Carolyn Hairston vs. GMAC / Ally



Carolyn Hairston vs. GMAC / Ally

Complaint For:

  1. Fraudulent Concealment
  2. Intentional Misrepresentation
  3. Negligent Misrepresentation
  4. Unfair Competition
  5. Wrongful Foreclosure
  6. Violation of Truth In Lending
  7. Violation of Appraisal Independence
  8. Violation of Appraiser Independence


Defendant Banks have for the last decade taken the losses of others and used them for their own private gain. That Defendants are in the business of making profit, and are entitled to do so is not at issue. Nor is at issue that Defendants engage in an inherently lucrative business. But it is the lengths to which Defendants have gone, to attain that profit, which is.It is where corporate lust for profit leads corporations and banks to abandon common principles of fair business dealing so well-entrenched in the human consciousness, that they need not even be announced by law, but are inherently apparent to all of us, that the courts must intervene, that an example must be set.

A line must be drawn putting Corporations, Banks, and Defendants herein on notice that where their greed exceeds the extant public need for informed disclosure in business dealings, the law will not sanction.


Brookstone Law filed the complaint in Los Angeles Superior court on 11/14/13 and the complaint was served to the defendants mid January. They had 30 days to respond to the complaint. There is a Case Management Conference set for 4/23/14. It is not a hearing, everyone meets to discuss plans for the case. We anticipate receiving further updates in 30-60 days. We will send an email advising clients of the new update. If you have any questions regarding this case please contact our client services department: (800) 946-8655 |

Attorney advertisement. The hiring of a lawyer is an important decision that should not be based solely upon advertisements. No representation is made that the quality of the legal services to be performed is greater than the quality of legal services performed by other lawyers. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. While this firm maintains joint responsibility, cases may be referred to affiliate attorneys and local counsel for principle responsibility. The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Live chat by BoldChat