Cindy Brown vs. The Bank of New York Mellon

When you get a momentHearing and Stunning Court Victory on Constitutional Right to Due Process and Dignity for Self-Represented Litigants Facing Vexatious Litigant Motions.

Harvard Law School Lawyer and civil rights attorney Raye Mitchell delivers research and support in Cindy Brown vs. The Bank of New York Mellon in defending vexatious litigant claims by bank attorneys-The Ryan Firm APC.

Los Angeles, California December 7, 2021, Raye Mitchell

The date is set. March 15, 2022, Cindy Brown will not be silenced and will finally get a chance to test the claims of the attorneys of the Bank of New York Mellon, who alleged that there was a valid foreclosure and eviction on her home. Cindy disagrees, and now there is a fresh look at the facts and law in the contest of a vexatious litigant motion filed by the Bank of New York Mellon.

Cindy Brown is an Olympic gold medalist, a proud member of the 1988 U.S. Women’s Basketball team, and a retired professional basketball player. Despite her earned success, Cindy is financially impaired. Having lost everything and then evicted from her home at gunpoint, she lived in a three thousand square-foot house in an upscale neighborhood in Orange County, California, living in her car, and now living in an RV.

Cindy did not squander her talent or blessings that led to these circumstances, and she is determined to restore her life. But being a strong Black woman and member of the LGBTQ community does not mean that Cindy Brown is immune to a 15-year assault on her dignity and humanity. In the end, episodes of personal and corporate identity theft fraud cojoined forces in a terrifying and life-threatening scheme of silence to rob Cindy of her life's financial achievements

Cindy is not a quitter. In 2008, Cindy turned to the civil justice system to find relief and hold those responsible accountable. The journey is ongoing and, in the summer of 2021, things took an even darker turn for the worst. Attorney for the Bank of New York Mellon filed a motion to deem Cindy a vexatious litigant set for November 2, 2021. If granted, Cindy's quest for justice could be over for good.

However, on November 2, 2021, instead of having to prove she is not a vexatious litigant and argue such in a fifteen-page memorandum and be deemed a vexatious litigant without having her day in court, Cindy flipped the script.

On March 15, 2022, the defendant, by whatever name it is using as The Bank of New York Mellon, Formerly Known as the Bank of New York as Successor in Interest to JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. as Trustee for Structured Asset Mortgage Investments II Inc. Bear Sterns ALT-A Trust 2006-2, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-2, must show up in court with witnesses and prove all its claims.

On November 2, 2021, composed and confident, Cindy Brown challenged Andrew Mesa of the Ryan Firm, APC, to adhere to the California law and not trample on her constitutional rights to a hearing and right to confront each piece of his evidence. Most self-represented litigants often lose the vex motion motions by waiving their rights to a hearing. Cindy Brown did not fall into the mantrap. Cindy is poised to make history

Currently, it appears to be an issue of first impression for the California Supreme court to resolve the scope and procedures required in a vexatious litigant motion hearing as required by statute. Cindy’s defense of the motion may lay the path forward for conducting such a hearing in the future to ensure the protection of constitutional due process and ensure that no defendant assumes they can sail through the process without putting evidence on the table.

Here is how the case evolved and some of the policy issues at stake in this groundbreaking hearing on March 15, 2022. First, Cindy Brown’s team must prepare a Status Conference Statement for December 17, 2021, and then the next appearance is the trial/hearing on March 15, 2022. Here are some of the background and policy issues to consider.

(c) 2021 Raye Mitchell 1