• Archives

  • Blog Stats

    • 674,368 hits
  • Categories

  • Advertisements

Investigator Bill Paatalo: Why Are The Oregon Courts Ignoring Its Own Rules Regarding The “Surrender And ‘Tender’ Of ‘Original’ Negotiable Instruments?” — Livinglies’s Weblog

Posted by Bill Paatalo on Dec 14, 2017 https://bpinvestigativeagency.com/why-are-the-oregon-courts-ignoring-its-own-rules-regarding-the-surrender-and-tender-of-original-negotiable-instruments/ This is the Oregon Uniform Trial Court Rule regarding the surrender of negotiable instruments before the entry of a judgment. Oregon is typically a non-judicial foreclosure state. However, the bank servicers have been increasingly choosing to go the judicial route. My sources are telling me that […]

via Investigator Bill Paatalo: Why Are The Oregon Courts Ignoring Its Own Rules Regarding The “Surrender And ‘Tender’ Of ‘Original’ Negotiable Instruments?” — Livinglies’s Weblog

The rules in California are very similar as a promissory note or other written obligation to pay money such as a negotiable instrument, if any, upon which the action is brought must be submitted to the clerk. The court clerk is required to note across the face of the writing, over his official signature, the date and fact that judgment has been rendered on such contract. See California Rule of Court 3.1806 which states that

“In all cases in which judgment is rendered upon a written obligation to pay money, the clerk must, at the time of entry of judgment, unless otherwise ordered, note over the clerk’s official signature and across the face of the writing the fact of rendition of judgment with the date of the judgment and the title of the court and the case. ”

Rule of Court 3.1806

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: