Chief Judge Campbell recuses herself—WHY?

Class Action ReconTrust/Bank of America Case Lands in Federal

Judge Dale Kimball's Court
by Morgan Skinner, KCSG News

12/30/2010

Utah Federal Court (GSA photo)

(Salt Lake City, UT) - US District Chief Judge Tena Campbell recused [Recusal order] herself in the class
action lawsuit against ReconTrust and Bank of America (NYSE: "BAC"), Mortgage Electronic Registration
Systems ("MERS"), Countrywide Home Loans, HSBC Bank (NYSE: "HSBC"), Wells Fargo Bank (NYSE:
"WFC"), U.S. Bank (NYSE: "USB"), Bank of New York/Mellon (NYSE: "BK"), KeyBank (NYSE: "KEY") filed in
Utah federal court Friday, November 5, 2010, alleging violations of the, Fair Debt Collections Practices
Act, Utah Pattern of Unlawful Activity Act (FDCPA), Unlawful Foreclosures, and Intentional Infliction of
Emotional Distress.

Upon Judge Campbell's recusal from the case [Class Action Complaint], it was sent to Judge Clark
Waddoups who has the Peni Cox case (No.10-00492) before his court based upon the same issues and
the same defendants, ReconTrust and Bank of America. The case is also on appeal to the 10th Circuit
Court in Denver, Colorado.
KCSG News learned from court records filed in the docket Thursday that Judge Waddoups recused
himself December 21, 2010. [Recusal order] So, the question now we are askingh now is why did Judge
Waddoups recuse himself in the class action matter and not recuse himself in the Peni Cox case pending
in his court when the Cox case is based upon the same issues against the same defendants? What's
changed, other than it's now a class action case?

Both matters filed in Utah District federal court by attorneys E. Craig Smay and John Christian Barlow
allege that ReconTrust has violated the FDCPA by proceeding with non-judicial foreclosure sales. The
complaint states that ReconTrust lacks the power of sale and therefore, its actions are within the
definition of debt collection. ReconTrust has used the mail, internet, and other instrumentalities of
interstate commerce in its attempt to collect the debt, the complaint says that ReconTrust has engaged
in this pattern of activity repeatedly over the course of many years, and as a result of this activity, each
foreclosure is wrongful. The complaint says the intentional and unlawful activity of ReconTrust has
caused widespread loss of property and intentional infliction of emotional distress.

Barlow told KCSG News in November he "hoped that homeowners and government officials could work
together to see that illegitimate corporations such as ReconTrust are not allowed to trample on the well
crafted laws of the State of Utah."

Barlow and Smay continue their Herculean task of trying to protect the rights of Utah citizens and
homeowners against the financial giants asking the court to require the defendants to adhere to Utah
law which stipulates that all foreign corporations must register to do business in the State of Utah, and
only members of the Utah State Bar and Utah Title Insurance companies are allowed to perform non-
judicial foreclosures. The defendants, ReconTrust and the Bank of America, claim their national banking
charter trumps state law.

In the Cuomo v. Clearing House Association case (No. 08-453) the US Supreme Court in June of 2009
decided, 5-4, that a federal banking regulation does not preempt the ability of states to enforce their
own fair-lending laws. The Court determined that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is the
sole regulator of national banks but it does not have the authority under the National Bank Act to pre-
empt enforcement of state law against national banks.

This is the underlying premise in the class action lawsuit before the court including the Peni Cox case.
The class action complaint is based upon four separate Utah court cases in which the Bank of America
through their foreclosure agent, ReconTrust Company has illegally foreclosed on homes in Utah,
according to the court records.

Read more: KCSG Television - ReconTrust Bank of America Class Action Case Moves to Judge Dale
Kimball s Court