READ THE COMPLAINT HERE- HOMEOWNERS SUE THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMALA HARRIS -SEPT. 6 2011

8/4/2019 READ THE COMPLAINT HERE- HOMEOWNERS SUE THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMALA HARRIS -SEPT. 6 2

1/103

READ BELOW THE COMPLAINT FILED INCALIFORNIA ON SEPT. 6, 2011

California Attorney General Kamala Harris "Acted as the Pawn of

America's Most Powerful Banks"Lawsuits in three states alleging that California Attorney GeneralKamala Harris "acted as the pawn of America's most powerfulbanks" when she seized ATTORNEYS FOR HOMEOWNERS legal files

and denied THE HOMEOWNERS the right to the legal counsel of theirchoice.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE (prlog)

Sep 07, 2011 - Suits were filed Tuesday in federal courts in New York,Florida and California, according to Erikson M. Davis, an attorney involved inthe actions. Davis said he expect homeowners to file against Harris inadditional states.

The California lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles said:

On August 17, 2011, Defendant Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General forDefendant State of California, grossly violated Plaintiffs' civil rights by seizingPlaintiff's legal files and denying Plaintiffs the right to the legal counsel of

their choice. Defendant Harris did this under the cover of secrecy withoutany public airing of the facts, without proper court approval, and withoutallowing either Plaintiffs or their counsel or any court a chance to respond.Harris did so based on an inadequate investigation while citing demonstrablyfalse accusations against Plaintiff Mitchell J. Stein, an attorney. And Harrisdid so at the behest of Bank of America, whose attorneys had been deeplyalarmed by the substantive progress that attorney Stein has achieved inPlaintiffs' mass joinder case against the bank.

Defendant Harris took this action while making the transparently false claim

that she was protecting "consumers." Plaintiffs herein are among theconsumers she purports to be protecting and they hereby vigorously rejectHarris' jaded interpretation of "protection." Plaintiffs' desire is to continue tobe represented by the LLP and one of its partners Mr. Stein and for himto continue to unravel the worst systematic fraud committed by any financialinstitution in United States history. . . .

Rather than protecting consumers, Defendant Harris' actions primarily


2/103

benefitted Bank of America, which has sought repeatedly to discreditattorney Stein ever since he filed the original lawsuit against Bank ofAmerica in 2009, a lawsuit that the attorney general herself described as the"granddaddy" of mass joinder bank cases,

Defendants' lawsuit . . . claimed, among other things, that attorney Steinhad participated in illegal and unethical soliciting of clients through mailadvertising. On February 3, 2011, Bank of America lawyer Keith Klein wentinto Superior Court with the very same allegations and was told that thebank had not presented a legitimate complaint against attorney Stein. Bankof America then took those same claims to Defendant Harris and arrangedfor her to do their bidding, . . .

Defendant Harris disingenuously stated that "her office takes no position asto the legal merits of any claims asserted in the mass joinder lawsuits filedby defendants." Yet she clearly has taken a position by seeking to removethe single most effective lawyer in prosecuting those cases.

Also to the benefit of Bank of America, Harris has chosen to support lessable competitors to pursue the mass joinder claims against banks. In fact,the primary evidence cited by Harris against attorney Mr. Stein was providedby an affidavit from attorneys at a competitor law firm, Brookstone LawGroup. . . Further, Harris and other Defendants approved and providedcover for a blatantly illegal marketing mailer . . .[which] states unequivocallythat anybody signing up with Brookstone Law will receive $75,000 from a"class action settlement." The facts are that such a $75,000 "class action

settlement" does not exist and is not close to existing. . . .

Plaintiffs were neither induced nor deceived in any fashion before asking Mr.Stein to represent them. To the contrary, had Harris taken the time tocontact Stein's clients, she might have learned that many of Mr. Stein'sclients were referred not by advertising but by the offices of CaliforniaSenator Dianne Feinstein or the Department of Homeland Security. . . .

Mr. Stein was the first attorney to file a lawsuit against the Bank of America in the California Bank of America litigation -- laying out a massive fraud

against homeowners that has since been validated in reports from theSenate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, the GovernmentAccountability Office and the Federal Reserve and in a series of lawsuits byAIG, attorneys general and this week -- the Federal Housing FinanceAgency. All of these subsequent reports and lawsuits were built on attorneyStein's foundation. . . .

The simple truth is this: Mitchell Stein and his legal associates, who have


3/103

built their case load not through fraudulent mailings but through tens ofthousands of hours of detective work, are Bank of America's biggestnightmare. And while Defendant Harris claims to be on the side of theCalifornia homeowner, she is effectively trying to provide Bank of America,one of the nation's worst corporate citizens in history who is now being sued

again by a very recent federal lawsuit, a "get out of jail free card" bysilencing attorney Stein. . . .

Defendant Harris has acted as the pawn of America's most powerful banks,rather than in the interests of California homeowners. Plaintiffs refuse to bemade victims of Harris' poor judgment. . . .

Since Defendants unlawfully shut down the LLP by duping a superior courtinto believing that it was only shutting down Mitchell Stein's law practice, theLLP's clients have not been given any information about their lawsuits fromthe attorney general or by Defendant California State Bar, which hasreportedly taken over their cases nationwide. Many Plaintiffs are fearful thatDefendant Harris has shared their files with the very banks they are suing.Some have been told they cannot get their personal legal files for at leastthree years. By that time, if the evidence of fraud is correct, their homeswill be long gone, Bank of America will no longer exist and they will havebeen denied their day in court.


4/103


5/103


6/103


7/103


8/103


9/103


10/103


11/103


12/103


13/103


14/103


15/103


16/103


17/103


18/103


19/103


20/103


21/103


22/103


23/103


24/103


25/103


26/103


27/103


28/103


29/103


30/103


31/103


32/103


33/103


34/103


35/103


36/103


37/103


38/103


39/103


40/103


41/103


42/103


43/103


44/103


45/103


46/103


47/103


48/103


49/103


50/103


51/103


52/103


53/103


54/103


55/103


56/103


57/103


58/103


59/103


60/103


61/103


62/103


63/103


64/103


65/103


66/103


67/103


68/103


69/103


70/103


71/103


72/103


73/103


74/103


75/103


76/103


77/103


78/103


79/103


80/103


81/103


82/103


83/103


84/103


85/103


86/103


87/103


88/103


89/103


90/103


91/103


92/103


93/103


94/103


95/103


96/103


97/103


98/103


99/103


100/103


101/103


102/103


103/103

READ THE COMPLAINT HERE- HOMEOWNERS SUE THE CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL KAMALA HARRIS -SEPT. 6 2011

Documents