ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Constitutional Law Blogs -> Chris King's 1st Amendment Page

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Constitutional Law

: Chris King's 1st Amendment Page

More ridiculous attempts by Martha Coakley's Mass Division of Banks to restrict Cat Gibbons' First Amendment Rights.

By Christopher King

ADVERTISEMENTS
Get this: The Massachusetts Division of Banks publicly stated that they believe Cat Gibbons and Miracle Mortgage violated policy and should be put right out of business.

But when she asked for her own documents and waived confidentiality they claimed that she has to sign a Confidentiality Agreement that she won't go public with the information. Look at Hearing Officer Neil Tobin's letter to her in the thumbnail. So they are saying they can publicly accuse her of activity that could theoretically result in a Criminal Indictment, but she can't publicly defend herself. That strikes me as antithetical to the Principles of the First Amendment.

Plus, her Stated Income Deals did not put anyone in harm's way, there were no consumer complaints and they all occurred prior to the policy change. Further Ms. Gibbons had a #1 rating and no previous sustained complaints, unlike other brokers who had histories of problems. Why is the Massachusetts Division of Banks picking on one of the only black female mortgage brokers in Massachusetts when years ago they ignored her complaints against Fidelity Mortgage -- even though Fidelity had been put out of business in Vermont? See Fidelity Guarantee Mortgage Corporation v. T Reben, 809 F2d 931 (1987).

Therefore I've got a pipeline with reviewing counsel and I am notifying them of this situation. Funny how Ms. Gibbons wrote a letter to the Division Counsel, yet Hearing Examiner Neil Tobin is the one who responds. On prior occasion Neil Tobin told Ms. Gibbons that he would not ask the Division to produce Certified Copies of her response to the Cease and Desist Order because he wanted to remain impartial, but now he is responding on behalf of the Commission. Nice.

Let me say this: I'll be at her hearings and I will be videotaping key testimony just as I am doing in the Revere Daniel Talbot murder trial, so whatever dirt the Division is doing is going to come out and they can't stop it. I'll get a Court Order if I have to. Here's the case and related public information requests for you newbies, and here is the Hard Line Ms. Gibbons is taking on them. They've never seen anything like it, I'm fairly certain of that. She has a pending case against them at MCAD and folks are reviewing things very closely.

Full post as published by Chris King's 1st Amendment Page on January 24, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0132 secs (new cache)