I. JURISDICTIONAL STATEMENT APPELLANT LISA KAY BRUMFIEL (“Brumfiel”), appeals all Orders of Judge Pratt’s beginning with the Order applying the CAPP program through the Order Granting CLG Attorney’s fees. All orders are final (Rule 54(b)). The Appeal, subject to C.A.R. 31(c) and C. A. R. 28(a), RT=Reporters Transcript; AA: =Appendix; Ad: =Addendum (Orders attached to brief). II. STATEMENT OF ISSUES

A. Whether the court erred in concluding that Brumfiel failed to state a claim under 12(b) (5); and concurrently that defendant lacked standing. B. Whether the Statute of Limitation of 1 year was tolled under the Continuing injury Doctrine in Brumfiel’s FDCPA claim. C. Whether the court erred in denying Brumfiel’s Motion to Dismiss on grounds that the Trust had standing to foreclose and denying her defenses including constitutional defense. D. Whether the Court erred Granting Plf’s Summary Judgment, where the Trustee’s status as holder was disputed as sufficient to foreclose. E. Whether the Court erred by holding that Brumfiel may not, as a non-party, challenge an assignment or agreement. F. Whether the court committed error by applying the Civil Access Pilot Program (CAPP) to Defendant’s foreclosure. G. Whether the court abused its discretion by making rulings on evidence that denied her a chance to tell her side, and withholding excess proceeds from the sale. H. Whether the plaintiff waived any deficiency judgment. 1

I. Whether the court erred by granting the CLG attorney’s fees from an Untimely, and Procedurally Defective Request. III. STATEMENT OF THE CASE

The Trustee initially sought a Rule 120 which it ultimately withdrew fearing Judge Martinez in the federal case # 12cv02716, would allow a challenge to the constitutionality of the Rule 120. In the federal case Brumfiel charged the above foreclosure attorneys with conspiracy to deprive homeowner’s of due