Law Office of Dennise S Henderson 1903 21st St Sacramento CA 95811 6813 as of 11232017

Dennise Henderson commented on Message to Homeowners Who Have Won Their

Cases --- Your Demands are Too Low. Attorney
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/208640
Law Office of Dennise S. Henderson
1903 21st St
Sacramento, CA 95811-6813
(916) 456-2027
Fax (916) 456-2035
in response to Neil Garfield:

SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS: WHEN THE HOMEOWNER WINS IN LITIGATION,

in every case the banks pay amazing amounts of money to the homeowner (and
their lawyer) in order to get agreement on sweeping the case under the rug.
Homeowners and their lawyers must realize that the settlement value of their
case may be worth 1000 times the Continue reading Message to Homeowners
Who Have Won Their Cases Your Demands are Too Low

Attorney Dennise Henderson, on November 21, 2017 at 1:54 pm said:

I would love to discuss this with you and your listeners at length. I refuse to sign confidentiality
agreements. In my first case against bank of america attorney for the bank severson and werson
lawyer put confidentiality language that was never discussed or agreed to. I had to force the
judgement and the attorney was asked why he did this he said he forgot.

I have sued b of a three times and came in on a trial i Los Angeles after the Sundquist case. These
banks have damaged people under contract, and tort law. Underneath these cases are
collusion with Home owner association and the bank; forced insurance; bad faith insurance.
In the last case the partner for Locke Lorde said we know where this is coming from
regarding the settlement number being pushed up over a million on a case with problems. You
bet these cases are valuable -children are committing suicide; parents are unable to work from
stress from years of being jerked around in a control fraud.

I have had the bank lawyers misquote law and then tell me it goes out that way all the time; i have
had watched them lie so often they dont even know they are doing it. Their PMKs consistently
perjure themselves. They send discovery with key codes mixed up so you are delayed receiving it. I
have two cases where after trial they re-violated the customer and have had to re-file in the court and
severson and werson move it to federal where it is delayed a year and a half. The thing bank
lawyers do not understand is that their clients have a problem false promises; fraud; breach of
contract and IIED. Most of these cases are emotional damages with little compensatory sometimes
because people are trying to survive and have spent money on non compensatory losses. It costs
150-300k to get these through trial.But it plays well to a jury and a judge.

We can get these cases to trial if you dont give up and hire a lawyer who is going to take it to
trial and not roll you and force you to take a deal after three years. By the time the client gets to
me he/she has been fleeced by lawyers and agencies and audits of the loan. The lawyer also
should refuse to sign confidentiality the fact that anyone would agree to anything with this
bank is outrageous and selling out the client and the pain that they have been through.

The plan is simple stop you from getting to trial; dismiss them out early on hope no one
picks it up during SOL; claim res judicata if someone asks. Then delay trial; give hope to
client in order to delay; shame them at depo and at settlement; get judge to tell them they
dont have a case; then hope you can scare them at trial; hope for some technical error; blame
the lawyer; rewrite what happened at trial for those who were not there; ask for
reconsideration and then write a big check after you get a bunch of lawyers to take a lot of
money and bury the case. Dont pay the one advocate who has been a thorn in b of as side
put her out of business. And if your lucky you get a judge that hates the lawyer more than
the bank.

As an attorney a trial attorney i am thinking long and hard about what is the best way for
clients to be made whole. The banks are set up not to resolve these before we file (bank ques
cant correct errors) until trial or realize that they are going to face a jury. But in California- both
judge and jury verdicts are being compromised. In Sundquist Judge Klein lowballed the emotional
damages too 28k for the wife for 7 + yrs. This was planned behavior by bank and their lawyers were
brought in to cover it up before the outside lawyers tried their spin on it. In another case a jury verdict
(although facts may not have been laid out properly ) a judge cut a 17 million jury verdict to 130k (?)
it went up on appeal and the decision was up held. If judges (many came from firms representing
banks or large corporations) are going to benefit the bank at every turn protect them from
published opinions; turn on the advocates who are trying to get these to trial with limited
resources and funds and then write i their opinion that which the bank tells them to write
then where do we get help for consumers. If you settle with bank you undermine value; if you
take it to trial it will be 4 yrs at minimum and then it will go up on appeal for 3 yrs. But if you
dont do that this will never change.

Our hope is to file a large number of cases at once. We currently have thirty and many more
have been evaluated. This is a nation wide problem needed a nationwide solution. Dont give
up your trial date it is the one thing they actually fear and have no experience with b/c none of
these lawyers regularly try cases. More to be said. . . .

Respond to this comment by replying above this line

New comment on Livinglies's Weblog

Dennise Henderson commented on Message to Homeowners Who Have

Won Their Cases --- Your Demands are Too Low. Attorney
http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/208640
Law Office of Dennise S. Henderson
1903 21st St
Sacramento, CA 95811-6813
(916) 456-2027
Fax (916) 456-2035
in response to Neil Garfield:

SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS: WHEN THE HOMEOWNER WINS IN

LITIGATION, in every case the banks pay amazing amounts of money to the
homeowner (and their lawyer) in order to get agreement on sweeping the
case under the rug. Homeowners and their lawyers must realize that the
settlement value of their case may be worth 1000 times the Continue
reading Message to Homeowners Who Have Won Their Cases Your
Demands are Too Low
I would love to discuss this with you and your listeners at length. I refuse to
sign confidentiality agreements. In my first case against bank of america
attorney for the bank severson and werson lawyer put confidentiality
language that was never discussed or agreed to. I had to force the
judgement and the attorney was asked why he did this he said he forgot.

I have sued b of a three times and came in on a trial i Los Angeles after the
Sundquist case. These banks have damaged people under contract, and tort
law. Underneath these cases are collusion with Home owner association and
the bank; forced insurance; bad faith insurance. In the last case the partner
for Locke Lorde said we know where this is coming from regarding the
settlement number being pushed up over a million on a case with problems.
You bet these cases are valuable -children are committing suicide; parents
are unable to work from stress from years of being jerked around in a control
fraud.

I have had the bank lawyers misquote law and then tell me it goes out that
way all the time; i have had watched them lie so often they dont even know
they are doing it. Their PMKs consistently perjure themselves. They send
discovery with key codes mixed up so you are delayed receiving it. I have
two cases where after trial they re-violated the customer and have had to re-
file in the court and severson and werson move it to federal where it is
delayed a year and a half. The thing bank lawyers do not understand is that
their clients have a problem false promises; fraud; breach of contract and
IIED. Most of these cases are emotional damages with little compensatory
sometimes because people are trying to survive and have spent money on
non compensatory losses. It costs 150-300k to get these through trial.But it
plays well to a jury and a judge.

We can get these cases to trial if you dont give up and hire a lawyer who is
going to take it to trial and not roll you and force you to take a deal after three
years. By the time the client gets to me he/she has been fleeced by lawyers
and agencies and audits of the loan. The lawyer also should refuse to sign
confidentiality the fact that anyone would agree to anything with this bank i
outrageous and selling out the client and the pain that they have been
through.

The plan is simple stop you from getting to trial; dismiss them out early on
hope no one picks it up during SOL; claim res judicata if someone asks.
Then delay trial; give hope to client in order to delay; shame them at depo
and at settlement; get judge to tell them they dont have a case; then hope
you can scare them at trial; hope for some technical error; blame the lawyer;
rewrite what happened at trial for those who were not there; ask for
reconsideration and then write a big check after you get a bunch of lawyers
to take alot of money and bury the case. Dont pay the one advocate who
has been a thorn in b of as side put her out of business. And if your lucky
you get a judge that hates the lawyer more than the bank.

As an attorney a trial attorney i am thinking long and hard about what is the
best way for clients to be made whole. The banks are set up not to resolve
these before we file (bank ques cant correct errors) until trial or realize that
they are going to face a jury. But in California- both judge and jury verdicts
are being compromised. In Sundquist Judge Klein lowballed the emotional
damages too 28k for the wife for 7 + yrs. This was planned behavior by bank
and their lawyers were brought in to over it up before the outside lawyers
tried their spin on it. In another case a jury verdict (although facts may not
have been laid out properly ) a judge cut a 17 million jury verdict to 130k (?)
it went up on appeal and the decision was up held. If judges (many came
form firms representing banks or large corporations) are going to benefit the
bank at every turn protect them from published opinions; turn on the
advocates who are trying to get these to trial with limited resources and fund
and then write i their opinion that which the bank tells them to write then
where do we get help for consumers. If you settle with bank you undermine
value; if you take it to trial it will be 4 yrs at minimum and then it will go up
on appeal for 3 yrs. But if you dont do that this will never change.

Our hope is to file a large number of cases at once. We currently have thirty
and many more have been evaluated. This is a nation wide problem
needed a nationwide solution. Dont give up your trial date it is the one thing
they actually fear and have no experience with b/c none of these lawyers
 regularly try cases. More to be said. . . .

Reply Comments

Want less email? Unsubscribe from all follow-up comments or modify your Subscription
Options.

Thanks for flying with WordPress.com