Tuesday, June 16th, 2009
The good news is that Judge Lloyd Zimmerman ORDERED a GMAC representative (one who is authorized to make a binding decision on Rosemary's case) to fly in to Mpls. for a  3:30 p.m. closed meeting tomorrow in the judge's chambers, together with Rosemary's lawyers, GMAC's lawyers and Rosemary. We assume the judge's goal is for GMAC to make a deal allowing her to stay in her home at an affordable rate. She has been paying on her home for 18 years.
 
The bad news is that the judge ruled out a jury trial on June 22nd. He also ruled against all of our legal arguments (see the end of this email for details on those legal arguments).

BUT the fact that he ordered GMAC to come to a mandatory mediation is extraordinary. It is clear that Rosemary and all parties involved have a morally compelling case. Now the main thing is to hope for real justice on Wednesday, June 17.

What's Next?
Watch for posts tonight, Wednesday, June 17th, as to whether a resolution is reached in the afternoon. If YES, a block celebration party will be held soon on Rosemary's block.
 
If a GMAC wins a writ of eviction, stay tuned for a coalition of groups to follow up with Civil Disobedience training Tuesday evening June 23rd at 6pm in the gym at Sabathani Community Center. The very earliest that eviction could take place would be Wednesday June 24th. We'll issue a call for as many people as possible to sit in at Rosemary's house in resistance.

*************
Here are some of the legal decisions Judge Zimmerman came to, along with some commentary:
 
    * GMAC did not discriminate against Rosemary Williams on the basis of race, which would have violated the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but in any case would not be binding under domestic law. GMAC is entitled to regain possession of the property based on a refinancing contract that Rosemary signed for an Adjustable Rate Mortgage loan at a value of $174,300. on August 31st, 2005. The judge upheld a summary judgment for GMAC to regain possession of their property.
    * The case for the human "right to housing" as defined in Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights must be thrown out because the United States has not ratified the international treaty.
      
    * The plaintiff's motion to intervene by neighbors and CANDO (Central Area Neighborhood Development Organization) to renegotiate Rosemary's loan so that she can remain in her home and care for it based on the likelihood that if she is evicted, it will remain vacant, thereby creating a nuisance in a neighborhood already blighted by vacated homes that have been vandalized, inviting crime. This motion was rejected based on GMAC's argument that because Rosemary is currently IN her home, she does not create a nuisance under Minnesota's nuisance statute. GMAC contended that if she were evicted, they would market the property, and it is only supposition that it would remain vacant.

In issuing his verbal ruling, Judge Zimmerman's comments were contradictory. On the one hand, he lamented the "dying of cities" and the "dying of neighborhoods," quoting at length from CANDO's allegations of their rapidly deteriorating neighborhood due to foreclosures. On the other hand, he stated that Rosemary "freely" entered into a contract with the lender and was not "swindled." He neglected to mention that the lender in no way tried to explain to Rosemary that her payments could and probably would skyrocket. Further, the judge pondered the question, "Why would a lender knowingly promote a loan that the mortgagor might not be able to repay? Hummm. Go figure! Once again, PROPERTY for PROFIT rules. When will the "law" catch up with people's reality by means of a moratorium on evictions?