truth, I swear that this it's the truth,"
and I know it sounds cynical but sometimes I've actually said to them, "you need to understand
something, I don't care what the truth is, in court I care what the evidence will prove."
And to follow down that road you have to have a thorough an intimate understanding of the
rules of evidence.