Opinion
Colorado Spring, CO 80903 Case Number: 2010CV5644
11-01-2011
BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS SUCCESSOR BY MERGER TO LASALLE BANK. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS INDENTURE TRUSTEE, ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDERS OF THE ACCREDITED MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST 2005-3 ASSET BACKED NOTES, Applicant, v. DIANA SLADEK, Defendant.
Attorney for Defendant: Diana L. Sladek, pro se 15720 Teak PI.
DENIED
The moving party is hereby ORDERED to provide a copy of this Order to any pro se parties who have entered an appearance in this action within 10 days from the date of this order.
Attorney for Defendant:
, pro se
15720 Teak PI.
[] COURT USE ONLY
Div.: V Courtroom:
MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER DENYING
MOTION TO VACATE ALL PREVIOUS ORDERS
OF THIS COURT, IMPOSE SANCTIONS AND
VACATE RULE 120 PROCEEDINGS
COMES NOW Defendant, pro se, and submits her Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying Motion to Vacate all Previous Orders of this Court, Impose Sanctions and Vacate Rule 120 Proceedings as follows:
1. Initially, Defendant would point out that she is not appealing the Court's earlier order but is simply asking the Court to reconsider it since clearly it was entered on behalf of an erroneous party which must be vacated.
2. As Defendant had previously stated based on the documents provided to the Court, BOA is not a party to this action and as such no order should have been entered giving BOA the right to foreclose when by its own admission it is not a party and should not have been named as one.
3. This Court has authority under C.R.C.P. 60(b) to vacate its Order as follows:
"the court may relieve a party or his legal representative from a final judgment, order, or proceeding for the following reasons: (1) Mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect; (2) fraud or other misconduct of an adverse party; (3) the judgment is void.....; or (5) any other reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment"
4. It is abundantly clear from the previously provided documents that BOA is not now nor should have been a party to this action. Hence, entering an order or judgment in favor of BOA in this or any companion action is total error. Defendant has clearly satisfied subsections (1), (2), (3) and (5) above.
5. It is unfortunate that Defendant did not have this information at the time of the Rule 120 hearing as she would have clearly raised that issue then.
6. However, based on the evidence provided, BOA has never had any standing in this case or any case involving Defendant
7. To allow this Order to stand would be to enter an order in favor of an entity that by its own admission is NOT a party to this case.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant this Motion.
Respectfully submitted this 25th day of July. 2011.
_______________
Diana L. Sladek
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above was served by mail this 25th day of July, 2011, upon:
Randall ChinThis document constitutes a ruling of the court an d should be treated as such.
1199 Bannock Street
Denver, CO 80204
Court: CO El Paso County District Court 4th JD
Judge: Robert C Erler
File & Serve
Transaction ID: 39085570
Current Date: Sep 23, 2011
Case Number: 2010CV5644
Case Name: BANK OF AMERICA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION vs. SLADEK, DIANA
Court Authorizer: Robert C Erler
_______________
Judge Robert C Erler