Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Petition for rehearing

Petition for rehearing

Ratings: (0)|Views: 154|Likes:
Published by Elena Blank
Petition for rehearing
Petition for rehearing

More info:

Published by: Elena Blank on Feb 14, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

09/16/2013

pdf

text

original

 
1 APPELLANT'S PETITITON FOR REHEARING OF ORDER DATED 1/14/2013
 
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIAAPPELLATE DIVISIONElena GrossRespondent and AppellantSuperior Court Case No: Inc 1106105vsDCA NO: APP 1100259Riverhawk Funding LLCPlaintiff and Respondent____________________________________________________________________________
APPELLANT'S PETITION FOR REHEARING OF APPELLATE COURT ORDERDATED 1/14/2013
____________________________________________________________________________Superior Court Assigned Judge:Honorable Arjuna T. SaraydarianElena GrossXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
 
2 APPELLANT'S PETITITON FOR REHEARING OF ORDER DATED 1/14/2013
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE OF INTEREST
3
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
4
I. INTRODUCTION
6
II. DISCUSSION and LEGAL ARGUMENT
7
REHEARING IS REQUIRED BECAUSE THE OPINION MISTATES APPELLANT'SARGUMENTS AND REACHED A FLAWED OPINION.
7
a. GROSS FAILED TO ESTABLISH THE FORECLOSURE WAS NOT PROPERLYCONDUCTED.1. SUBSTANTIAL CREDIBLE EVIDENCE OF A FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURE SALEWAS PRESENTED.2. APPELLATE COURT BASED ITS OPINION ON AN ISSUE THAT WAS NOT RAISEDBY EITHER PARTY.3. AUTOMATIC STAY IN PLACE DURING APPEAL
8101011
b. APPELLANT HAS THE CONSTITIONAL RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL WHICHTHE TRIAL COURT VIOLATED, ESPECIALLY IF THERE IS ANY AMBIGUITYTO JURY WAIVER.c. CHANGE OF VENUE APPLICABLEd. TWO DAY NOTICE NOT APPLICABLEe. MOTION TO QUASH, DISMISS AND STRIKE SHOULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED.III. PETITIONER ALSO ASSERTS JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES WHICH AREGROUNDS FOR GRANTING A PETITION FOR REHEARING TO VACATETHE TRIAL COURT ORDER.a. Jurisdictional issues regarding notice of appeal.CONCLUSIONCERTIFICATE OF WORD COUNTVERIFICATIONTABLE OF EXHIBITS
11121314181820202122
 
3 APPELLANT'S PETITITON FOR REHEARING OF ORDER DATED 1/14/2013
 
CERTIFICATE OF INTERESTED PARTIES
Pursuant to California Rule of Court 8.208, Petitioner filed this Certificate of Interested Parties.Pursuant to rule 8.208(d)(3), Petitioner knows of no other interested parties.Dated: January 24th 2013.Respectfully submitted,Elena Gross

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->