feb 2014 brief 3

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/feb-2014-brief-3 1/95

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF OHIO SECOND APPELLATE DIVISION

Wells Fargo Bank NA. as Trustee for Securitized C.A. Case No.023136 Asset Backed ecei!a"les ##C 2006$%&1

'ortgage &ass$T(roug( Certi)cates*Series 2006 %&1&lainti+*

!. ,o(n A. eed* et al.

-efendant

DEFENDANTS MOTION TO VACATE

No co/es -efendant ,o(n A. eed -efendant * for t(is /otion

to !acate t(is Court s No!e/"er 13 t( 200 4udg/ent entr5 granting

&lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank NA. as Trustee for Securitized Asset Backed

ecei!a"les ##C 2006$%&1 'ortgage &ass$T(roug( Certi)cates* Series

2006 %&1 &lainti+7 /otion of 4udg/ent on t(e "asis of t(e State of

%(io s Su8re/e Court s %cto"er 31* 2012 (olding in Federal 9o/e

#oan 'ortgage Cor8oration !. Sc( artz ald* 2012$%(io$:01;.

Respectfully submitted

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"#$% A& Reed<0 'a8le A!e..Center!ille* %(io <:<:==3;$ =0$2:;6

[email protected]

1

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


SERVICE

A t'ue (%d e)(ct c#py #f t$e f#'e*#i%* $(s bee% se'+ed t$is ,- t$ d(y #f Au*ust ./,/ +i( em(il (s f#ll#0s1

Atty2s f#' Pl(i%ti3

A/elia A. Bo er 0013<;<

and

-a!id >an Sl5ke 00;;;21300 ?ast Broad St.* Suite :=0Colu/"us* %(io <323: >ia e/ail @ (b#0e'4plu%5ettc##%ey&c#m And d+(%sly5e4plu%5ettc##%ey&c#m

and

Sara '. &eters/ann 00::<02#erner* Sa/8son ot(fuss&.%. Bo :< 0Cincinnati* %(io <:201$:< 0 >ia e/ail @ (ttyem(il4ls'l(0&c#m

Att5 for -efendant ,o(n #. eedT(o/as W. endo;=2: &aragon d.

-a5ton* %(io <:<:= >ia e/ail @ t5e%d#4mid(m6title&c#m

C? TDFDCAT? %F S? >DC? T9? EN-? SD N?- 9? ?BG C? TDFD?S t(at a true andcorrect co85 of t(e foregoing (as "een for arded* !ia E*

2

mailto:[email protected]








8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


I%t'#duct#'y St(teme%t

As an initial /atter* -efendant freel5 ackno ledges t(at &lainti+

)led t(is la suit in 200 * and /uc( litigation (as since ensued*

including an a88eal and /otion for relief fro/ 4udg/ent 8ursuant to

Ci!. . 60 B .&lainti+ de"t collector Wells Fargo Bank as Trustee for Trust7

clai/s to "e t(e real 8art5 in interest to foreclose on an alleged Note

and 'ortgage created "et een 9 Block and -efendant eed.

-efendant eed (as re8eatedl5 disa!o ed an5 kno ledge of sa/e.

T(is does not* (o e!er* c(ange t(e fact t(at t(e Court ne!er (ad

4urisdiction to (ear t(is /atter* nor as &lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank N.A.

as Trustee* t(e real 8art5 in interest entitled to enforce t(e allegednote and /ortgage on Fe"ruar5 2; t( * 200 * t(e date &lainti+ )led t(e

foreclosure co/8laint* nor can it "e at an5 8oint t(ereafter* it(out

&lainti+ (a!ing 7'st "een assigned or ot(er ise "een legall5 !ested as

t(e true 9older in -ue Course of t(e note /ortgage in Huestion.

-efendant su"/its t(at &lainti+ is not* as not* and "5 t(e Trust s o n

controlling docu/ent s ter/s* could ne!er (a!e "een.

-efendant also states t(at "5 t(e ter/s found u8on t(e alleged

'ortgage itself* as is s(o n on 8age one* under t(e (eading

B% %W? C%>?NANTSI

89#''#0e' 0(''(%ts (%d 0ill defe%d *e%e'(lly t$e title t#

t$e P'#pe'ty (*(i%st (ll cl(ims (%d dem(%ds sub:ect t#

(%y e%cumb'(%ces #f 'ec#'d&;

Wit(in t(is action* -efendant is /erel5 e ercising (is legal

reHuire/ent and dut5 of arranting and defending generall5 t(e

contractual ter/s of t(e alleged /ortgage contract.

3

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


-e"t collector &lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank N.A. as Trustee WFB

lacked standing to "ring* initiate or in!oke t(is action "ecause it as

not* nor as it allo ed to "e* t(e (older of t(e note or t(e assignee of

t(e /ortgage at t(e ti/e it )led suit explained infra . Df a 8art5 does

not (a!e standing at t(e ti/e t(e co/8laint is )led* it is a 4urisdictional8ro"le/ t(at cannot later "e cured .

T(e Huestion of standing is a t(res(old Huestion of (et(er t(e

8art5 (as a personal stake in t(e outco/eJand if t(at 8ersonal stake

does not e ist (en t(e la suit is )led* t(e suit /ust "e dis/issed.

&lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank N.A. as Trustee (ad no legal interest at t(e

ti/e it )led t(e co/8laint* and standing cannot e ist it(out a legal

rig(t or clai/.

Since t(e foreclosing "ank relied on an alleged after foreclosure

initiation acHuired interest in t(e alleged note and /ortgage to

esta"lis( its rig(t to enforce t(e agree/ents* t(en D 'o!e t(e Court to

!acate t(e 4udg/ent in its entiret5 or to re/and "ack to t(e ci!il court

it( instruction for sa/e.

D need not 8roceed under Ci!. . 60 B "ecause t(e 4udg/ent is !oid.

T(e on 8oint decision of t(e %(io Su8re/e Court s Sc( artz ald

decision 1 states t(at standing (as to e ist at t(e ti/e t(e case is )led*

and if it does not e ist* t(e 4urisdiction of t(e co//on 8leas court as

not* it could not (a!e "een in!oked. A court it(out 4urisdiction cannot

enter an5 4udg/ent e ce8t one dis/issing t(e case for lack of

4urisdiction . A /otion to !acate a !oid as o88osed to a !oida"le

4udg/ent is not "ased on Ci!. . 60 B * it in!okes t(e court s in(erent

8o er. &atton !. -ie/er* 3: %(io St. 3d 6 1= .

1 Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald , 2012-Ohio-5017. (Standing is required to invoke the jurisdiction of theco on !"eas court, and it is deter ined as of the fi"ing of the co !"aint.#

$

http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/0/2012/2012-ohio-5017.pdf



8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


WFB* according to t(e "inding case la in t(e State of %(io and

'ontgo/er5 Count5* as not entitled to 4udg/ent as a /atter of la

"ecause t(e5 ere not and could not e!er (a!e "een t(e real 8art5 in

interest. T(e 4udg/ent is !oid a" initio. es 4udicata cannot "e a "ar to

4udg/ent t(at is !oid a" initio.

I& Rele+(%t F(ctu(l 9(c5*'#u%d

,&O% Feb'u('y .< t$ .//= > E)& 8A; ? Pl(i%ti3 7led t$e

f#'ecl#su'e c#mpl(i%t i% t$is (cti#%&

2. As of 'arc( 6 t( * 200 t(e note /ortgage at issue (ad not

"een assigned fro/ (oe!er t(e 8re!ious (olderKo ner as*

to &lainti+ (erein.

3. %n August 26 t( * 200 &lainti+ )led a Notice of Assign/ent of

'ortgage (ic( contains t(erein also an Assign/ent of Note

? ( C7 * (ic( contained a co85 of a recorded assign/ent of

-efendant s note /ortgage to &lainti+. T(e Assign/ent*7

attac(ed (ereto as ? (. B7 .

<. &lainti+ recorded t(e Assign/ent on 'arc( 2; t( * 200 or 2=

da5s after t(e foreclosure la suit )ling.

:. %n No!e/"er 13 t( * 200 t(e Court granted &lainti+ s

4udg/ent and entered a decree of foreclosure against

-efendant.

-efendant (as re8eatedl5 and continuousl5 (eld t(at &lainti+ in

t(e case at Bar lacked t(e ca8acit5 to e!oke t(e 4urisdiction of t(e

5

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


court in t(is actionL 2 (ence &lainti+ lacked standing to initiate t(is

suit. 3

II& L(0 (%d A'*ume%tT(ere are /ore issues it( t(is 8ost dated assign/ent ? (. B7

t(an 4ust t(ose addressed in t(e Sc( artz ald -ecision. But t(at s

(ere e start.

T$e POST DATED ASSI@NMENT issue ,&

As is e!idenced in &lainti+ s alleged Assign/ent7 fro/ %8tion

%ne 'ortgage Cor8. to T(e Trust7 t(e date of t(e transference or

Assign/ent7 of "ot( t(e Note 'ortgage did not occur until after

t(e suit to foreclose (ad alread5 "een )led.

Dn Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation v. Schwar wald!et al. * a case recentl5 decided "5 t(e %(io Su8re/e Court*8lainti+ "ank "roug(t a foreclosure la suit "efore it o"tainedan assign/ent of /ortgage securing defendant (o/eo ner sloan. -efendants /aintained t(at 8lainti+ lacked standing tosue /uc( as -efendant 8re!iousl5 contended in t(is case"ecause t(e assign/ent of /ortgage (ad not "een recorded

2 %ugust 15, 200&, 'e orandu in O!!osition to "aintiffs 'otion for Su ar) *udg ent+ Octo er 15, 200&, e!") to o !"aint+ /ove er 21,200&, 'otion to acate a oid *udg ent• ece er 1, 200&, 'e orandu in O!!osition to "aintiffs 'e orandu in O!!osition to efendant *ohn %. eed s

'otion to acate+ *anuar) 1 , 2004, 'otion for econsideration+ %!ri" 1,2010, % ended 'otion to %!!ea" u"ing of the o6er O 8+ %!ri" 30, 2010, %!!"ication for 9 ergenc) econsideration+ :e ruar) 1$,2011, 'otion to acate *udg ent 9ntr)

3 iv. . 10( # requires attach ent to the !"eading of a co!) of the 6ritten account or an) other 6ritten instru ent 6hen

a c"ai or defense is founded on those docu ents. Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald , 2012-Ohio-5017. (Standing is required to invoke the jurisdiction of theco on !"eas court, and it is deter ined as of the fi"ing of the co !"aint.#Wells Fargo v. Burrows , 2012-Ohio-5445 (4th ist.#(% !"aintiff ust attach docu ents evidencing the right to enforce

oth the note and the ortgage to the co !"aint to sho6 standing, or e su ject to dis issa".# HSBC Bank USA !.A. v. Sherman , 2013-Ohio-$220 (1st ist.#( eter ination of standing shou"d e ade ased onattach ents to a co !"aint, ut standing in a forec"osure action can e esta "ished ) sho6ing the right to enforce eitherthe note or ortgage. %"so ado!ted in the Second, :ifth, 9"eventh, and 86e"fth istricts.#

Lu"an v. #e$enders o$ W%ldl%$e, 50$ .S. 555 (1442# (8o survive a otion for su ar) judg ent for "ack of standing, a !art) ust set forth ) affidavit or other evidence s!ecific facts to su!!ort its c"ai .#

http://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/LegalResources/Rules/civil/CivilProcedure.pdf








http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=10150124802357408838&q=504+U.S.+555&hl=en&as_sdt=6,36







8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


8rior to t(e )ling of t(e la suit. &lainti+ as assigned t(e/ortgage !ia for/al assign/ent* as (ere* onl5 (fte' t(e )lingof t(e la suit. T(e trial court entered a 4udg/ent in fa!or of8lainti+* and t(e Second -istrict Court of A88eals a+ir/ed.

T(e Su8re/e Court re!ersed* (olding t(at standing is a 4urisdictional reHuire/ent t(at /ust "e satis)ed to e!eninitiate a foreclosure la suitI

Be 'ec#*%i ed t$(t st(%di%* is ( :u'isdicti#%(l'e ui'eme%t2 i% State ex rel. Dallman v. Franklin Cty.Court of Common Pleas >, <G? G O$i# St& .d ,<- (%d

0e st(ted1 8It is (% eleme%t('y c#%cept #f l(0 t$(t (p('ty l(c5s st(%di%* to invoke the jurisdiction #f t$ec#u't u%less $e $(s i% (% i%di+idu(l #' 'ep'ese%t(ti+ec(p(city s#me 'e(l i%te'est i% t$e sub:ect m(tte' #f t$e

(cti#%&; >Emp$(sis (dded by t$e C#u't?&

(Schwarzwald, (tt(c$ed $e'et# (s E)$& 8D; (t p('(& ..?&

Furt(er* t(e Court stated*

89ec(use st(%di%* t# sue is 'e ui'ed t# i%+#5e t$e :u'isdicti#% #f t$e c#mm#% ple(s c#u't st(%di%* is t#be dete'mi%ed (s #f t$e c#mme%ceme%t #f suit&;2 Id& Atp('(& . I%+#5i%* :u'isdicti#% #f t$e c#u't t$usdepe%ds #% t$e st(te #f t$i%*s (t t$e time t$e (cti#% isb'#u*$t (%d %#t (fte'& Id& At p('(& . &

Dn re!ersing t(e Second -istrict* t(e Su8re/e Court includedI

T$e l(c5 #f st(%di%* (t t$e c#mme%ceme%t #f (f#'ecl#su'e (cti#% 'e ui'es dismiss(l #f t$e c#mpl(i%tJ&K

"d. At 8ara. <0 ?/8(asis added .

9ence* in accordance it( t(e ruling of t(e Su8re/e Court of

t(e State of %(io* (en &lainti+ )led t(is la suit on Fe"ruar5 2; t(

200 * &lainti+ lacked t(e ca8acit5 to in!oke t(e 4urisdiction of t(e

court or in ot(er ords* &lainti+ did not (a!e standing to in!oke t(e

4urisdiction of t(e court7 "ecause &lainti+ de"t collector (ad not 5et

7

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


"een assigned t(e /ortgage and note* and for reasons stated in

s8eci)cit5 "elo it could not t(en nor can it e!er cure t(is lack of

standing t(roug( a later )ling of t(e /ortgage assign/ent as it

atte/8ted to do on 'arc( 2; t( * 200 .

HISTOR (s (lle*ed by Pl(i%ti3&

&lainti+ "roug(t t(is action to foreclose "ased on an alleged

/ortgage* dated ,une =t(* 200:* (ic( secured an alleged loan of

M100*000 issued to t(e -efendant "5 9 Block 'ortgage

Cor8oration* a 'assac(usetts Cor8oration7* 9 B7 . %n ,une =t(*

200:* 9 B assigned t(e alleged note and /ortgage to %8tion %ne

'ortgage Cor8oration* %8tion %ne7 . %8tion %ne t(en alleges to

(a!e assigned t(e note and /ortgage to &lainti+ "5 assign/ent

e ecuted 'arc( ;t(* 200 . &lainti+ is t(e alleged de"t collector

Trustee7 for a securitized trust titled Securitized Asset Backed

ecei!a"les ##C 2006$%&1 'ortgage &ass$T(roug( Certi)cates* Series

2006 %&17* t(e Trust7 . %n Fe"ruar5 2; t( 200 &lainti+ Trustee

initiated t(e foreclosure suit at Bar.

HISTOR (s (lle*ed by t$e EVIDENCE

&lainti+ "roug(t t(is action to foreclose "ased on an alleged

/ortgage* dated ,une =t(* 200:* (ic( secured an alleged loan of

M100*000 issued to t(e -efendant "5 9 Block 'ortgage

Cor8oration* a 'assac(usetts Cor8oration7* 9 B7 .

%n ,une =t(* 200:* 9 B ?ntit5 A * it( t(e use of an Allonge

e (i"it allegedl5 assigned all of t(eir rig(ts to t(e note and

/ortgage to %8tion %ne 'ortgage Cor8oration ?ntit5 B * %8tion

%ne7 .

&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


%8tion %ne si/ultaneousl5 using t(e sa/e Signator5 creates a

secondar5 allonge e (i"it transferring all of t(eir rig(ts to t(e note

and /ortgage to OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.<

%8tion %ne t(en allegedl5 t(ere is no assign/ent 8ro+ered "5

&lainti+ for t(is action * t(roug( 2 unsigned and unaut(enticated*

8re!iousl5 created docu/ents intent : *

1. titledI &urc(ase &rice and Ter/s Agree/ent7 ? ..

and

2. titledI ?P?CETD%N C%&G F#%W A'?N-?- AN-

?STAT?- '% T A ? #%AN &E C9AS? AN-

WA ANTD?S A ??'?NT ? *

it( (ic( e are lead to "elie!e it(out an5 8roof (atsoe!er t(at

%8tion %ne does assignKsellsKtransfers 6 all of t(eir rig(ts to t(e N%T?

'ortgage to Barcla5s Bank ?ntit5 C S8onsor (o t(en* e are led

to "elie!e intent ; * "undles t(e Note 'ortgage along it(

a88ro i/atel5 :*000 ot(er like kind in!est/ents and uses t(e entire

"undle to create a ne )nancial instru/ent called a S8ecial &ur8ose >e(icle S&> * (ic( is designed to "e de8osited into a ?'DC Trust.

4 ; 6ou"d 6rite <="ank> ut according to S9 a6, if ; did that then ; 6ou"d e re!resenting that on")<="ank> 6as the authori?ed ho"der, those 6ou"d e the sa e S9 "a6s 6hich require the 6ord <=earer> to

e inserted efore this %""onge can e treated as a =earer instru ent.

5 Black&s ' th intent. ("3c#1. 8he state of ind acco !an)ing an act, es!. a for idden act. + @hi"e otive isthe induce ent to do so e act, intent is the enta" reso"ution or deter ination to do it. @hen the intent todo an act that vio"ates the "a6 eAists, otive eco es i ateria". f. 'O8; 9B S ;9/89 .

%s 6ith a" ost a"" of "aintiffCs docu ent su issions, the docu ents "aintiff su its that are to ere!resentative of the transfer of the /ote D 'ortgage fro O!tion One to =arc"a)Cs =ank are a"" unsignedand unauthenticated so no <true> ethod of transfer is even re!resented. = 8, the contro""ing a6 (; S D

/E. 9 8 # oth require fu"" sa"es and transfer of a"" rights and o6nershi! efore a true securiti?ation of thenotes and ortgages into the trust can eAist and the 8rustCs contro""ing docu ent, the S% a"so andates aco !"ete evidentiar) trai" of a"" transfers andFor assign ents of oth the note and ortgage efore einga""o6ed to e de!osited into the trust.7 Black&s ' th intent. ("3c#1. 8he state of ind acco !an)ing an act, es!. a for idden act. + @hi"e otive isthe induce ent to do so e act, intent is the enta" reso"ution or deter ination to do it. @hen the intent todo an act that vio"ates the "a6 eAists, otive eco es i ateria". f. 'O8; 9B S ;9/89 .

4

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Barcla5s Bank ?ntit5 C t(en* e are lead to "elie!e* allegedl5

sells it(out a 8(5sical assign/ent* no 8roof of transfer* no 8roof of

negotiation* no recei8t of deli!er5* etc. and transfers all of t(eir rig(ts

to t(e contents of t(e S&> containing -efendants alleged Note

'ortgage again it(out a 8(5sical assign/ent* no 8roof of transfer*no 8roof of negotiation* no recei8t of deli!er5* etc. to t(e securitized

trust s -e8ositor = Securitized Asset Backed ecei!a"les ##C7 ?ntit5

- SAB 7 * (o t(en allegedl5 de8osits and transfers all of t(eir

interests and rig(ts 5et again it(out a 8(5sical assign/ent* no 8roof

of transfer* no 8roof of negotiation* no recei8t of deli!er5* etc. to t(e

notes and /ortgages in t(e S&> 10 to t(e Trust7 ?ntit5 ? . 11

%8tion %ne ?ntit5 9 t(en alleges it( intent and scienter 12 to

(a!e assigned t(e note and /ortgage to &lainti+ ?ntit5 E "5

assign/ent of 'ortgage e e ecuted 'arc( ;t(* 200 . &lainti+ (ad

8re!iousl5 initiated suit on Fe"ruar5 2; t( * 200 . T(e i/8ortant as8ect

fro/ a"o!e is t(e assign/ent fro/ ?ntit5 9 directl5 to ?ntit5 E .

&lainti+* as re8resented is t(e alleged de"t collector Trustee for

a securitized ?'DC trust titled Securitized Asset Backed ecei!a"les

##C 2006$%&1 'ortgage &ass$T(roug( Certi)cates* Series 2006 %&17*

t(e Trust7 .

AR@UMENT >besides Sc$0('t 0(ld >p#st d(ti%*??

& Sa e as :ootnote 5 a oveG no signed or authenticated contract.4 Sa e as :ootnote 5 a oveG no signed or authenticated contract.10 Sa e as :ootnote 5 a oveG no signed or authenticated contract.11 ;t is i !ortant here to note that in each transaction "isted a ove, "aintiff a"so !roduces no recei!ts, no

de"iver) acce!tance, nothing 6hatsoever to sho6 !roof of conve)ance or transfer or negotiation or sa"e of, inthe end, an a""eged H5 =i""ion 6orth of financia" instru ents fro an) !art) to an) other !art) 6hatsoever.12 Black’s 9 th scienter (s;-en-t*r or see-#, n. I atin Jkno6ing")JK (1&2$#1. % degree of kno6"edge that akes a !erson "ega"") res!onsi "e for the consequences of his or her act oro issionB the fact of an act s having een done kno6ing"), es!. as a ground for civi" da ages or cri ina"

!unish ent. See L/O@ 9 M9B '9/S 9%. I asesN ri ina" a6 P20B /eg"igence ())))*+,+ 302.K 2.% enta" state consisting in an intent to deceive, ani!u"ate, or defraud. - ;n this sense, the ter is used

ost often in the conteAt of securities fraud. 8he Su!re e ourt has he"d that to esta "ish a c"ai forda ages under u"e "O -5. a !"aintiff ust !rove that the defendant acted 6ith scienter. -rnst D -rnst v.

Hoch$elder $25 .S. 1&5,4 S. t. 1375 (147 #. I asesN Securities egu"ation MNNNc 0,$5, 0.51(2#.K

10

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


T(e lack of 8ro8er transfers of t(e note /ortgage 8ro8er

ould "e A Q B* B Q C* C Q - and - Q ? and in fact* t(e i/8ro8er

transfers as in t(e case at Bar (ere &lainti+ s Assign/ent alleges

transfer fro/ ?ntit5 9 to E * to ot(ers creates a series of docu/ent

defects and de)ciencies t(at include* "ut are not li/ited to t(efollo ingI

a Broken endorse/ent c(ains A Q B* B Q ? L" %riginal Notes it(out signatures on endorse/entsL

c Notes it( ski88ing endorse/entsL

d Notes it( endorse/ents on unattac(ed allongesL

e Allonges unattac(ed to t(eir original et$ink notesLf Allonges co8ied and taken fro/ ot(er notes and 8laced onto adi+erent note L

g Allonges unattac(ed to original notes it( "lankendorse/entsL

( Notes ne!er endorsedL

i Allonges ne!er datedL

4 Allonges in "lank and 8re$e ecuted and undated for later )ll$

ins "5 unkno n 8artiesL

k -ou"le 8ledges of t(e sa/e note andKor loan to di+erent8artiesL

l &ost$dated assign/ents of /ortgages and notesL

/ o"o$signed assign/ents of /ortgages and notesL

n &ost$dated assign/ents of /ortgages and notesL

o Assign/ents e ecuted it( no la ful aut(orit5L

8 Assignors assigning to t(e/sel!esL

H T o di+erent 8arties clai/ing t(e o ners(i8 of t(e sa/enoteKloan.

C(% t$e T'ustee F#'ecl#se

11

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Furt(er* -efendant reHuests ,udicial Notice t(at in t(e case at

Bar* it is t(e Trustee for t(e Trust7 t(at is "ringing t(e foreclosure

suit. &lainti+ Trustee o+ers no 8roof of an5 transfer of an5 o ners(i8*

or rig(ts or aut(orit5 fro/ t(e Trust to t(e Trustee 13 ofKor 8ertaining to

t(e Note andKor t(e 'ortgage andKor 8ertaining to t(e rig(ts oraut(orit5 granted to t(e Trustee* in t(e case at Bar to foreclose.

T(e a"o!e state/ent is of ut/ost i/8ortance "ecause it(in t(e

Trust s controlling docu/ent* it s Dndenture* t(e &ooling and Ser!icing

Agree/ent &SA * at section 3.1: e )nd t(at "5 contractual

agree/ent it is not t(e Trustee s 8osition to engage in an5 foreclosing

related acti!ities* it is instead t(e Ser!icer s7 1< o"ligation. Section

3.1: readsI

Section 3.15 Realization upon Defaulted Mortgage Loans. <8he Servicer sha"" use its estefforts, consistent 6ith %cce!ted Servicing ractices, to forec"ose u!on or other6ise co !ara ")convert (6hich a) inc"ude an acquisition of 9O ro!ert)# the o6nershi! of !ro!erties securingsuch of the 'ortgage oans as co e into and continue in defau"tG> emphas%s m%ne

<3. Again* &lainti+ Trustee* an entit5 se8arate fro/ 5et created

in t(e entiret5 fro/ t(e Trust itself* it s actions li/ited "5 la and "5

contract* lacked not onl5 an5 8ro8er Assign/ent of t(e Note andKor

/ortgage t(at is t(e su"4ect of t(is action* "ut also lacked an5

aut(orit5 to initiate t(e foreclosure action (ic( /ust "e gi!en it(in

t(e trust s go!erning docu/ent* its Dndenture* t(e &ooling and

Ser!icing Agree/ent &SA . &lainti+ Trustee lacked t(e legal and

/andator5 reHuire/ent of ca8acit5 to in!oke t(e 4urisdiction of t(is

13 Or for that atter an) !roof of transfer to the trust fro the e!ositor or !roof of transfer fro theS!onsor (=arc"a)Cs =ank# to the e!ositor or !roof of transfer fro the ender O!tion One to the S!onsorQOne can on") transfer 6hat one has to transfer.1$ Servicer, another se!arate "ega" entit) hired ) the trust to service the docu ent require ents of the trust.;tCs duties are out"ined 6ith s!ecificit) 6ithin the trustCs oo"ing and Servicing %gree ent.

12

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


court and t(erefore* &lainti+ (ad no standing to initiate t(is suit (ic(

/eans t(is suit as >%D- a" initio.

<<. Further * &lainti+ can ne!er su+er a loss or in4ur5 as is

reHuired "5 t(e eal &art5 in Dnterest ule. As &lainti+ Trustee is onl5an incident of t(e Trust and as t(e Trust Dndenture gi!es no rig(ts to

&lainti+ Trustee to ot(er ise o"tain* 8urc(ase* or (old legal

o ners(i8 of an5 ite/ ot(er t(an trust s 8ossessions* &lainti+ Trustee

fails to satisf5 t(e E.S. Constitution Article DDD s standing reHuire/ents

t(at a 8lainti+ /ust s(o (ic( reHuireI

a it (as su+ered an in4ur5 in fact t(at is concrete and

8articularized and actual or i//inent* not con4ectural or

(58ot(eticalL

" t(e in4ur5 is fairl5 tracea"le to t(e c(allenged action of t(e

defendantL and c it is likel5* as o88osed to /erel5 s8eculati!e*

t(at t(e in4ur5 ill "e redressed "5 a fa!ora"le decision.

Standing is a t(res(old issue. Wit(out standing to in!oke t(e

4urisdiction of t(e court at t(e initiation of suit* no furt(er /utterings

or 8rotestations of t(e &lainti+ can "e (eard for t(e5 are /oot.

THE TRUST

T(e Trust as for/ed as a !e(icle for 8urc(asing /ortgage

"acked securities and t(en selling certi)cates "ased solel5 on t(e

inco/e generated "5 t(ose /ont(l5 8rinci8al and interest 8a5/ents

generated "5 t(ose notes and /ortgages (eld it(in t(e Trust. T(e

Trust is su"4ect to t(e ter/s of t(e trust indenture controlling

13

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


docu/ent /e/orialized in a docu/ent titled t(e &ooling and

Ser!icing Agree/ent7* t(e &SA7 . T(e &SA as signed "5 t(e

-e8ositor* Securitized Asset Backed ecei!a"les ##C SAB 7 * "5 t(e

Ser!icer* %8tion %ne* and "5 t(e Trustee* W?##S FA % BAN * NA*

and is dated ,anuar5 1* 2006.

T(e &SA contractuall5 sets fort( t(e go!erning la of t(e trust

and t(e /anner in (ic( /ortgages ould "e 8urc(ased "5 t(e trust*

as ell as t(e duties of t(e trustee and t(e ser!icer. Dt is t(e trust s

o n contractual controlling docu/ent.

Section 2.01* su"section 1 of t(e &SA reHuires t(at transfer and

assign/ent of /ortgages /ust "e e+ected "5 (and deli!er5* for de8ositit( t(e Trustee it( t(e original note endorsed in "lank.

Section 2.0: of t(e &SA reHuires t(at t(e -e8ositor transfer all

rig(t* title* interest in t(e /ortgages to t(e Trustee* on "e(alf of t(e

trust* as of t(e Cl#si%* D(te . T(e Cl#si%* D(te (s p'#+ided i% t$e

PSA is "(%u('y .-t$ .//- .

T(e -ate of t(e Assign/ent of 'ortgage and Note referencedinfra* is o!er 2 5ears 8ast t(e date allo ed for de8osits into t(e trust.

Df t(e trust does not 8erfect legal title "5 taking 8(5sical 8ossession of

t(e notes and /ortgages* t(e Dnternal e!enue Code* s8eci)call5 .-

U&S&C& =-/@>d?>,? * 8ro!ides for a 100 8ercent ta 8enalt5 on t(ose

non$co/8l5ing cas( Ro s se!erel5 a+ecting t(e Trust s Dn!estors

eturn %n Dn!est/ent %D .

As listed in t(e &SA* t(e -e8ositor in t(e case at Bar as

Securitized Asset Backed ecei!a"les ##C7 SAB . Wit(in t(e

sc(e/a of a securitized 'BS 'ortgage Backed Securit5 ?'DC eal

?state 'ortgage Dn!est/ent Conduit trust* t(e -e8ositor is t(e

/andated entit5 in t(e title c(ain t(at 8ro!ides t(e Bankru8tc5

1$

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/860G




8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


re/oteness necessar5 to t(e Notes and t(e 'ortgages de8osited into

t(e trust* for co/8liance to o"tain t(e AAA rating it( t(e securities

ratings agencies reHuired "5 t(e Trust* and also /andated for

co/8liance it( D S rule 60 1: . T(e -e8ositor is also t(e aut(orized

and designated sole de8ositor to t(e trust.

Dn t(e case at Bar* &lainti+ s(o s not 1 iota of 8roof t(at said

S8onsor* Barcla5s Bank ?ntit5 C * e!er recei!ed -efendant s Note

andKor 'ortgage.


-e8ositor ?ntit5 - e!er recei!ed -efendant s Note andKor 'ortgage

% t(e alleged and 8re!iousl5 allegedl5 created S&> fro/ S8onsor

Barcla5s Bank containing -efendant s alleged Note andKor 'ortgage.


-e8ositor SAB e!er recei!ed or de8osited t(e alleged 'ortgage and

Note or S&> into t(e &lainti+ Trust.


&lainti+ Trust e!er transferred t(e alleged 'ortgage and Note to t(e

&lainti+ Trust s Trustee* Wells Fargo Bank N.A. (o is t(e &lainti+ in

t(is case.

Dt is essential for t(e courts to understand t(at "efore t(e alleged

note /ortgage could "e 8laced it(in an5 ?'DC trust* eac( of

t(ese ste8s as /andated "5 N.G. ?.&.T.#* D. .C. reHuire/ents AN- "5t(e contractual ter/s found it(in t(e &SA (ic( as signed and

agreed u8on "5 t(e 8artici8ants of t(e securitization. T(e rules for t(e15 ; & 0 requires that, a ong other things, the 9'; trust e a <c"osed entit)> and < ankru!tc) re ote.> /e6EorkCs 9state o6ers D 8rust "a6s 6ere chosen ) '=S s!onsors (in the S%s# as the <contro""ing> statutes to govern

9'; trusts, as the 9 8 Cs ru"es and conco itant co on "a6 esta "ish <co on "a6 trusts> that confor the9'; taA free !ass-through require ents. /ES=% /E =usiness a6 *ourna" RSu er 2012 R o". 1 R/o. 1 end note 7

15

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


de8osit of all of t(e Notes 'ortgages allegedl5 (eld it(in t(e 8ool

of assets o ned "5 t(e trust are strict and are /andated to "e ad(ered

to 8unctiliousl5.

As stated in t(e NGSBA NG Business #a ,ournal Su//er 2012>ol. 16 No. 1 8g. ;;L

<8he 'ortgage Securiti?ation 8ransaction ;n 14& , ongress changed the taA code. Oneof these changes 6as the creation of the ea" 9state 'ortgage ;nvest ent onduit( 9'; #. % 9'; or s!ecia" !ur!ose vehic"e (S # is an entit) that is created for thes!ecific !ur!ose of eing a taA-free !ass-through for interest inco e generated ) !oo"ed

ortgages. 8his a""o6ed investors to !urchase shares or certificates in a ortgage !oo"that 6as on") taAed once at the investor "eve". 8he 9'; ru"es a""o6ed the ortgage

!oo"s to co""ect interest inco e fro the !oo" and dis urse that inco e to the certificateho"ders taA-free at the !oo" "eve". rior to the 9'; , interest inco e fro !oo"ed

ortgage invest ents 6ere taAed t6ice, once at the !oo" "eve" and again at the investor

"eve".9'; ru"es are ver) s!ecific, 1 and to qua"if) as a 9'; under federa" and state taA

codes, the S had to eet ver) stringent require ents. @ith res!ect to '=S thecontro""ing trust docu ent is kno6n as the oo"ing and Servicing %gree ent ( S%#. Onefunction of the S% is to esta "ish the ru"es governing the trust such that the trustCsactivities and anage ent confor to ; & 0. ;f the trust did not confor , it cou"d"ose its 9'; status and its taA-free !ass-through status.> 17

/ES=% /E =usiness a6 *ourna" RSu er 2012 R o". 1 R/o. 1 !g. 77

T(e Trust s agree/ent kno n as t(e &ooling and Ser!icing

Agree/ent &SA * t(e trust s indenture 1 * sets fort( in its entiret5

(o t(e trust acHuires and is allo ed to acHuire its assets and t(e

Trust agree/ent sets fort( "ot( 8o ers and t(e li/its of t(e 8o ers

of t(e Trust and t(e Trust s 8artici8ants.

1 ; & 0 requires that, a ong other things, the 9'; trust e a <c"osed entit)> and < ankru!tc) re ote.> /e6EorkCs 9state o6ers D 8rust "a6s 6ere chosen ) '=S s!onsors (in the S%s# as the <contro""ing> statutes to govern

9'; trusts, as the 9 8 Cs ru"es and conco itant co on "a6 esta "ish <co on "a6 trusts> that confor the9'; taA free !ass-through require ents. /ES=% /E =usiness a6 *ourna" RSu er 2012 R o". 1 R/o. 1 end note 717

;f a taA-free !ass-through trust "ost its 9'; status, the taA !ena"ties to an investor that !urchased certificates 6ou"d e devastating. ;t 6ou"d a"so trigger an event ca""ed a <!ut ack.> 8here 6as considera "e argu ent over 6hether thesetrusts 6ere < usiness> trusts or co on "a6 trusts, ut the trend a!!ears to e a judicia" recognition that the) are in factco on "a6 trusts. /ES=% /E =usiness a6 *ourna" RSu er 2012 R o". 1 R/o. 1 end note &

1& ="ackCs 4th. trust %ndenture. 1. % docu ent containing the ter s and conditions governing a trustee sconduct and the trust eneficiaries rights. - %"so ter ed %ndenture o$ trust. I asesN 8rusts P 14-24.K 2. Seedeed o$ trust under 99 .

1

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


T(e &SA 1= reHuires t(at eac( 8art5 to t(e sale of t(e /ortgage

loans endorse eac( 8ro/issor5 note to t(e ne t 8art5 in t(e c(ain of

title until t(e 8ro/issor5 note and /ortgage is deli!ered to t(e

Trustee for t(e "ene)t of t(e Trust. T(is reHuire/ent is included in

t(e &SA and is found at Section 2.01 " (ic( in 8art readsL( # ;n connection 6ith the transfer and assign ent of each 'ortgage oan, the e!ositor has de"iveredor caused to e de"ivered to the 8rustee for the enefit of the ertificateho"ders the fo""o6ingdocu ents or instru ents 6ith res!ect to each 'ortgage oan so assignedN

(i# the origina" 'ortgage /ote earing a"" intervening endorse ents sho6ing a co !"ete chain of endorse ent fro the originator to the "ast endorsee...

(ii# the origina" of an) guarantee eAecuted in connection 6ith the 'ortgage /oteB

(iii# the origina" 'ortgage 6ith evidence of recording thereon or a certified true co!) of such'ortgage su itted for recording. 20

(iv# the origina"s of a"" assu !tion, odification, conso"idation and eAtension agree ents, if an),6ith evidence of recording thereonB

(v# the origina" %ssign ent of 'ortgage for each 'ortgage oan endorsed in "ankB

(vi# the origina"s of a"" intervening assign ents of 'ortgage (if an)# evidencing a co !"ete chainof assign ent fro the a!!"ica "e originator to the "ast endorsee 6ith evidence of recordingthereon....

(vii# the origina" ortgagee tit"e insurance !o"ic) ...

(viii# the origina" or, if unavai"a "e, a co!) of an) securit) agree ent, chatte" ortgage orequiva"ent docu ent eAecuted in connection 6ith the 'ortgage (if !rovided# ...

&lainti+ 8ro+ers no series of endorse/ents of t(e alleged

8ro/issor5 note reRecti!e of eac( 8art5 (o (ad an alleged o ners(i8

interest in t(e alleged 8ro/issor5 note.

Furt(er* t(is c(ain of endorse/ents* or rat(er t(e lack t(ereof* in

order to co/8l5 it( t(is Trust s &SA* ould (a!e (ad to "e co/8lete

on or "efore t(e closing date7 of t(e trust s8eci)ed it(in t(e &SA oft(is securitization "ut in no e!ent /ore t(an =0 da5s fro/ t(e closing14 8he 8rustCs oo"ing and Servicing %gree ent is a u "ic ocu ent avai"a "e hereGhtt!NFF666.secinfo.co Fd S .v&h.d.ht

20 !ote) %ndeed ! -/0L law re1u%res recordat%on o$ the note 2e$ore %ts acceptance as a part o$ the trust%s consummated.

17

http://www.secinfo.com/dRSm6.v8h.d.htm

http://www.secinfo.com/dRSm6.v8h.d.htm

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


date of t(e trust 8ursuant to section 2.02 of t(e &SA. T(e a"sence of

t(ese endorse/ents on t(is 8ro/issor5 note is not onl5 !er5

co/8elling 8roof of lack of note (older status* "ut also 8roof of

&lainti+ s fraud in t(e 8roduction to t(e Court of t(e Assign/ent of

'ortgage ? (i"it ? 7 (ic( "5 t(e ter/s of t(e trust s o ngo!erning docu/ent &SA cannot* does not and cannot no 8ost

trust closing date e!er legall5 e ist.

Ender t(e ter/s of t(e trust (ic( are contractuall5* legall5

go!erned under NG ?.&.T.#.* t(e contracts "et een t(e 8arties &SA *

andKor ECC U = in t(e case at Bar* t(ere are un/et reHuire/ents for

t(e c(ain of title "5 t(e foreclosing entit5 to "e Huali)ed as a &?T?7

8erson entitled to enforce . Dn ot(er ords* single endorse/ents in

"lank* clai/ing t(at an5 8art5 in 8ossession of a note can enforce a

note* e!en a t(ief* ski88ed assignees* no 8roof of 9older in -ue Course

does not ork. T(e trust s Trustee is s8eci)call5 N%T allo ed to o n

an asset acHuired out of t(in air on its o nV its sole e istence is for

ser!ice to t(e Trust. An5t(ing done "5 an5 trust 8artici8ant in

contra!ention to t(e trust s indenture is "5 contractual agree/ent

>%D- at its ince8tion.

T(e e!idence in t(e collateral )le s(o s an utter and co/8lete

failure of t(e 8arties to t(is alleged securitization to actuall5 con!e5

t(is alleged 8ro/issor5 note to t(is alleged Trust as as articulated "5

t(e -efendant in eac( and e!er5 8re!ious 8leading. T(e 8lainti+

Trustee (as o+ered no 8roof of o ners(i8 and t(e collateral )le

8ro+ered "5 t(e &lainti+ t(roug( -isco!er5 clearl5 de/onstrates t(att(is loan as not securitized into nor as it e!er transferred to t(is

Trust.

1&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Assu/ing t(e note andKor /ortgage at issue could so/e(o

retroacti!el5 "e 8ro8erl5 and legall5 de8osited into t(e Trust* t(e

Court s(ould also "e /ade a are t(at Sections 2.0; d.* e.* (.* 3.01 c.*

3.1; ( * :.02* c* .11 of t(e &SA are all s8eci)c to t(e case at "ar

(ic( set fort( furt(er e 8licit restrictions on t(e 8o ers of t(eTrustee* -e8ositor and t(e Ser!icer of t(e trust7 and (ic( 8ro(i"its

t(e Trustee* -e8ositor and t(e Ser!icer fro/ taking an5 action (ic(

ould 4eo8ardize t(e ?'DC status of t(e Trust. T(e 8roduction of t(e

8ost dated* forged and fa"ricated Assign/ent of 'ortgage is itself a

8ro(i"ited action. T(ese t58es of li/itations are co//on and are

8resent in t(is or a si/ilar for/ in e!er5 8ooling and ser!icing

agree/ent (ic( seeks to create a securitized trust t(at can clai/ t(e

ta "ene)ts of ?'DC status under t(e ES Ta Code.

An5 atte/8t to acce8t a transfer of t(is alleged &ro/issor5 note

after t(e ,anuar5 26* 2006* 8lus =0 da5 closing date of t(e trust ould

(a!e !iolated "ot( S?C code <2< 1122 and t(e ?'DC 8ro!isions of

t(e D S ta code 2 S & 0 % thru : -for a nu/"er of reasons.

a. First* t(e alleged loan is in default at t(is ti/e. T(erefore

t(e alleged loan cannot "e a Huali)ed /ortgage loan7 under

t(e D S ta code "ecause a Huali)ed /ortgage loan is a

8erfor/ing /ortgage loan.

". Second* an atte/8ted transfer to t(e trust is no at a 8oint

in ti/e after t(e closing da5 of t(e Trust and after t(e

certi)cates ere issued* in e+ect* t(e &lainti+ ould "e

clai/ing to (a!e transferred an asset to a trust t(at (ad "5 itso n ter/s "een closed for /ore t(an 2 5ears at t(e ti/e t(e

alleged transfer took 8lace.

c. T(ird* t(e alleged 8ro/issor5 note as ne!er endorsed to

t(e Trust "5 t(e -e8ositor and as suc( is de!oid of t(e

14

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


reHuired c(ain of endorse/ents reHuired it(in t(e &SA and

(ic( an5 reasona"le /arket 8artici8ant ould e 8ect to "e

8resent for t(e 8ur8oses of esta"lis(ing t(e series of true

sales set fort( in t(e &SA to esta"lis( a (ole and co/8lete

c(ain of title of t(e 8ro/issor5 note for t(e 8ur8oses of"ankru8tc5 re/oteness.

d. Fourt(* T(e clai/ t(at t(e alleged note (as "een

transferred to t(e Trust onl5 "ecause it is endorsed in "lank

si/8l5 Ries in t(e face of t(e /andator5 ter/s of t(e &SA and

N.G. ?.&.T.#. and is an e tre/e de!iation fro/ t(e industr5

standards* custo/s and 8ractices (ic( 8re!ailed at all ti/es

/aterial to t(is transaction and (ic( 8re!ail toda5.

e. Fift(* an5 transfer allo ed to "e acce8ted into t(e trust

8ast t(e trust s o n cut$o+ date of de8osits in!okes t(e rat(er

draconian D S /andate of ta ing t(e ?'DC trust s assets not

at t(e fa!ora"le rate of 0 t(at t(e5 no en4o5* "ut at t(e rate

of 100 of t(e !alue of t(eir assetsV causing* /assi!e

)nancial losses to t(e Certi)cate 9older Dn!estors.

?Huall5* "5 allo ing a -e8osit into t(e trust after t(e trusts

closing date7 as &lainti+ s Assign/ent of 'ortgage7 alleges*

&lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank as Trustee again !iolates t(e 8lain

language found it(in t(e &SA at section .11 titled Ta 'atters

section 4 8ara. 6 (ic( reads in 8artL

/either the Servicer nor 8rustee sha"" (i# !er it the creation of an) interests in an)8rust 9'; other than the regu"ar and residua" interests set forth in the re"i inar)State ent,GGG or (iii# other6ise kno6ing") or intentiona"") take an) action, causethe 8rust :und to take an) action or fai" to take (or fai" to cause to e taken#an) actionreasona ") 6ithin its contro" and the sco!e of duties ore s!ecifica"") set forth herein,that, under the 9'; rovisions, if taken or not taken, as the case a) e, cou"d (%#endanger the status of an) 8rust 9'; as a 9'; or (=# resu"t in the i !osition ofa taA u!on an) 8rust 9'; or the 8rust :und (inc"uding ut not "i ited to the taA on3proh%2%ted transact%ons3 as defined in Section & 0:(a#(2# of the ode and the taA on

20

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


contri utions to a 8rust 9'; set forth in Section & 0M(d# of the ode, or the taA on3net %ncome $rom $oreclosure propert43 # un"ess the 8rustee receives an O!inion of

ounse" (at the eA!ense of the !art) seeking to take such action or, if such !art) fai"s to !a) such eA!ense, and the 8rustee deter ines that taking such action is in the estinterest of the 8rust :und and the ertificateho"ders, at the eA!ense of the 8rust :und,

ut in no event at the eA!ense of the 8rustee# to the effect that the conte !"ated action6i"" not, 6ith res!ect to the 8rust :und or an) 8rust 9'; created hereunder,

endanger such status or, un"ess the 8rustee deter ines in its so"e discretion toinde nif) the 8rust :und against such taA, resu"t in the i !osition of such a taA#.

To Su//arize* T(e closing date of t(is trust as ,anuar5 26*

2006. T(e creation date of &lainti+ s Assign/ent of 'ortgage is

'arc( ;* 200 or 2:X 'ont(s 8ast t(e trust s closing date as suc( it

is in !iolation of t(e trust s o n controlling docu/ent* t(e &ooling and

Ser!icing Agree/ent &SA * D. .C. regulations and t(e trust scontrolling la * N.G. ?.&.T.#. and is >%D-. &lainti+ s and &lainti+ s

counsel clearl5 s(o scienter "5 (a!ing acted in contra!ention to t(e

trust "5L

1. creating or /anufacturing* forger5 it( intent to defraud

intent scienter

2. atte/8ting t(e use of distri"ution and intent to fraud

3. actuall5 su"/itting selling false* forged and fraudulent

docu/ents it(in t(is !er5 Court of #a and ?Huit5*

e!idenced not onl5 "5 t(eir late creation date as it concerns

legal standing to in!oke t(e 4urisdiction of t(e Court* "ut

also in contra!ention of D S ?'DC #a as e 8lained a"o!e

and again it(in t(e &SA at Section .11 Ta 'atters g

(ic( readsL

g not kno ingl5 or intentionall5 take an5 action or o/it

to take an5 action t(at ould cause t(e ter/ination of t(e

?'DC status of an5 Trust ?'DC created (ereunderL

<. 'aking false state/ents to t(e Court

21

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


!emo dat 1uod non ha2et

%ne can onl5 gi!eKassign andKor transfer t(at (ic( one (as to

gi!eKassign andKor transfer. %nl5 t(e legiti/ate rig(ts of t(e transferor

can "e transferred to t(e transferee.

T(ere is no trust if t(e trust fails to acHuire t(e 8ro8ert5.

ermani v. !i"erty #ut. $ns. Co & A&D& .d -/G >N& & App& Di+& s(

Dep('t& , <?&

Dn so doing t(e a"o!e* in !iolation of t(e la * codes* rules

regulations articulated a"o!e* &lainti+ also acted in !iolation of t(e

Fair -e"t Collection &ractices Act. T(e allegations a"o!e are re$

alleged and incor8orated (erein "5 reference.

-efendant ,o(n A. eed incor8orates "5 reference all of t(e

8roceeding and foregoing allegations in t(e entiret5 of -efendant s

ans ers 8leadings as in regard to t(e Co/8laint in its entiret5 and

fro/ its ince8tion.

T$e POST DATED ASSI@NMENT .

As is referred to a"o!e* &lainti+ s Assign/ent of 'ortgage7

and Note as created on 'arc( ; t( * 200 . T(e &lainti+ Trust* "5

!irtue of it s ?'DC status (as (at is called a Cut$%+ date7. T(eTrust s cut$%+ date7 is t(e date in (ic( t(e Trust is /andated "5 la

to sto8 acce8ting de8osits into it. Aside fro/ t(e creation 8ost

foreclosure issue related a"o!e* "5 t(e ter/s of t(e Trust s o n &SA*

22

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


N.G. ?.&.T.#. D. .C. regulations all /andate t(at t(is Assign/ent as

!oid at its ince8tion.

T(e Trust is also a eal ?state 'ortgage Dn!est/ent Conduit

?'DC trust and as suc( is (eld in strict regulations it( "ot( D. .S.?'DC trust rules of #a and t(e #a s and ules created s8eci)call5

in accordance it( t(e Trust la s of eit(er t(e State of t(e Trust s

creation or "5 t(e contractual c(oice of t(e 8artici8ants of t(e Trust*

as is t(e case at "ar. T(e agreed contractual c(oice of #a to "e

ad(ered to "5 t(e Trust s 8artici8ants in t(e case at Bar is Ne Gork

Trust #a ?.&.T.#..

&lainti+ s 8roduction of t(e Assign/ent7 is contrar5 to Ne

Gork #a and D S 60. Dn s(ort* t(e &lainti+ Trust e ercised a

8ro(i"ited act on 'arc( ; t( * 200 .

T(e afore/entioned Assign/ent7 is contrar5 to t(e Trust s

Dnstru/ents and t(erefore >oid 8ursuant to D S 60A$ and Ne Gork

?states* &o ers Trusts ?.&.T.# $ &art 2 $ U ; 2.< and t(e Trust s

Dndenture reHuire/ents.

J%n) action 6hich deviates fro the 8rust docu ents is void. 7-2.$ %ct of trustee incontravention of trust ;f the trust is eA!ressed in the instru ent creating the estate of thetrustee, ever) sa"e, conve)ance or other act of the trustee in contravention of the trust,eAce!t as authori?ed ) this artic"e and ) an) other !rovision of "a6, is voidJ.

No 8ossession of t(e Asset e ists until t(ere (as "een a deli!er5

and an acce8tance of t(e Asset and t(e gi!er of t(e Asset (as

relinHuis(ed all do/inion and control o!er t(e Asset signif5ing a true

sale of t(e Asset to t(e &lainti+ Trust t(ere"5 /aking t(e Asset* inter

alia* "ankru8tc5 re/ote and securel5 it(in t(e Trust >ault.

23

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


&lainti+ s 8ro+ered Assign/ent7 in t(e case at Bar 8ro!e s onl5

t(at it as a forged and fa"ricated docu/ent created solel5 for t(e

8ur8ose of facilitating t(e eas5 t(eft of -efendant s (o/e it(in a

Court of #a and t(e use of t(e Court in t(e laundering of t(e illegal

8a8er ork used to create t(e alleged Note 'ortgage andsu"seHuent alleged 'BS Dn!est/ent Trust.

The Trust is a REMI Trust

T(e Trust as for/ed as a ?'DC trust &., Ender t(e ?'DC

8ro!isions of t(e Dnternal e!enue Code D C7 t(e closing date of t(e

Trust is also t(e startu8 da5 for t(e Trust. T(e closing dateKstartu8 da5

is signi)cant "ecause all assets of t(e Trust are /andated to "e

transferred to t(e Trust on or "efore t(e closing date to ensure

t(at t(e Trust recei!ed its ?'DC status. T(e D C 8ro!ides in

8ertinent 8art t(atI

<9Ace!t as !rovided in section & 0M(d#(2#, Tif an) a ount is contri uted to a9'; after the startu! da), there is here ) i !osed a taA for the taAa "e )ear of the9'; in 6hich the contri ution is received equa" to 100 !ercent of the a ount of such

contri ution.>2 .S. . & 0M(d#(1#.

T(e assign/ent of t(e note and t(e /ortgage (ic( alleges t(e

transfer of t(e Note 'ortgage in t(is case as dated 'arc( ; t( *

200 * (o e!er* 8ursuant to t(e ter/s of t(e &SA t(e trust closed on

,anuar5 1 st * 2006. Acce8tance of t(e alleged Note 'ortgage into

&lainti+ Trust at t(e date s(o n on &lainti+ s Assign/ent is in

!iolation of D C 60 d 2 and as suc( is /andated to "e declared

21 8he ;nterna" evenue ode !rovides that the ter s Trea" estate ortgage invest ent conduitC andT 9'; C ean an) entit)U(1# to 6hich an e"ection to e treated as a 9'; a!!"ies for the taAa "e )earand a"" !rior taAa "e )ears, (2# a"" of the interests in 6hich are regu"ar interests or residua" interests, (3#6hich has 1 (and on") 1# c"ass of residua" interests (and a"" distri utions, if an), 6ith res!ect to such interestsare !ro rata#, ($# as of the c"ose of the 3rd onth eginning after the startu! da) and at a"" ti es thereafter,su stantia"") a"" of the assets of 6hich consist of qua"ified ortgages and !er itted invest ents.

2$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


>%D- "5 t(e ter/s found it(in t(e &SA and "5 N.G. ?.&.T.#. D. .C.

regulations. 22

THE POST DATED ASI@NMENT .

Dn t(e case at "ar* Wells Fargo Bank* N.A* as Trustee of t(e

Trust7* clai/s to "e t(e sole and e clusi!e o ner of t(e securitized

note /ortgage. Df Wells* as Trustee for t(e Trust7 is in fact t(e true

and legal o ner* it /ust (a!e acHuired legal title to t(e loan it(in =0

da5s of ,anuar5 1* 2006 t(e trust s closing date7 .

For clari)cation of t(e a"o!eL Ne Gork la states t(at transfers

to a ?'DC trust after t(e closing date of t(e trust are !oid. N.G.

?states* &o ers and Trusts #a UU <6,&,= * <6.& . @l(s5i +& 9(%5 #f

Ame'ic( N&A .* 21 Cal. 8tr.<t( 10;= 2013 . See also* S(ldi+(' +&

"PM#'*(% C$(se * 2013 W# 2<:26== Bk5. S- Te . 6K:K13 (olding

t(at trustee /ortgagee s 8osition is !oid if notes and assign/ents of

/ortgage not deli!ered it(in =0 da5 of closing of trust L Bells F('*#

+& E'#b#b# * 2013 W# 1 31;== NG Sli8 %8. <K2=K13 (olding t(at NG

trust la go!erns securitization not %(io la and t(at notes and

assign/ents of /ortgage /ust "e 8(5sicall5 deli!ered to trustee

it(in =0 da5s of closing for trustee to (a!e clai/ of o ners(i8 . T(e

I%te'%(l Re+e%ue C#de 8ro!ides for 100 8ercent ta 8enalties for

asset transfers to t(e trust after t(e closing date of t(e trust and t(e

Trust s controlling docu/ent* t(e &SA* s8eci)call5 Section =.02*

for"ids all 8artici8ants in t(e securitization of t(e assets of t(e trust to

8erfor/ an5 action in contra!ention to t(e D S code.

Furt(er* Section =.02 of t(e &SA s8eci)call5 8ro(i"its t(e

acHuisition of an5 asset for a ?'DC fund after t(e closing date unless

22 T(ere is no trust if t(e trust fails to acHuire t(e 8ro8ert5. ermani v. !i"erty #ut. $ns. Co & A&D& .d -/G >N& & App& Di+& s( Dep('t& , <?&

25

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/nycode/EPT/7/1/7-1.8


http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=8535344425094007526&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr


http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOURTS-txsb-1_12-ap-01010/pdf/USCOURTS-txsb-1_12-ap-01010-0.pdf


https://docs.google.com/file/d/0BxUYhg0cYUOTbUd6Q045Wm9YZFE/edit












8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


t(e 8art5 8er/itting t(e acHuisition and t(e ND'S net interest /argin

securities Dnsurer (a!e recei!ed an %8inion letter fro/ counsel* at t(e

8art5Ys e 8ense* t(at t(e acce8tance of t(e asset ill not a+ect t(e

?'DCYs status.

&lainti+ o+ers no suc( e!idence or 8roof t(at a letter (as "een

8ro!ided to s(o co/8liance it( t(ese reHuire/ents of t(e &SA.

&lainti+ (as 8ro+ered 23 no e!idence of -e8ositor s de8ositing of t(e

note and /ortgage into t(e Trust and (as 8ro+ered no e!idence t(at

t(e trustee (ad aut(orit5 to acHuire t(e note and /ortgage (erein

after t(e trust (ad closed or for t(e 8ur8ose of foreclosure.

-efendant asserts t(at t(e alleged transfer of t(e note

/ortgage to &lainti+ Trust (erein as >%D- a" initio "ecause t(e note

is re8resented to (a!e "een acHuired after t(e trust s closing date and

as suc( is a !iolation of t(e contractual ter/s esta"lis(ed and

/e/orialized it(in t(e Trust s controlling docu/ent* t(e &SA.

W(ereas in %(io #a it /a5 "e 8er/issi"le for a 9older7 to

e ecute suit on a note andKor /ortgage* in t(e case at Bar t(e alleged

contraction "et een 8arties is not "eing done "5 an %(ioan against an

%(ioan. Dnstead it is "eing co//itted "5 a de"t collector (o is an

alleged re8resentati!e of a NG Trust* a trust (ic( is "ound "5 NG

#a s and as suc( it is u8 to &lainti+ to 8ro!e not onl5 t(at (e is indeed

t(e true &?T? &erson ?ntitled To ?nforce of t(e alleged Note

'ortgage* "ut also t(at (e (as an5 legal ca8acit5 (atsoe!er to (old

an5t(ing in contra!ention to t(e trust. Dn t(e case at Bar* &lainti+ de"tcollector (as not t(e legal ca8acit5 to e!en "e a 9older7.

23 ="ackCs 4thG !roffer (!rof-dr#, v2. ("$c# 8o offer or tender (so ething, es!. evidence# for i ediate acce!tance.I asesN ri ina" a6 N.No 70B :edera" ivi" rocedure 2013B 8ria" (7.NNP$$.K- !roffer,n.

2

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


&lainti+ de"t collector o+ers onl5 3 signed docu/ents* 4ust 3

8ieces of 8a8er attesting to t(eir alleged legiti/ac5 to foreclose* t(eir

rig(t to "e &?T?. T(ose docu/ents areI

1. t(e 8ost dated* 8ost created and )led it( t(e court

/ont(s after foreclosure initiation* Assign/ent of

'ortgageV (ic( is o"o$Signed 2< "5 a kno n o"o$

Signer 2: na/ed 's. To8aka #o!e. 26

2. T(e 8ost dated* 8ost created and )led it( t(e court

/ont(s after foreclosure initiation* A+ida!it of Status of

Account and 'ilitar5 StatusV again signed "5 t(e sa/e

o"o$Signer 's. To8aka #o!e

3. T(e unattac(ed Allonge fro/ %8tion %ne 'ort. Cor8. to

OOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

-efendant su"/its ne e!idence in t(is case in t(e for/ of an

A+ida!it attesting to t(e o"o$signing e 8lained infra of "ot(

2$ 6e no6 have a "ega" definition of J o o-signerJ fro the .S. .O.%. for the 5th ircuit (8V# in the case of

9;/%M9 v. 9 8S W9 =%/L /%8;O/% 8 S8 O' %/E, /o. 12-505 4 (5th ir. Oct. 24, 2013#.8he court defined J o o-signingJ as fo""o6sB

J< o osigning> is the co""oquia" ter the edia, !o"iticians, and consu er advocates have used to descri e anarra) of questiona "e !ractices anks de!"o)ed to !erfect their right to forec"ose in the 6ake of the su !ri e

ortgage crisis, !ractices that inc"uded having ank e !"o)ees or third-!art) contractorsN (1# eAecute andackno6"edge transfer docu ents in "arge quantities 6ithin a short !eriod of ti e, often 6ithout the !ur!ortedassignorCs authori?ation and outside of the !resence of the notar) certif)ing the ackno6"edg ent, and (2#s6ear out affidavits confir ing the eAistence of issing !ieces of "oan docu entation, 6ithout !ersona"kno6"edge and often outside of the !resence of the notar).J

25 ;n *anuar) 2011, *ohn . OC=rien, egister of the 9sseA Southern istrict registr) of eeds in Sa"e , 'assachusetts(< egister OC=rien>#, co issioned 'c onne"" ro!ert) %na")tics, ;nc. (<' %># to conduct a forensic eAa ination totest the integrit) of his registr) due to his concerns thatN 1.# 'ortgage 9"ectronic egistration S)ste s, ;nc. ('9 S>#

!roc"ai s that its e ers can avoid recording assign ents of ortgage if the) register the e"ectronica"") in the'9 SX S)ste B and 2.# due to the ro o-signing scanda" s!ot"ighting inda Mreen Y an e !"o)ee of efendant ocV, Y as featured in a 0 'inutes eA!oseC on the su ject 6hich first aired on %!ri" 3, 2011.

% true and correct co!) of ) re!ort entit"ed Forens%c -5am%nat%on 6$ Ass%gnments 6$ Mortgage 7ecorded #ur%ng +8,8 9n 0he -sse5 Southern #%str%ct 7eg%str4 6$ #eeds , 6hich ; re"eased on *une 2&, 2011, is avai"a "e on egister OC=rienCs6e site atN htt!NFFsa"e deeds.co F!dfF%udit.!df.

2 *ohn . OC=rien, egister of the 9sseA Southern istrict registr) of eeds in Sa"e , 'assachusetts !u "ishes a "ist ofkno6n o o-Signers at his 6e site at htt!NFF666.sa"e deeds.co Fro ositeF!dfFro osigners.!df . 's. oveCs na ea!!ears on !age 2, o"u n =, o6 23.

27

http://www.salemdeeds.com/robosite/pdf/robosigners.pdf



8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


&lainti+ s Assign/ent of 'ortgage7 and &lainti+ s A+ida!it of Status

of Account and 'ilitar5 Status7 /arked ? (i"it OO7..

THE ALLON@E

%n or a"out ,une =* 200:* as t(e e!idence of record s(o s 'r.eedYs alleged original lender* 9 Block 'ortgage Cor8.* clai/s t(at

t(roug( t(e use of an alleged e ecuted endorse/ent (ic( as

unattac(ed* is inco/8lete* is non$aut(enticated "5 a+ida!it* and is left

une ecuted &a5 to t(e %rder7 as in e isting distinctl5 se8arate under

la fro/ "earer 8a8er7 docu/ent entitled allonge7 dated ,une =*

200: fro/ %8tion %ne to OOOOOOOOOO. 2;

27 o!!ents "f #$e Lavalle To %lorida Supre!e ourt &age 52 /)e ava""e, e6 'ortgage ;nstitute, $07F4 &-4047 ortgagefraudsZao".co <2$3. ;n fact, a co on industr) !ractice 6as to create an <unattached> and an undated <endorsed in "ank> !iece of

!a!er the industr) 6rong") inferred 6as an <a""ongeQ> 2$$. 8he unattached !iece of !a!er 6ith an eAecuted endorse entu!on its face 6ou"d then e !"aced in a fi"e 6ith or 6ithout a note, scanned and i aged into an i aging s)ste and thendiscarded, destro)ed, concea"ed, or even "ater attached if necessar), u!on defau"t ) a orro6er 6hen a servicer neededto create evidence of note o6nershi! or ho"der status. 2$5. nder %rtic"e 3, <indorse ent> eans a signature < onan instru ent, not on a 2lank p%ece o$ paper .> 2$ . ;n order for the endorse ent on an a""onge to e va"id, the !ro!erdocu ent custod) !rocess that shou"d have een fo""o6ed 6as toN a# deter ine if roo eAisted on the "ast !age of thenote or its ackside to see if an) roo eAisted for the endorse entB # on") if no roo eAisted, a "ank !iece of !a!ershou"d e fir ") affiAed to the <"ast !age> of the origina" 6et-ink note, so as to !revent its re ova" and re!"ace entB c#the first !age on the face of the note shou"d then e sta !ed <%""onge !ro!ert) address, "oan nu er etc. shou"d e

!"aced u!on the "ank !iece of !a!erB and then e# the endorse ent sta ! and signature shou"d e !"aced on the affiAed !iece of !a!er to the note (i.e. an a""onge#. 2$7. %n unattached to an origina" note "ank !iece of !a!er is not an a""onge.%n unattached to an origina" note "ank !iece of !a!er 6ith an endorse ent on its face is not an a""onge either. ;f the

endorse ent is !"aced u!on the "ank !iece of !a!er and then the endorse ent and signature are !"aced on the "ank !iece of !a!er 6hi"e unattached, a"" so eone has endorsed 6as the "ank !iece of !a!er, not the origina" note itse"f. 2$&.arre"" @. ierce is a 'ichigan "a6)er for the nationa" "a6 fir of )ke a Mossett. 'r. ierce served as e er of the

%rtic"e 4 Stud) o ittee for the er anent 9ditoria" =oard for the nifor o ercia" ode, as hair of the %rtic"e4 :i"ing roject and as the !ri ar) drafter of the ;nternationa" %ssociation of o ercia" %d inistratorsC 'ode"%d inistrative u"es for %rtic"e 4 fi"ing offices. We is a frequent "ecturer and 6riter regarding atters.> <2$4. 'r.

ierce authored an artic"e for the %ssociation of or!orate ounse" tit"ed <%""ongesN Se!arate ;ndorse ents /ot9ffective n"ess %ffiAed.> ;n this artic"e, 'r. ierce eA!oses the "enderCs <dirt) secret> of the otives and use ofa""onges ) the ortgage industr) 6hen he 6ritesN

<Secured "enders routine") take !"edges of instru ents (inc"uding negotia "e instru ents under %rtic"e 3 andother !ro issor) notes# as co""atera". ;nstru ents are su ject to s!ecia" !riorit) ru"es.Securit) interests !erfected ere") ) fi"ing a 1 financing state ent are junior to securit) interests

!erfected ) !ossession, 6ithout regard to ti e of fi"ing or !ossession.Securit) interests !erfected ) <contro"> (!ossession !"us indorse ent# are senior to those !erfected ere") )

fi"ing or !ossession. %ccording"), secured !arties 6ho are re")ing on instru ents as co""atera" 6i"" 6ant to havecontro" over the instru ents.Instru!ents !a$ 'e indorsed to secured parties( ' ut it is a cumbersome process that has to be unwound whenthe loan is repaid as expected . It is( therefore( convenient and common practice to have the requisiteindorsements supplied on a separate piece of paper . This keeps the instrument “clean” so that it can be returned clean when the secured obligations are paid . The separate piece of paper is kept with the instrument but is nottypically attached to it ( though the lender or its custodian has authorit$ to do so( at least upon default.8his !ractice 6orks 6e"" in ost cases. Even though the lender is not $et a )holder* under +rticle 3( 'ecausethe indorse!ent is not attached( the lender has possession and the related loan docu!ents should cause thelender to 'e a )nonholder in possession of the instru!ent ,ho has the rights of a holder(* that is one ,ho canenforce the instru!ent as such under - 3/301 ( and co!pel indorse!ent under - 3/ 03.

2&




8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Dt is -efendant s 8osition t(at along "eside t(e kno n "ogus*

forged and fa"ricated Assign/ent of 'ortgage referenced a"o!e* t(e

8ro+ered Allonge7 fro/ %8tion %ne 'ort. Co. to "lank7 is also afraud and a s(a/ created solel5 to re8resent to t(is Court &lainti+ s

interest in an alleged Note 'ortgage (ic( in trut( (as no legal

!alue (atsoe!erV e ce8t to 8ro!e &lainti+ s and &lainti+ s Counsel s

illingness to forge* to fa"ricate* to create and "ring into t(is court

fraudulent docu/ents created solel5 to induce t(e Court s "ias at

-efendant s and t(e Courts e 8ense.

T$e Bells F('*# M(%u(l

-efendant su"/its ne and 8re!iousl5 uno"taina"le e!idence in

t(is case of &lainti+ Wells Fargo Banks recentl5 8u"licl5 8u"lis(ed* in

;n addition, secured parties in 2!ere possession have priorit$ over other secured parties e4cept those ,hohave control 2possession plus indorse!ent , so the fai"ure to achieve fu"" contro" does not nor a"") i !air

!riorit) (no one e"se 6i"" have !ossession eAce!t in rare cases#. 4-330(d#. o! even if a separate indorsement is not initially “affixed” to an instrument! a secured party in %ttachedB> d#identif)ing infor ation on the note such as origination date, orro6er na e,

possession normally maintains first priority and has the power to negotiate the instrument upon

default"8here are occasions, ho6ever, 6hen having an indorse ent is critica"") i !ortant. One 6ou"d e the re"ative") rarecase 6here one co !eting secured !art) has !ossession for itse"f as 6e"" as for the other co !eting secured !art),so oth 6ou"d e in !ossession and !riorit) cou"d de!end on the effectiveness of an indorse ent. %nother 6ou"d e6here the aker of a negotia "e instru ent has defenses against the na ed !a)ee ut the secured !art), 6ith theindorse ent, 6ou"d e a ho"der in due course. Eet another 6ou"d e an assign ent of a note or a casua" !"edge6here the re"ated docu ents do not c"ear") !rovide the "ender 6ith the rights of a ho"der.

nder %rtic"e 3, 6hich a!!"ies to <negotia "e instru ents> (as defined in %rtic"e 3# and 6hichis co on") a!!"ied ) courts to non-negotia "e instru ents, < indorse!ent* !eans a signature )on aninstru!ent %or the purpose of deter!ining ,hether a signature is !ade on an instru!ent( a paper affi4edto the instru!ent is a part of the instru!ent.* - 3/ 062a 2e!phasis supplied . -nder this rule( aseparate assign!ent docu!ent is not sufficient to create the re7uisite indorse!ent( unless it is )affi4ed* tothe instru!ent.So e 'ichigan assignees found out the hard 6a) ho6 i !ortant it is to have oneCs se!arate indorse ent <affiAed.>;n one case, a se!arate indorse ent 6as not attached to the note in question and the assignee 6as un6i""ing to

!roduce the under")ing assign ent of "oans agree ent. 8he court he"d the se!arate indorse ent 6as not effectiveand, ecause it referenced the un!roduced under")ing agree ent, it did not !rove an a so"ute assign ent 6asintended. Brown Bark 99 L/ v. Ba4 Are Floor Cover%ng : #es%gn 9nc. ase /o. 24 0, ('ich. t. %!!. 'a) 31,2011#. ;n the other case, the assignee u"ti ate") had t6o !ro "e s after it took a note and !"aced it in an enve"o!e6ith a se!arate indorse ent. /ot on") 6as the se!arate indorse ent ineffective ecause it 6as not affiAed to thenote, it turned out the <note> 6as in fact a co"or co!) of the origina" note, so the assignee did not even have

!ossession of the note. @ithout ever having had !ossession, the assignee did have standing to enforce the note as a"ost note under 3-304. Sha4a v. ;aram ase /o. 30&405 ('ich. t. %!!. 'a) , 201$#. "edgees and otherassignees of notes need to ensure that origina" notes are de"ivered to the , and if indorse ents are se!arate")

!rovided, that transaction docu ents !ro!er") authori?e the to attach the se!arate indorse ents 6hena!!ro!riate.>

24

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


(ouse /anual titledV Bells F('*# H#me M#'t*(*e F#'ecl#su'e

Att#'%ey P'#cedu'e M(%u(l Ve'si#% ,; 8ro!ing scienter t(roug( a

8attern and 8ractice of &lainti+ s and &lainti+ s Counsel in t(e

creation of forged and fraudulent docu/ents created solel5 to allo

&lainti+ and &lainti+ s Counsel to fraudulentl5 steal free (o/es fro/(o/eo ners (en t(e5 lacked t(e legal rig(t to do so "ecause t(e5

lacked t(e /andated 8roof to acco/8lis( it legall5.

A distinguis(ed colleague* Ne Gork "ankru8tc5 attorne5 #inda

Tirelli (as "een orking in e 8osing t(ese re/ediation7 8ractices.

T(eir ta$da7 &err5 'ason$like /o/ents of e!idence all of a sudden

a88earing in foreclosure and "ankru8tc5 litigation are not a/using. %n

'arc( 12* 201<* t(e Ne Gork &ost 8u"lis(ed a stor5 on 's. Terelli s

ork (erein it roteI

“Wells Fargo, the nation’s biggest mortgage servicer, appears to have set updetailed internal procedures to fabricate foreclosure papers on demand ,according to allegations in papers fled Tuesday in a e! "or# $ederal court% &n a fling in

e! "or#’s 'outhern (istrict in White )lains $or a local homeo!ner in ban#ruptcy,attorney *inda Tirelli described a 150-page Wells Fargo Foreclosure AttorneyProcedures Manual created ovember +, 11 and updated February 4, 1 %.ccording to court papers, the /anual details “ a procedure for processing

[mortgage] notes without endorsements and obtaining endorsements andallonges %0

T(e Wells Fargo s /anual 's. Terilli s8eaks of is e!en /ore

disconcerting (en 5ou re!ie 4ust a fe of t(e ste8s in its nu/erous

8rocesses as reRected "elo I

Attorne5I Df an allonge is still needed after a note (as "eenendorsed* for ard t(e allonge attac(/ent to Wells Fargo -efault-ocs area !ia e/ail address-efaultallonge/ail"o @ ellsfargo.co/ and add ste8 G<<*

ATT% N?G ?ZE?ST?- A##%N ?* to F% 3

¬ WF / (e$ault (ocs Team2 &$ property is located in an original docstate and attorney has the original note, revie! the allongeattachment to determine i$ !e have signing authority to e ecuteinternally%

30

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


¬ &$ WF / does have signing authority, enter log code F .*5&6.**7 58 '8 T F79 & T89 .* '&5 .T:98;

¬ &$ WF / does not have signing authority, enter log code F .*586.**7 58 '8 T 7:T F79 8<8 :T&7 ; and mail document $or 3rdparty signature%

¬ .$ter allonge has been e ecuted, enter log code F .*5.6.**7 58 7/)*8T8(=98T:9 8( T7 .TT79 8";%

¬ omplete the "44 actual date !ith the date allonge !as returnedto attorney%

T(e Wells Fargo /anual /a5 "e re!ie ed and do nloaded at

(tt8IKKsto8foreclosurefraud.co/K 8contentKu8loadsK201<K03KforeclosureOattorne5O8rocedureO/anual$1.8df.

T(is /anual* is t(e foundation for t(e strong re"uke of Wells

Fargo in t(e recent 30$ 8age o8inion of Federal Bankru8tc5 ,udge

o"ert -rain in Ne Gork s Sout(ern -istrict (erein in (is o8inion*

,udge -rain stated it( e/8(asisI

V [T\(e "lank indorse/ent* u8on (ic( Wells Fargo is rel5ing*as forged*7 Ne!ert(eless it does s(o a general illingness

and 8ractice on Wells Fargo s 8art to create docu/entar5

e!idence* after t(e$fact* (en enforcing its clai/s* W9DC9 DS?PT A% -DNA G*7

T(is as on t(e (eels of anot(er /a4or defeat for Wells Fargo

(erein a fa/il5 (o (ad actuall5 8aid o+ t(eir /ortgage as

unla full5 foreclosed on "5 Wells Fargo and t(e ,udge a arded o!er

M3 /illion in 8uniti!e and co/8ensator5 da/ages "5 ,udge . Brent

?lliott of 'issouri s <3rd ,udicial Circuit.

Dn t(is 'issouri case* t(e auto/ated ro"otic foreclosure*e!idence and itness 8rocess as in 8erfect focus for t(is 9onora"le

Court to understand (en t(e cor8orate itness for Wells Fargo

testi)ed t(atI

31

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


%$&m not here as a human "ein'. $&m here as are resentative of )ells Far'o.*

Dn (is o8inion attac(ed as ? (i"it 9* ,udge ?lliott c(astised Wells

Fargo for t(eir outrageous and re8re(ensi"le7 decisions and

dece8ti!e and intentional conduct7 t(at dis8la5ed a co/8lete andtotal disregard for t(e rig(ts of t(e "orro ers. 9e ent on to stateI

Defe%d(%t Bells F('*# #pe'(ted f'#m ( p#siti#% #fsupe'i#'ity p'#+ided by its e%#'m#us 0e(lt$&; 8BellsF('*#2s decisi#% t##5 (d+(%t(*e #f (% #b+i#usly 7%(%ci(lly

+ul%e'(ble f(mily ;

t(e 4udge continued* noting t(at Wells Fargo s(o ed no e!idence of

re/orse for t(e (ar/ caused. T(e 4udge rote.

$n fact, the Court recalls the lack of remorse andhumanity illustrated "y a )ells Far'o cor oratere resentative who testi+ed, $&m not here as a human"ein'. $&m here as a re resentative of )ells Far'o, 7

T$e RO9O6SI@NED DOCs&

W(en &lainti+* se!eral /ont(s (fte' initiating foreclosure*

introduced into t(e court record a forged and fa"ricated* "ack datedand o"o$Signed docu/ent titled Assign/ent of 'ortgage7* &lainti+ s

Counsel certi)ed t(e legiti/ac5 of a docu/ent t(at could* "5 t(e !er5

ter/s it(in t(e controlling docu/ent of t(e Trust &SA itself* ne!er

8ossi"l5 e ist.

T(is docu/ent is titled Assign/ent of 'ortgage7. E8on

ins8ection t(oug(* t(is docu/ent is in realit5 not onl5 t(e alleged

assign/ent of t(e alleged /ortgage "ut also t(e alleged assign/ent of

t(e alleged note.

Also u8on ins8ection it can "e found t(at t(is docu/ent as

attested to and signed "5 one 's. To8aka #o!e. 's. #o!e is an

32

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


e/8lo5ee of #ender &rocessing Ser!ices in -akota Count5* 'innesota

and as suc( t(e A%' as also fraudulentl5 signed "5 a 8erson (o

(ad no aut(orit5 to sign. Dt is 8atentl5 fraudulent and is an o"!ious

forger5 and as e 8lained infra it as e ecuted t o 5ears after t(e

&lainti+ trust s /andated Cut$%+ date7 for de8osits and afterforeclosure initiation.

'ortgages /a5 "e enforced onl5 "5* or on "e(alf of* t(e entit5

t(at is entitled to enforce t(e o"ligation t(e /ortgage secures. T(e

underl5ing o"ligation in all cases is a 8ro/issor5 note. T(e /ortgage is

t(e securit5 instru/ent t(at secures t(e inde"tedness created "5 t(e

note to t(e real 8ro8ert5.

T(e 8ractice of &lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank s use of unaut(orized

docu/ent forgers in A+ida!it Assign/ent of 'ortgage creation is

no co//on kno ledge. Dt is a /atter t(at (as e!en "een

una+ectionatel5 ter/ed o"o$Signing7 2 2= AN- no t(roug( co//on

kno ledge of &lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank s &u"lic ad/issions and

8a5/ent of M Billions in )nes concerning sa/e of 8artici8ation in t(at

!er5 sa/e illegal action on a dail5* /ont(l5 and 5earl5 "asis* -efendant

su"/its and 'e uests t$e C#u'ts "udici(l N#tice of t(e recentl5 and

8re!iousl5 una!aila"le A+ida!it and acco/8an5ing letter attac(ed

(ereto as ? (i"it F 7 stating in 8artL

< 9n an attempt to prov%de 4ou w%th more ass%stance 9 have enclosed an a$$%dav%t s%gned

24 me as 7eg%ster o$ the Southern -sse5 #%str%ct 7eg%str4 o$ #eeds attest%ng to the

presence o$ a ro2o<s%gned s%gnature on 4our document as l%sted on Mc#onnell /ropert4

2& 8he ter Jro osigningJ does not accurate") descri e the !attern and !ractice. 8he !attern and !ractice are oreaccurate") descri ed as contract !erjur), contract forger), evidence fa rication, fraud u!on the ourt, and theft in 6hichfa i"ies are rendered ho e"ess as a resu"t of cri ina" ehavior.

24 8he !ractice fro investo!edia, J;n the third and fourth quarters of 2010, a ro o-signing scanda" e erged in thenited States invo"ving M'% 'ortgage and a nu er of ajor .S anks. =anks had to ha"t thousands of forec"osures

in nu erous states 6hen it eca e kno6n that the !a!er6ork 6as i""egiti ate ecause the signers had not actua"")revie6ed it. @hi"e so e ro o-signers 6ere idd"e anagers, others 6ere te !orar) 6orkers 6ith virtua"") nounderstanding of the 6ork the) 6ere doing.J

33

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Ana,4t%cs Approved 7o2o<s%gners L%st. 9$ 4ou are currentl4 2e%ng $oreclosed upon th%s

a$$%dav%t ma4 2e presented to 4our attorne4 the lender or the court to show that 4our

cha%n o$ t%tle has 2een corrupted .>

T(e a"o!e referenced A+ida!it attests to t(e unla ful and

kno n o"o$Signer7 signature status of &lainti+ s Assign/ent of

'ortgage ? ? 7 as ell as signature status of &lainti+ s sole

8ro+ered and alleged legal conclusor5 A+ida!it titled STATES %F

ACC%ENT AN- 'D#DTA G STATES AFFD-A>DT7 ? . OO7 (ic( are

"ot( signed "5 one 's. To8aka #o!e* as as 8re!iousl5 articulated to

t(is Court "5 -efendant in all of -efendant s 8re!ious 8leadings. T(e

a"o!e /entioned forged* fraudulent and conclusor5 A+ida!it7 and

Assign/ent of 'ortgage ('e . #f t$e t$'ee s#lely si*%ed

d#cume%ts &lainti+ 8resented to t(e court in t(eir case to esta"lis(

t(eir alleged o ners(i8 of t(e alleged Note 'ortgage and t(eir

su"seHuent rig(t to initiate t(is foreclosure suit against -efendant.

T(e a"o!e #o!e conclusor5 a+ida!it re8resents t(at it is "ased

on #o!e s fa/iliarit5 it( -efendants account stating #$iant has

access of and has personal knowledge of the acco%nts of said compan&!

and speci'call& with the acco%nt of (ohn L. )eed! defendant herein .7

#o!e also a!ers t(at said acco%nt is in defa%lt and that plainti$ has

elected to call the entire *alance of said acco%nt d%e and pa&a*le.. 7.

W(ile t(e #o!e A+ida!it states t(at #o!e s 8ersonal kno ledge is

li/ited to (er re!ie of %8tion %ne 'ortgage Co. as Ser!icing Agent

for &lainti+* #o!e fails to identif5* descri"e or anne t(e 8articular

"usiness records u8on (ic( (er li/ited kno ledge is "ased.

Signi)cantl5* t(e #o!e 'o!ing A+ida!it /akes t(e conclusor5

re8resentation t(at 8lainti+ (as "een in continuous 8ossession of t(e

note and /ortgage since 8rior to t(e co//ence/ent of t(is action

it(out 8ro!iding an5 factual details* or t(e source of #o!e s

kno ledge. Dn addition to a lack of foundation* t(e #o!e 'o!ing

3$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


A+ida!it fails to 8ro!ide e!idence t(at t(e originating lender* 9

Block Dnc.* indorsed and 8(5sicall5 deli!ered t(e alleged eed Note*

t(roug( t(e 8ro8er and /andated legal 8rocesses necessar5 to

e+ectuate a true transference of o ners(i8 and all rig(ts and interests

t(ereof to eac( 8artici8ant in t(e securitization c(ain and t(en )nall5to t(e Asset Backed ecei!a"les Trust.

-efendant (as re8eatedl5 denied 8lainti+ s actions on t(e ground

t(at &lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank as Trustee for trust lacks standing to

foreclose.

S8eci)call5* -efendant contends and (as al a5s contended in

eac( and e!er5 of (is 8leadings t(at 's. #o!e also lacked t(e actual

aut(orit5 to e ecute t(e %8tion %ne Assign/ent.

T(e a"o!e referenced a+ida!it of ,o(n %"rien* co/"ined it( t(e

se!eral ot(er factual inconsistencies t(e -efendant (as 8re!iousl5

articulated to t(is Court G/ G, G. 33 * 8ro!e "e5ond an5 dou"t t(at

&lainti+ s 8osition* a 8osition (ic( is co/8letel5 !oid of legal

standing to (a!e initiated t(is foreclosure action against -efendant*

could not (a!e "een acco/8lis(ed it(out t(e use of* as as8re!iousl5 articulated "5 -efendant* 3< forged and fraudulentl5 created

docu/ents* created s8eci)call5 "5 and deli!ered into t(is Court (ile

"eing Certi)ed "5 &lainti+ s Counsel as "eing true* 4ust and accurate

for t(e sole 8ur8ose of "linding t(is Court to t(e legal realities of t(eir

30 %ns6er of efendant *ohn eed (5F2 F200&# &, 11, 12, 13, 1$, 15, 17, 1&, 14, 20, 21, 22, 23, and throughout the restof the !"eadings.31

%ns6er of efendant *ohn %. eed 'e orandu in O!!osition to "aintiffCs 'otion :or Su ar) *udg ent andequest :or 8ria" =) *ur) (fi"ed %ug, 15 th, 200&# 8he o!ening state ent < :irst"), Eou Wonor, the !"aintiff hasnCt even !roven that it o6ned or he"d the !ro issor) note 6hich is the su ject of the co !"aintG> 1, 2,32

9ach and ever) other !"eading su itted ) efendant and a"read) a !art of this "ega" actionCs record.33 'O8;O/ 8O % 9% 8W9 9 ;S;O/, O 9 %/ 9/8 E O 9 ;/M 9:9/ %/8S 9'9 M9/ E%'9/ 9 'O8;O/ 8O % %89 % O; * M'9/8 in itCs entiret)3$

'O8;O/ 8O % 9% 8W9 9 ;S;O/, O 9 %/ 9/8 E O 9 ;/M 9:9/ %/8S 9'9 M9/ E%'9/ 9 'O8;O/ 8O % %89 % O; * M'9/8 at $ thru 1 , 35, $5, $ , $7,$&, 50, 52, 5&, 0, 7, 234, 2$0,2$1, 2$2, .

35

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


8osition and t(e situation (ic( t(en lead to t(e ulti/ate t(eft of

-efendants (o/e* loss of -efendant s 8ersonal and "usiness in!entor5

and 8ossessions* forced (o/elessness u8on -efendant and "eca/e t(e

cause of -efendant s /ental in4ur5 (ile allo ing &lainti+ s o n

un4ust enric(/ent. Dn essence* t(e5 not onl5 got a free (ouse* t(e5 alsogot t(e Court to launder t(eir dirt5 /one5.

-efendants 8leadings and e (i"its s(o undenia"le p'##f t(at

eac( of t(e entities in!ol!ed in t(eir entiret5 and t(roug(out t(e entire

c(ronolog5 ti/e$line of t(is alleged /ortgage did fail in t(eir legal

and /andator5 due diligence duties and reHuire/ents to sign* date*

aut(enticate* record and /ore stated in /ore s8eci)cit5 infra . T(e

true (older in due course of t(e alleged Note 'ortgage and true

(older of t(e legal rig(t to foreclose u8on t(is alleged Note

'ortgage is entirel5 a falsit5 and under no circu/stance of fact is it*

as it* nor can it e!er "e t(e &lainti+ Wells Fargo Bank NA. as Trustee

for t(is Trust (o ould (a!e t(e legal aut(orit5 or rig(t to "ring a

foreclosure action against -efendant eed..

As a result* t(e Courts No!e/"er 13 t( * 200 entr5 granting

&lainti+ s /otion for 4udg/ent and issuing a decree of foreclosure is

!oid a" initio as o88osed to !oida"le .

Accordingl5* "ased u8on t(e foregoing* -efendant res8ectfull5

reHuests t(at t(e No!e/"er 13 t( 200 entr5 "e !acated and t(is /atter

re/anded "ack to t(e Ci!il Court it( instruction to dis/iss*

instruction to Huiet title and eac( of -efendants Counterclai/s to "ela full5 ad4udged.

3

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Respectfull$ su'!itted(

888888888888888888888888

9ohn +. Reed

4 /aple .ve%enterville, 7hio 4>4>+

+3?-@+ - >[email protected]

37



8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


I nti" this o!inion a!!ears in the Ohio Officia" e!orts advance sheets, it a) e cited as Fed Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald S"i! O!inion /o. 2012-0hio-5017.K

#"TI E

8his s"i! o!inion is su ject to for a" revision efore it is !u "ished in an advance sheet of

the Ohio Officia" e!orts. eaders are requested to !ro !t") notif) the e!orter of

ecisions, Su!re e ourt of Ohio, 5 South :ront Street, o"u us, Ohio $3215, of an)

t)!ogra!hica" or other for a" errors in the o!inion, in order that corrections a) e ade

efore the o!inion is !u "ished.

SLI& "&I#I"# #o. 01 /0:I"/501;

%EDER+L :"ME L"+# M"RT<+<E "R&"R+TI"#( +&&ELLEE( v"

S :=+RT>=+LD ET +L.( +&&ELL+#TS.

?-ntil this opinion appears in the "hio "fficial Reports advance sheets(

it !a$ 'e cited as #ed" $ome %oan &tge" 'orp" v" chwart(wald!

Slip "pinion #o. 01 /0hio/501;.@

Foreclosure<<<*ur%sd%ct%onal aspects o$ stand%ng<C%v.7. ,=(A><*ur%sd%ct%on

determ%ned as o$ t%me o$ $%l%ng su%t.

(/os. 2011-1201 and 2011-13 2-Su itted %!ri" $, 2012- ecided

Octo er 31, 2012.#

% 9% fro and 9 8;:;9 ) the ourt of %!!ea"s for Mreene ount),

/o. 2010 % $1, 14$ Ohio %!!.3d $$, 2011-Ohio-2 &1.

"AD"##ELL( 9.

[\1] uane and *u"ie Sch6art?6a"d a!!ea" fro a judg ent of the Second istrict

ourt of %!!ea"s affir ing a decree of forec"osure entered in favor of the :edera" Wo e

oan 'ortgage or!oration. ;n addition, the a!!e""ate court certified that its decision in

this case conf"icts 6ith decisions of the :irst and

S-&REME "-RT "% " :I"

3&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


9ighth istricts on the fo""o6ing issueN J;n a ortgage forec"osure action, the

"ack of standing or a rea" !art) in interest defect can e cured ) the assign ent of

the ortgage !rior to judg ent.J

[\2] :edera" Wo e oan co enced this forec"osure action efore ito tained an assign ent of the !ro issor) note and ortgage securing the

Sch6art?6a"dsC "oan. 8he Sch6art?6a"ds aintained that :edera" Wo e oan

"acked standing to sue. 8he tria" court granted su ar) judg ent in favor of

:edera" Wo e oan and entered a decree of forec"osure. 8he a!!e""ate court

affir ed, ho"ding that :edera" Wo e oan had re edied its "ack of standing 6hen

it o tained an assign ent fro the rea" !art) in interest.

[\3] Wo6ever, standing is required to invoke the jurisdiction of the

co on !"eas court, and therefore it is deter ined as of the fi"ing of the

co !"aint. 8hus, receiving an assign ent of a !ro issor) note and ortgage

fro the rea" !art) in interest su sequent to the fi"ing of an action ut !rior to the

entr) of judg ent does not cure a "ack of standing to fi"e a forec"osure action.

(\$] %ccording"), the judg ent of the court of a!!ea"s is reversed, and

the cause is dis issed.

%acts and &rocedural :istor$

(\5] ;n /ove er 200 , uane and *u"ie Sch6art?6a"d !urchased a

ho e in Venia, Ohio, and received a ortgage "oan fro egac) 'ortgage in the

a ount of H251,250. 8he) eAecuted a !ro issor) note and a ortgage granting

egac) 'ortgage a securit) interest in the !ro!ert). egac) 'ortgage then

endorsed the !ro issor) note as !a)a "e to @e""s :argo =ank, /.%., and assigned

it the ortgage.

[\ ] ;n Se!te er 200&, uane Sch6art?6a"d "ost his jo at =arco,

;nc., and the Sch6art?6a"ds oved to ;ndiana so he cou"d acce!t a ne6 !osition.

8he) continued aking ortgage !a) ents as the) tried to se"" the house in

Venia, ut the) 6ent into defau"t on *anuar) 1, 2004. ;n 'arch 2004, @e""s

2

*anuar) 8er , 2012

34

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


:argo agreed to "ist the !ro!ert) for a short sa"e, and on %!ri" &, 2004, the

Sch6art?6a"ds entered into a contract to se"" it for H254,400, 6ith c"osing set for

*une &, 2004.

[\7] Wo6ever, on %!ri" 15, 2004, :edera" Wo e oan 'ortgageor!oration co enced this forec"osure action, a""eging that the Sch6art?6a"ds

had defau"ted on their "oan and o6ed H2$5,0&5.1& !"us interest, costs, and

advances. ;t attached a co!) of the ortgage identif)ing the Sch6art?6a"ds as

orro6ers and egac) 'ortgage as "ender, ut did not attach a co!) of the note,

c"ai ing that Ja co!) of Ithe noteK is current") unavai"a "e.J

[\&] *u"ie Sch6art?6a"d then contacted @e""s :argo a out the

forec"osure co !"aint. She testified, J; 6as to"d that it 6as standard !rocedure

and don t 6orr) a out it ecause 6e 6ere doing a short sa"e.J 8he

Sch6art?6a"ds did not ans6er the co !"aint.

[\4] On %!ri" 2$, 2004, :edera" Wo e oan fi"ed 6ith the court a co!)

of the note signed ) the Sch6art?6a"ds in favor of egac) 'ortgage. 8he fina"

!age carries a "ank endorse ent ) @e""s :argo !"aced a ove the endorse ent

) egac) 'ortgage !a)a "e to @e""s :argo.

[\10] On 'a) 15, 2004, @e""s :argo assigned the note and ortgage to

:edera" Wo e oan, and :edera" Wo e oan fi"ed 6ith the court a co!) of theassign ent on *une 17, 2004. ;t then oved for a defau"t judg ent and a

su ar) judg ent, ut the tria" court discovered that :edera" Wo e oan had

fai"ed to esta "ish a chain of tit"e ecause no assign ent of the ortgage fro

egac) 'ortgage to @e""s :argo a!!eared in the record.

BC11 uring this ti e, even though it had assigned its interest in the

note and ortgage to :edera" Wo e oan, @e""s :argo continued discussing a

short sa"e of the !ro!ert) 6ith the Sch6art?6a"ds, ut de"a)s in. this !rocess

eventua"") caused the Sch6art?6a"ds u)er to rescind the offer. On ece er

1$, 2004, the tria" court granted the Sch6art?6a"ds "eave to fi"e an ans6er. 8hat

3

S 9'9 O 8

$0

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


sa e da), :edera" Wo e oan fi"ed 6ith the court a co!) of the assign ent of the

ortgage fro egac) 'ortgage to @e""s :argo dated /ove er 27,200 .

[\12] :edera" Wo e oan again oved for su ar) judg ent,

su!!orting the otion 6ith the affidavit of Wer an *ohn Lennert), vice !resident

of "oan docu entation for @e""s :argo as servicing agent for :edera" Wo e oan,6ho averred that the Sch6art?6a"ds 6ere in defau"t and 6ho authenticated the .

note and ortgage as 6e"" as the assign ent of the note and ortgage fro @e""s

:argo. Su sequent"), :edera" Wo e oan fi"ed co!ies of the notari?ed

assign ents fro egac) 'ortgage to @e""s :argo and fro @e""s :argo to

:edera" Wo e oan.

[\13] 8he Sch6art?6a"ds a"so oved for su ar) judg ent, asserting

that :edera" Wo e oan "acked standing to forec"ose on their !ro!ert).

[\1$] 8he tria" court entered su ar) judg ent for :edera" Wo e oan,

finding that the Sch6art?6a"ds had defau"ted on the note, and it ordered the

equit) of rede !tion forec"osed and the !ro!ert) so"d. :edera" Wo e oan

!urchased the !ro!ert) at a sheriff s sa"e.

[\15] On a!!ea", the Second istrict ourt of %!!ea"s affir ed and he"d

that :edera" Wo e oan had esta "ished its right to enforce the !ro issor) note

as a nonho"der in !ossession, ecause assign ent of the ortgage effected a

transfer of the note it secured. 8he court further eA!"ained that standing is not a jurisdictiona" !rerequisite and that a "ack of standing a) e cured ) su stituting

the rea" !art) in interest for an origina" !art) !ursuant to iv. . 17(%#. 8hus, the

court conc"uded that a"though :edera" Wo e oan "acked standing at the ti e it

co enced the forec"osure action, it cured that defect ) the assign ent of the

ortgage and transfer of the note !rior to entr) of judg ent.

[\1 ] 8he court of a!!ea"s certified that its decision conf"icted 6ith

Wells Fargo Bank !.A. v. B4rd 17& Ohio %!!.3d 2&5, 200&-0hio-$ 03, &47

/.9.2d 722 (1st ist.#, \ 15-1 B Bank o$ !ew ork v. ?%ndele 1st ist. /o. -

$

*anuar) 8er , 2012

$1

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


040251, 2010-0hio-5$2, \ 3-$B and Wells Fargo Bank !.A. v. *ordan &th ist.

/o. 41 75, 2004-0hio-;042, \ 21, cases that he"d that a "ack of standing cannot

e cured ) su stituting the rea" !art) in interest for an origina" !art) !ursuant to

iv. . 17(%#. @e acce!ted the conf"ict and the Sch6art?6a"ds discretionar)

a!!ea" on the sa e issue.+rgu!ents on +ppeal

[\17] 8he Sch6art?6a"ds eA!"ain that the essentia" as!ect of standing is

injur) to a "ega"") !rotected right and c"ai that :edera" Wo e oan had not een

injured ) their defau"t at the ti e it co enced this forec"osure action, ecause

it had not o tained the note and ortgage unti" after it fi"ed the co !"aint.

e")ing on federa" case"a6, the) aintain that standing is deter ined as of the

ti e the action is rought, so that su sequent events do not cure a "ack of

standing. 8he) further urge that a"though the require ent of a rea" !art) in

interest can e 6aived, that require ent cannot e equated 6ith the require ent

of standing.

[\1&] :edera" Wo e oan asserts that !ursuant to . . 1303.31, it is a

J!erson entit"ed to enforce the noteJ ecause it is JIaK nonho"der in !ossession of

the instru ent 6ho has the rights of a ho"derJ ) virtue of the negotiation of the

note fro egac) to @e""s :argo and the assign ent fro @e""s :argo. :urther,

it aintains that . . 1303.31 defines on") 6hich !art) is entit"ed to enforce anote and that the fai"ure to e a rea" !art) in interest at the co ence ent of suit

can e cured !ursuant to iv. . 17(%# ) the assign ent of the ortgage, and

note. ;t a"so contends that the jurisdictiona" require ent of justicia i"it) is

satisfied if the a""egations of the co !"aint esta "ish that the !"aintiff has standing

to !resent a justicia "e controvers) and that even if it is deter ined that those

a""egations 6ere in fact fa"se, the atter re ains justicia "e so "ong as the !"aintiff

su sequent") o tains the right to forec"ose !rior to judg ent. On this asis, it

argues that ecause Jthe Ohio onstitution esto6s genera" (and not "i ited#

5

S 9'9 O 8 O: OW;O

jurisdiction on co on !"eas courts, co on !"eas courts have jurisdiction to

$2

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


hear dis!utes, even if the na ed !"aintiff 6as not the correct !erson to invoke it.J

8hus, it concedes that the record in this case does not esta "ish that it 6as a

!erson entit"ed to enforce the note as of the date the co !"aint 6as fi"ed, ut it

aintains that it J!roved that it 6as such a !erson !rior to judg ent.J

[\14] %ccording"), the question !resented is 6hether a "ack of standingat the co ence ent of a forec"osure action fi"ed in a co on !"eas court a)

e cured ) o taining an assign ent of a note and ortgage sufficient to esta "ish

standing !rior to the entr) of judg ent.

La, and +nal$sis .

Stand%ng to Sue

[\20] 8he Ohio onstitution !rovides in %rtic"e ; , Section $(=#B J8he

courts of co on !"eas and divisions thereof sha"" have such origina" jurisdiction

over all "ust%c%a2le matters and such !o6ers of revie6 of !roceedings of

ad inistrative officers and agencies as a) e !rovided ) "a6.J (9 !hasis

added.#

[\21] ;n Cleveland v. Shaker Hts. 30 Ohio St.3d $4, 51, 507 /.9.2d 323

(; 4&7#, 6e statedN

A=hether a part$ has a sufficient staFe in an other,ise

Gusticia'le controvers$ to o'tain Gudicial resolution of thatcontrovers$ is ,hat has traditionall$ 'een referred to as the

7uestion of standing to sue. =here the part$ does not rel$ on an$

specific statute authorizing invocation of the Gudicial process( the

7uestion of standing depends on ,hether the part$ has alleged

...... a personal staFe in the outco!e of the controvers$. H

*anuar) 8er , 2012

9d quoting M%ddletownv. Ferguson 25 Ohio St.3d 71, 75, $45 /.9.2d 3&0

(14& #, quotingS%erra Clu2 v. Morton $05 .S. 727, 731-732, 42 S. t. 13 1, 31

.9d.2d 3 (1472#, quoting Baker v. Carr 3 4 .S. 1& , 20$, &2 S. t. 41, 7

$3

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


.9d.2d 3 (1472#. Si i"ar"), the nited States Su!re e ourt o served in

Steel Co. v. C%t%zens $or a Better -nv%ronment 523 .S. &3, 102, 11& S. t. 1003,

1$0 .9d.2d 210 (144&#, that JIsKtanding to sue is !art of the co on

understanding of 6hat it takes to ake a justicia "e case.J^

[\22] @e recogni?ed that standing is a Jjurisdictiona" require entJ inState e5 rel. #allman v. Frankl%n Ct4. Court o$ Common /leas 35 Ohio St.2d

17 , 174, 24& /.9.2d 515 (1473#, and 6e statedN J;t is an e"e entar) conce!t of

"a6 that a !art) "acks standing to %nvoke the "ur%sd%ct%onof the court un"ess he has,

in an individua" or re!resentative ca!acit), so e rea" interest in the su ject atter

of the action.J (9 !hasis added.# See also !ew Boston Coke Corp. v. 04ler @+

Ohio St.3d 21 , 21&, 513 /.9.2d 302 (14&7# ( the issue of standing, inas uch as

it is jurisdictiona" in nature, a) e raised at an) ti e during the !endenc) of the

!roceedingsJ#B Steing"ass D Scarse""i, 0he 6h%o State Const%tut%on) A 7e$erence

?u%de 1&0 (200$# (noting that the jurisdiction of the co on !"eas court is

"i ited to justicia "e atters#.

[\23] %nd recent"), in ;%nca%dv. -r%e 9ns. Co. 12& Ohio St.3d 322,

2010-0hio- 03 , 4$$ /.9.2d 207, 6e affir ed the dis issa" of a co !"aint for

"ack of standing 6hen it had een fi"ed efore the c"ai ant had suffered an)

injur). 8here, Lincaid asserted c"ai s that his insurer had reached the insurance

contract ) fai"ing to !a) eA!enses covered ) the !o"ic)B ho6ever, he had never !resented a c"ai for rei urse ent to the insurer. @e conc"uded that Lincaid

"acked standing to assert the cause of action, eA!"aining, J nti" 9rie refuses to !a)

a c"ai for a "oss, Lincaid has suffered no actua" da ages for reach of contract,

the !arties do not have adverse "ega" interests, and there is no justicia "e

controvers).J 9d. at \ 13.

7

S 9'9 O 8 O: OW;O

[\2$] =ecause standing to sue is required to invoke the jurisdiction of the

co on !"eas court, Jstanding is to e deter ined as of the co ence ent of

suit.J Lu"an v. #e$enders o$ W%ldl%$e50$ .S. 555, 570-571, 112 S. t. 2130, 114

.9d.2d 351 (1442#, fn. 5B see also Fr%ends o$ the -arth 9nc. v. La%dlaw

-nv%ronmental Servs. (06C> 52& .S. 1 7, 1&0, 120 S. t. 43, 1$5 .9d.2d 10

$$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


(2000# !ova Health S4s. v. ?and4 $1 :.3d 11$4, 115$-1155 (10th ir.2005#B

Focus on the Fam%l4 v. /%nellas Suncoast 0rans%t Auth. 3$$ :.3d 12 3, 1275

(11th ir.2003#B /err4 v. Arl%ngton Hts. 1& :.3d &2 , &30 (7th ir.1444#BCarr

v. Alta erde 9ndustr%es lnc. 431 :.2d 1055, 10 1 (5th ir.1441#.

[\25] :urther, invoking the jurisdiction of the court Jde!ends on the stateof things at the ti e of the action rought,J Mullan v. 0orrance 22 .S. 537, 534,

.9d. 15$ (1&2$#, and the Su!re e ourt has o served that JItKhe state of

things and the origina"") a""eged state of things are not s)non) ousB

de onstration that the origina" a""egations 6ere fa"se 6i"" defeat jurisdiction.J

7ockwell 9nternatl. Corp. v. Un%ted States 5$4 .S. $57, $73, 127 S. t. 1347,

1 7 .9d.2d 140 (2007#.

[\2 ] 8hus, JI!Kost-fi"ing events that su!!") standing that did not eAist

on fi"ing a) e disregarded, den)ing standing des!ite a sho6ing of sufficient

!resent injur) caused ) the cha""enged acts and ca!a "e of judicia" redress.J 13%

@right, 'i""er D oo!er, Federal /ract%ce and /rocedure 4, Section 3531

(+88 > see ?rupo #ata$lu5 v. Atlas ?lo2al ?roup L./. 5$1 .S. 5 7, 575, 12$

S. t. 1420, 15& .9d.2d & (200$#, quoting Caterp%llar 9nc. v. Lew%s514 .S.

1, 75, 117 S. t. $ 7, 13 .9d.2d $37 (rejecting argu ent thatJ fina"it),

efficienc), and judicia" econo ) J can justif) sus!ension of the ti e-of-fi"ing

ru"e#BUtah Assn. o$ Count%es v. Bush $55 :.3d 104$, 1101, and fn. (10thir.200 # (a !"aintiff cannot re") on injuries occurring after the fi"ing of the

co !"aint to esta "ish standing#.

&

*anuar) 8er , 2012

[\27] 8his !rinci!"e accords 6ith decisions fro other states ho"ding that

standing is deter ined as of the fi"ing the co !"aint. See e.g. #eutsche Bank

!atl. 0rust v. Brum2augh 2012 OL 3, 270 .3d 151, \ 11 (J;f eutsche =ank

eca e a !erson entit"ed to enforce the note as either a ho"der or nonho"der in

!ossession 6ho has the rights of a ho"der a$ter the $oreclosure act%on was $%led

then the case a) e dis issed 6ithout !rejudice _ _ _J Ie !hasis addedK#B U.S.

$5

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Bank !atl. Assn. v. ;%m2all 140 t. 210, 2011 8 &1, 27 %.3d 10&7, \1$ (J .S.

=ank 6as required to sho6 that at the t%me the compla%nt was $%ledit !ossessed

the origina" note either ade !a)a "e to earer 6ith a "ank endorse ent or ade

!a)a "e to order 6ith an endorse ent s!ecifica"") to .S. =ankJ Ie !hasis

addedK#B Mtge. -lectron%c 7eg%strat%on S4s. 9nc.v. Saunders 2010 '9 74, 2 %.3d2&7, \ 15 (J@ithout !ossession of or an) interest in the note, '9 S lacked

stand%ng to %nst%tuteforec"osure !roceedings and cou"d not invoke the jurisdiction

of our tria" courtsJ Ie !hasis addedK#B 7MS 7es%dent%al /ropert%es L.L.C.v,

M%ller 303 onn. 22$, 224, 232, 32 %.3d 304 (2011#, quoting H%land v. 9ves 2&

onn.Su!!. 2$3, 2$5, 257 %.2d &22 (14 # (eA!"aining thatJ IsKtanding is the

"ega" right to set judicia" achiner) in otion J and ho"ding that the !"aintiff had

standing ecause it !roved o6nershi! of the note and ortgage at the ti e it

co enced forec"osure action#B Mclean v. */ Morgan Chase Bank !atl. Assn.

74 So.3d 170, 173 (:"a.%!!.2012# (Jthe !"aintiff ust !rove that it had standing

to forec"ose 6hen the co !"aint 6as fi"edJ#B see also Burle4 v . #ouglas 2 So.3d

1013, 1014 ('iss.2004#, quoting Lu"an v. #e$enders o$ W%ldl%$e50$ .S. 555,

571, 112 S. t. 2130, 114 .9d.2d 351 (1442#, fn. 5 (J standing is to e

deter ined as of the co ence ent of suit J#B 9n re +88= Adm%n%strat%on o$

Appropr%at%ons o$ Water o$ the !%o2rara 27& /e . 137, 1$5, 7 & /[email protected] $20

(2004# (Jon") a !art) that has standing a) invoke the jurisdiction of a court or tri una". %nd the junior a!!ro!riators did not "ose standing if the) !ossessed it

under the facts eAisting 6hen the) co enced the "itigationJ Ifootnote o ittedK#.

4

S 9'9 O 8 O: OW;O

[\2&] Were, :edera" Wo e oan concedes that there is no evidence that it

had suffered an) injur) at the ti e it co enced this forec"osure action. 8hus,

ecause it fai"ed to esta "ish an interest in the note or ortgage at the ti e it fi"ed

suit, it had no standing to invoke the jurisdiction of the co on !"eas court.

0he 7eal</art4<%n<9nterest 7ule

[\ 24] 8he court of a!!ea"s and :edera" Wo e oan re"ied on the

$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


!"ura"it) o!inion in State e5 rel. *ones v. Suster &$ Ohio St.d 70, 77, 701 /.9.2d

1002 (144&#, 6hich suggested that JItKhe "ack of standing a) e cured )

su stituting the !ro!er !art) so that a court other6ise having su ject atter

jurisdiction a) !roceed to adjudicate the atter. iv. . 17.J Wo6ever, four

justices dec"ined to join that !ortion of the o!inion, and therefore it is not aho"ding of this court. See Ohio onstitution, %rtic"e /, Section 2(%# (J%

ajorit) of the su!re e court sha"" e necessar) to constitute a quoru or to

render a judg entJ#.

[\30] %t co on "a6, a"" actions had to e rought in the na e of the

!erson ho"ding "ega" tit"e to the right asserted, and individua"s !ossessing on")

equita "e or eneficia" interests cou"d not sue in their o6n right. See generall4

"ark D Wutchins, 0he 7eal /art4 %n 9nterest 3$ Ea"e .*. 254 (1425#B %

@right, 'i""er D Lane, Federal /ract%ce and /rocedure Section 15$1 (2010#.

Wo6ever, the !ractice in equit) re"aAed this require ent, and states "ater

a rogated the co on-"a6 ru"es and ado!ted Jru"es that !er itted an) rea" !art)

in interest to ring suit.J Spr%nt Commun%cat%ons Co. L./.v.% Servs. 9nc.

55$ .S. 2 4, 274, 12& S. t. 2531, 171 .9d 2d $2$ (200&#.

[\31] ;n Ohio, iv. . 17(%# governs the !rocedura" require ent that a

co !"aint e rought in the na e of the rea" !art) in interest and !rovidesN

9ver) action sha"" e !rosecuted in the na e of the rea" !art) in interest.

%n eAecutor, ad inistrator, guardian, ai"ee,

10

*anuar) 8er , 2012

trustee of an eA!ress trust, a !art) 6ith 6ho or in 6hose na e a contract has

een ade for the enefit of another, or a !art) authori?ed ) statute a) sue in

his na e as such re!resentative 6ithout joining 6ith hi the !art) for 6hose

enefit the action is rought. @hen a statute of this.state so !rovides, an action for

the use or enefit of another sha"" e rought in the na e of this state. /o action

sha"" e dis issed on the ground that it is not !rosecuted in the na e of the rea"

$7

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


!art) in interest unti" a reasona "e ti e has een a""o6ed after o jection for

ratification of co ence ent of the action ), or joinder or su stitution of, the

rea" !art) in interest. Such ratification, joinder, or su stitution sha"" have the sa e

effect as if the action had een co enced in the na e of the rea" !art) .in

interest.

[\32] onsidering iv. . 17(%# in Sheal4 v. Camp2ell 20 Ohio St.3d 23,

2$^25,$&5 /.9.2d 701 (14&5#, 6e o servedN

8he !ur!ose ehind the rea" !art) in interest ru"e is < _ _ _ to ena "e the

defendant to avai" hi se"f of evidence and defenses that the defendant has against

the rea" !art) in interest, and to assure hi fina"it) of the judg ent, and that he

6i"" e !rotected against another suit rought ) the rea" !art) at interest on the

sa e atter. Celanese Corp. o$ Amer%ca v. *ohn Clark 9ndustr%es (5 ir."45$#, 21$

:.2d 551, 55 .J D9n re H%ghland Hol%da4 Su2d%v%s%on(1471#, 27 Ohio %!!.2d

237K 2$0 I273 /.9.2d 403#.

[\33] %s the Su!re e ourt eA!"ained in L%ncoln /ropert4 Co. v. 7oche

5$ .S. &1,40, 12 S. t. 0 , 1 3 .9d.2d $15 (2005#, the rea"-!art)-in-interest

ru"e concerns on") !ro!er !art) joinder. iv. . 17(%# does not address standingBrather, the !oint of the ru"e is that Jsuits ) re!resentative !"aintiffs on eha"f of

the rea" !arties in interest are the eAce!tion rather than the ru"e and shou"d on") e

a""o6ed 6hen the rea" !arties in interest are identifia "e and the res judicata sco!e

of the judg ent can e effective") deter ined.J. Consumer Fedn. o$ Am. v. Up"ohn Co.

3$ %.2d 725, 724 ( . .1475# (construing ana"ogous istrict of

o"u ia ru"e#.

[\3$] 8hus, the 8hird and the /inth ircuits have rejected the notion that

:ed. . iv. . 17(a#, on 6hich iv. . 17(%# is ased, a""o6s a !art) 6ith no !ersona" stake

in a controvers) to fi"e a c"ai on eha"f of a third !art), o tain the

cause of action ) assign ent, and then have the assign ent re"ate ack to

co ence ent of the action, statingN

$&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


J u"e 17(a# does not a!!") to a situation 6here a !art) 6ith no cause of

action fi"es a "a6suit to to"" the statute of "i itations and "ater o tains a cause of

action through assign ent. u"e 17(a# is the codification of the sa"utar) !rinci!"e

that an action shou"d not e forfeited ecause of an honest istakeB it is not a

!rovision to e distorted ) !arties to circu vent the "i itations !eriod.J

?ardner v. State Farm F%re D Cas. Co. 5$$:.3d 553, 5 3 (3d ir.200&#, quoting

Un%ted States e5 rel. Wul$$ v. CMA 9nc. &40 :.2d 1070, 1075 (4th ir."4&4#.

[\ 35] 8he SiAth ircuit ourt of %!!ea"s decision in Eur%ch 9ns. Co. v.

Log%trans 9nc.247 :.3d 52& ( th ir.2002#, i""ustrates this !oint. ;n that case, a

fire at a 6arehouse destro)ed !ro!ert) insured ) % erican Muarantee, 6hich

!aid out a c"ai for da ages. Wo6ever, another insurance co !an), ùrich

S6it?er"and, fi"ed a co !"aint c"ai ing to e the insured s su rogee,

not6ithstanding the fact that ùrich S6it?er"and had neither issued an insurance

12

*anuar) 8er ,2012

!o"ic) nor !aid out an) one) to the insured. 8he defendants oved to dis issfor "ack of standing, and. ùrich S6it?er"and sought to su stitute % erican

Muarantee as the rea" !art) in interest !ursuant to :ed. . iv. . 17(a#. 8he district

court dis issed the action.

[\3 ] 8he SiAth ircuit ourt of %!!ea"s ackno6"edged that the statute of

"i itations 6ou"d ar % erican Muarantee s c"ai un"ess :ed. . iv. . 17(a# a""o6ed it to

e su stituted for ùrich S6it?er"and. Wo6ever, the court distinguished et6een the

require ent of standing and the o jection that the

!"aintiff is not the rea" !art) in interest, and it he"d that ecause Jùrich % erican

ad itted") has not suffered injur) in fact ) the defendants, it had no standing to

ring this action and no standing to ake a otion to su stitute the rea" !art) in

interest.J ld.

[\37] Other courts have a"so deter ined that a !"aintiff cannot re") on

$4

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


!rocedura" ru"es si i"ar to iv. . 17(%# to cure a "ack of standing at the

co ence ent of "itigation.. #av%s v. ageo Corp. $&1 :.3d 1, 7& (4th

ir.2007# (J6hether or not uA 6as the rea"-!art)-in-interest, it does not have

standing, and it cannot cure its standing !ro "e through an invocation of

:ed. . iv. . 17(a#J#B Clark v. 0ra%l%ner Corp. 2$2 :.3d 3&& (10th ir.2000#(ta "e#, o!inion re!orted at 2000 @ 1 4$244 (noting that the !"aintiff cannot

3retroact%vel4 2ecome the rea"-!art)-in-interestJ in order to cure a "ack of

standing at the fi"ing of the co !"aint Ie !hasis sicK#B accord State v. /ropert4 at

+8, 7a%n2ow #r%ve 7$0 So.2d 1025, 1027-102& (%"a.1444# (rejecting the

argu ent that a "ack of standing can e cured after fi"ing of the co !"aint#B

Consumer Fedn. o$ Am. v. Up"ohn Co. 3$ %.2d 725, 724 ( . .%!!.1475#

(eA!"aining that dis issa" for "ack of standing is consistent 6ith . .

Su!er. t. iv. . 17(a##B see also McLean v. */Morgan Chase Bank !atl. Assn.

74 So.3d 170, 173 (:"a.%!!.2012# (Ja !art) is not !er itted to esta "ish the right

13

S 9'9 O 8 O: OW;O

to aintain an action retroactive") ) acquiring standing to fi"e a "a6suit after the

factJ#.[\3&] @e agree 6ith the reasoning and ana")sis !resented in these cases.

Standing is required to invoke the jurisdiction of the co on !"eas court.

ursuant to iv. . &2, the u"es of ivi" rocedure do not eAtend the jurisdiction

of the courts of this state, and a co on !"eas court cannot su stitute a rea" !art)

in interest for another !art) if no !art) 6ith standing has invoked its jurisdiction

in the first instance.

[\34] %ccording"), a "itigant cannot !ursuant to iv. . 17(%# cure the

"ack of standing after co ence ent of the action ) o taining an interest in the

su ject of the "itigation and su stituting itse"f as the rea" !art) in interest.

)ffect of %ack of tanding on #oreclosure *ctions

[\$0] 8he "ack of standing at the co ence ent of a forec"osure action

requires dis issa" of the co !"aintB ho6ever, that dis issa" is not an adjudication

50

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


on the erits and is therefore 6ithout !rejudice. See State e5 rel Coles v.

?ranv%lle 11 Ohio St.3d 231, 2007-0hio- 057, &77/.9.2d 4 &, \ 51. =ecause

there has een no adjudication on the under")ing inde tedness, our dis issa" has

no effect on the under")ing duties, rights, or o "igations of the !arties.

onclusion[\ 61 ;t is funda enta" that a !art) co encing "itigation ust have

standing to sue in order to !resent a justicia "e controvers) and invoke the

jurisdiction of the co on !"eas court. iv. . 17(%# does not change this !rinci!"e, and a

"ack of standing at the outset of "itigation cannot e cured )

recei!t of an assign ent of the c"ai or ) su stitution of the rea" !art) in

interest.

[\ $2] Were, it is undis!uted that :edera" Wo e oan did not have

standing at the ti e it co enced this forec"osure action, and therefore it fai"ed

1$

*anuar) 8er , 2012

to invoke the jurisdiction of the court of co on !"eas. %ccording"), the

judg ent of the court of a!!ea"s is reversed, and the cause is dis issed.

*udg ent reversed

and cause dis issed.

O O//O , .*., and :9;:9 , / =9 M S8 %"8O/, %/`"/M9 , ,

and ' M99 = O@/,**., concur.

8ho !son Wine, . . ., Scott %. Ling, and 8err) @. ose) *r., for

a!!e""ee.

%ndre6 '. 9ng"e, for a!!e""ants.

=ruce '. =ro)"es, urging reversa" for a ici curiae Wo eo6ners of the

State of Ohio and Ohiofraudc"osure. "ogs!ot.co ,

%dvocates for =asic ega" 9qua"it), ;nc., and %ndre6 . /euhauserB

ega" %id Societ) of "eve"and and *u"ie L. o ieB ega" %id Societ) of

South6est Ohio, . . ., and /oe" '. 'organB o unit) ega" %id Services,

51

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


;nc., hristina '. *anice, and au" 9. `ind"eB and Ohio overt) a6 enter and

inda ook, urging reversa" for a ici curiae %dvocates for =asic ega" 9qua"it),

;nc., ega" %id Societ) of "eve"and, ega" %id Societ) of South6est Ohio,

. . ., o unit) ega" %id Services, ;nc., Ohio overt) a6 enter, ega"

%id Societ) of o"u us, Southeastern Ohio ega" Services, ega" %id of @estern Ohio, and ro Seniors, ;nc.

52

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


E :IJITS

9Ahi it <%>

"riginal o!plaint

53

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


5$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


55

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


5

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


57

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


5&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


54

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


0

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


1

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


2

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


3

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


%""ongeG WD ="ock to O!tion One 'ortgage or!.

5

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


%""onge O!tion One to ="ank

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


7

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


4

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


70

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


71

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


72

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


73

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


7$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


75

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


7

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


E4hi'it )J*

%ssign ent of 'ortgage fro O!tion One 'ort. or!.

to @e""s :argo =ank /a.

77

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


E4hi'it ) *

/otice of :i"ing of %ssign ent

7&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


74

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


&0

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


&1

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


&2

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


E4hi'it )E* &urchase &rice K Ter!s +gree!ent

&3

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Exhibit “E2 Purchase Price ! "er#s Agree#ent signaturepage

&$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


E4hi'it )<*E E -TI"# "& %L"= +ME#DED +#D REST+TEDM"RT<+<E L"+#

&-R :+SE +#D =+RR+#TIES +<REEME#T 2E %++RML&+=+

&5

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Exhibit “$2%E&FAA'M(PAWA) *ue *iligence +tate#ent

&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Exhibit “$,%E&FAA'M(PAWA) alidity o. Mortgage *ocu#ents ! / nership

&7

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Exhibit “$%E&FAA'M(PAWA) /rigination *ue *iligence

&&

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Exhibit “$5%E&FAA'M(PAWA) +ignatory page 1

&4

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Exhibit “$%E&FAA'M(PAWA) +ignatory page 2

40

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


Exhibit “$3%E&FAA'M(PAWA) +ignatory page ,

41

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


OC=rien %ffidavit 1

42

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


43

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


%ffidavit of 8o!aka ove

4$

8/20/2019 Feb 2014 Brief 3.


feb 2014 brief 3

Documents