Were the Defendants ' due process rights violated when they were not given notice of the foreclosure proceeding?

Were the Defendants ' due process rights violated when the foreclosing party did not have possession of the mortgage promissory note, and for secondary evidence, relied on a fraudulent assignment of mortgage?

Can a judicially-supervised foreclosure be allowed where serious doubt has been raised concerning standing of the Plaintiff?

Is it incumbent on a Trial Court Justice to make further inquiry when post-trial, new and material evidence has been brought to the Court 's attention, irrespective of whether the new evidence has been brought according to proper procedural protocol?

Did the Trial Court err when it allowed the testimony of the Caliber witness —a witness with no personal knowledge of the mortgage loan, the note, or relevant events? [Caliber is the loan servicer on the subject mortgage].

Were the Defendants' due-process rights violated?