Does a State's judge-made common law foreclosure practice violate Due Process of Law that calculates the amount of deficiency judgments after confirmation of a forced auction sale by merely mathematically subtracting the net proceeds of a judicial foreclosure from the amount owed to a foreclosing plaintiff regardless of any evidence of the true value of the foreclosed property at sale confirmation, resulting in widespread forfeiture of otherwise trillions of dollars of surplus equity of tens of millions of homeowners nationally, inconsistent with Justice Douglas' admonition in Gelfert v. National City Bank of New York, 313 U.S. 221, 232n3 (1941), that "[m]ortgagees are constitutionally entitled to no more than payment in full"?

Does a State's judge-made common law foreclosure practice violate Due Process of Law that calculates the amount of deficiency judgments after confirmation of a forced auction sale by merely mathematically subtracting the net proceeds of a judicial foreclosure from the amount owed to a foreclosing plaintiff regardless of any evidence of the true value of the foreclosed property at sale confirmation, resulting in widespread forfeiture of otherwise trillions of dollars of surplus equity of tens of millions of homeowners nationally, inconsistent with Justice Douglas' admonition in Gelfert v. National City Bank of New York, 313 U.S. 221, 232-233 (1941), that [m]ortgagees are constitutionally entitled to no more than payment in full?"