Difference between revisions of "Georgia Ethics Code Does Not Apply To Fulton Judges"

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Georgia Ethics Code Does Not Apply To Fulton Judges (view source)

Revision as of 15:50, 28 March 2023

No change in size ,  15:50, 28 March 2023
no edit summary
(username removed)
(username removed)
Line 20: Line 20:
Though the McCrackens hired a property manager to execute a "staged" eviction, this was obviously not a typical landlord-tenant case—with an alleged rent of $15,000 per month after a $100,000 down payment under a Purchase and Sale Agreement. Having committed to removing Jackson as their buyer, the McCrackens’ property manager refuses to drop the case despite having failed to deliver proper legal notices before initiating the eviction (or "dispossessory") process. At the time the case was filed the real estate market was getting exponentially warmer and it appeared to be in the McCrackens’ interest to pocket Jackson’s investment and seek a new buyer. Jackson offered multiple times to simply pay off the running balance and continue with the purchase, to which the McCrackens’ attorney has repeated "Not a chance!" Clearly, it was never about rent, it was about the sale. But why?
Though the McCrackens hired a property manager to execute a "staged" eviction, this was obviously not a typical landlord-tenant case—with an alleged rent of $15,000 per month after a $100,000 down payment under a Purchase and Sale Agreement. Having committed to removing Jackson as their buyer, the McCrackens’ property manager refuses to drop the case despite having failed to deliver proper legal notices before initiating the eviction (or "dispossessory") process. At the time the case was filed the real estate market was getting exponentially warmer and it appeared to be in the McCrackens’ interest to pocket Jackson’s investment and seek a new buyer. Jackson offered multiple times to simply pay off the running balance and continue with the purchase, to which the McCrackens’ attorney has repeated "Not a chance!" Clearly, it was never about rent, it was about the sale. But why?
<br>
<br>
==The Mythical "Staged" Eviction: Fact Meets Fiction==
In a typical eviction where a tenant fails to pay rent, a landlord would initiate a dispossessory action with the court on grounds of "nonpayment" of rent. And if the tenant comes up with the money owed, the landlord would drop the case and everyone moves on as before the case was filed. So what exactly is a "staged eviction"? We consulted with Jackson's attorney, Matthew D. McMaster and here was his explanation.
<br>
<blockquote>
A "staged eviction" is when a landlord uses court procedures to remove a paying tenant by underhanded means. And if you have either (a) an unprepared tenant or (b) a corrupt or simply incompetent judge, a property owner acting in bad faith could easily be successful in his or her endeavor.
<br>
This often occurs when a property owner decides to sell the rental and they no longer want the tenant in the home under any set of circumstances (which is what we have here). And when there is a written lease and the tenant is solvent, it makes an eviction very difficult. Well, in Jackson's case, we not only have a solvent tenant and a written lease, but we also have a Purchase and Sale Agreement between the McCrackens and Jackson signed a day after the alleged lease agreement. To make matters even more complicated, the McCrackens aren’t even a named party to the eviction case.
<br>
The easiest way to get a tenant to simply stop paying his or her rent (and every landlord attorney knows this) is to demand some absurd amount so as to induce the tenant not to pay any money at all. Imagine for example that you owe the present month's rent, for say $2,000, and your landlord demands $4,000 due within three (3) days for both the present month and the previous month's rent though you know for a fact you already paid the previous month's rent. The natural response by an unsuspecting tenant is to not pay a dime! Then the landlord will file with the court to have the tenant evicted and will inevitably win—though the money judgment will be less than requested by the landlord in the original demand. And thus, the staged eviction is completed in a manner that appears "legal enough" so as to avoid criminal prosecution.
<br>
</blockquote>
"As an experienced landlord-tenant attorney—often times defending tenants—I have been privy to witnessing behavioral patterns of many landlord attorneys and judges that are complicit with these tactics, and it is very sad to say the least. Whether you have flat out corruption or if you have a judge who simply isn’t paying any attention to detail, it's a very scary situation." McMaster continued: "The other judges turned a blind-eye when we sought removal of Judge Leftridge and relief from what we perceived to be blatant impropriety in Jackson's case. It was almost as if they were saying 'It doesn't matter what the law says, we aren't going to remove our friend from the bench.'"
<br>
Because the McCrackens are not a named party to the eviction case, Jackson could not address his title and breach of contract disputes in a counterclaim. So in February 2023, Jackson filed a ''Petition For Quiet Title And Complaint for Breach of Contract'' against "All The World" and the McCrackens.


==Looks Like Mortgage Fraud, Smells Like Mortgage Fraud==
==Looks Like Mortgage Fraud, Smells Like Mortgage Fraud==
Line 42: Line 62:
All that being said, what at first glance appeared to be the result of simple greed, turns out to be an act of necessity. The McCrackens as a matter of fact cannot catch up on their mortgage now owned by First Key unless they sell to a fresh buyer for the full price. Thus, they have no choice but to renege on their contract with Jackson making a "staged" eviction their ONLY chance out of debt with the unsuspecting mortgage company. And with the help of the Fulton County Superior Court bench, the McCrackens may very well succeed.
All that being said, what at first glance appeared to be the result of simple greed, turns out to be an act of necessity. The McCrackens as a matter of fact cannot catch up on their mortgage now owned by First Key unless they sell to a fresh buyer for the full price. Thus, they have no choice but to renege on their contract with Jackson making a "staged" eviction their ONLY chance out of debt with the unsuspecting mortgage company. And with the help of the Fulton County Superior Court bench, the McCrackens may very well succeed.
<br>
<br>
==The Mythical "Staged" Eviction: Fact Meets Fiction==
In a typical eviction where a tenant fails to pay rent, a landlord would initiate a dispossessory action with the court on grounds of "nonpayment" of rent. And if the tenant comes up with the money owed, the landlord would drop the case and everyone moves on as before the case was filed. So what exactly is a "staged eviction"? We consulted with Jackson's attorney, Matthew D. McMaster and here was his explanation.
<br>
<blockquote>
A "staged eviction" is when a landlord uses court procedures to remove a paying tenant by underhanded means. And if you have either (a) an unprepared tenant or (b) a corrupt or simply incompetent judge, a property owner acting in bad faith could easily be successful in his or her endeavor.
<br>
This often occurs when a property owner decides to sell the rental and they no longer want the tenant in the home under any set of circumstances (which is what we have here). And when there is a written lease and the tenant is solvent, it makes an eviction very difficult. Well, in Jackson's case, we not only have a solvent tenant and a written lease, but we also have a Purchase and Sale Agreement between the McCrackens and Jackson signed a day after the alleged lease agreement. To make matters even more complicated, the McCrackens aren’t even a named party to the eviction case.
<br>
The easiest way to get a tenant to simply stop paying his or her rent (and every landlord attorney knows this) is to demand some absurd amount so as to induce the tenant not to pay any money at all. Imagine for example that you owe the present month's rent, for say $2,000, and your landlord demands $4,000 due within three (3) days for both the present month and the previous month's rent though you know for a fact you already paid the previous month's rent. The natural response by an unsuspecting tenant is to not pay a dime! Then the landlord will file with the court to have the tenant evicted and will inevitably win—though the money judgment will be less than requested by the landlord in the original demand. And thus, the staged eviction is completed in a manner that appears "legal enough" so as to avoid criminal prosecution.
<br>
</blockquote>
"As an experienced landlord-tenant attorney—often times defending tenants—I have been privy to witnessing behavioral patterns of many landlord attorneys and judges that are complicit with these tactics, and it is very sad to say the least. Whether you have flat out corruption or if you have a judge who simply isn’t paying any attention to detail, it's a very scary situation." McMaster continued: "The other judges turned a blind-eye when we sought removal of Judge Leftridge and relief from what we perceived to be blatant impropriety in Jackson's case. It was almost as if they were saying 'It doesn't matter what the law says, we aren't going to remove our friend from the bench.'"
<br>
Because the McCrackens are not a named party to the eviction case, Jackson could not address his title and breach of contract disputes in a counterclaim. So in February 2023, Jackson filed a ''Petition For Quiet Title And Complaint for Breach of Contract'' against "All The World" and the McCrackens.


==The Courthouse Shell Game==
==The Courthouse Shell Game==
(username removed)
Retrieved from "https://thewikilaw.org/wiki/index.php/Special:MobileDiff/1066"

Navigation menu