NJ Appeals Court Reverses SJ "Failed To Have Standing" WELLS FARGO v. SANDRA A. FORD


NJ Appeals Court Reverses SJ “Failed To Have Standing” WELLS FARGO v. SANDRA A. FORD

NJ Appeals Court Reverses SJ “Failed To Have Standing” WELLS FARGO v. SANDRA A. FORD



DOCKET NO. A-3627-06T1

as Trustee,

Argued October 5, 2010 – Decided

Before Judges Skillman, Yannotti and Espinosa.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey,
Chancery Division, Bergen County, Docket
No. F-12259-06.

Margaret Lambe Jurow argued the cause for
appellant (Legal Services of New Jersey,
Inc., attorneys; Ms. Jurow and Rebecca
Schore, on the brief).

Robert F. Thomas argued the cause for
respondent (Pluese, Becker & Saltzman,
attorneys; Mr. Thomas and Rob Saltzman, on
the brief).

The opinion of the court was delivered by

January 28, 2011

For these reasons, the summary judgment granted to Wells Fargo must be reversed and the case remanded to the trial court because Wells Fargo did not establish its standing to pursue this foreclosure action by competent evidence. On the remand, defendant may conduct appropriate discovery, including taking the deposition of Baxley and the person who purported to assign the mortgage and note to Wells Fargo on behalf of Argent.

Our conclusion that the summary judgment must be reversed because Wells Fargo failed to establish its standing to maintain this action makes it unnecessary to address defendant’s other arguments. However, for the guidance of the trial court in the event Wells Fargo is able to establish its standing on remand, we note that even though Wells Fargo could become a “holder” of the note under N.J.S.A. 12A:3-201(b) if Argent indorsed the note to Wells Fargo even at this late date, see UCC Comment 3 to N.J.S.A. 12A:3-203, Wells Fargo would not thereby become a “holder in due course” that could avoid whatever defenses defendant would have to a claim by Argent because Wells Fargo is now aware of those defenses. See N.J.S.A. 12A:3-203(c); UCC Comment 4 to N.J.S.A. 12A:3-203; see generally 6 William D.
Hawkland & Larry Lawrence, Hawkland and Lawrence UCC Series [Rev.] § 3-203:7 (2010); 6B Anderson on the Uniform Commercial Code, supra, § 3-203:14R. Consequently, if Wells Fargo produces an indorsed copy of the note on the remand, the date of that indorsement would be a critical factual issue in determining whether Wells Fargo is a holder in due course.

Accordingly, the summary judgment in favor of Wells Fargo is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings in conformity with this opinion.

Continue below…

[ipaper docId=47816170 access_key=key-294yktwr9oil0mwvhm90 height=600 width=600 /]

© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



This post was written by:

- who has written 9287 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD.

CONTROL FRAUD | ‘If you don’t look; you don’t find, Wherever you look; you will find’ -William Black

Contact the author

6 Responses to “NJ Appeals Court Reverses SJ “Failed To Have Standing” WELLS FARGO v. SANDRA A. FORD”

  1. Eugene Villarreal says:

    Finally we’re getting some real action in New Jersey. Thanks to people like Jurow and Schore who have been helping homeowners thru Legal Services of New Jersey. As a homeowner in New Jersey, I have seen that the courts have been very, very, very reluctant to dismiss cases where the stench of fraud, fraud upon the court overwhelms the the judges to grant Summary Judgments, and Reversed and Remands. This is like the third case from New Jersey that has showed up in the internet websites, lately. Second from Bergen County, except for the cases from Jeff Barnes @ foreclosuredefensenationwide.com, and the cases are reversed and remanded and the homeowner will have to continue the fight and give the Plaintiffs(Banks) another opportunity to return to the court with their stench of fruad until the courts as it seems not to be nauseated by the it.
    In this case, does “as Trustee” means that they don’t own the mortgage and note and they are just representing some that does? Why didn’t they, Wells Fargo, N.A., disclose/identify who they were representing? A securitized trust ????
    In the next case from New Jersey (Middlesex County), on this website, Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., as Trustee for WaMu Series 2007-HEI Trust, v. Tracey T. Wilson, Pro Se, again, the case was Reversed and Remanded back to trail court because of an alleged Assignment and the Affidavit does not meet the threshold(requirement).
    Is this why New Jersey foreclosure cases are 95% Uncontested ???? Even when they are contested, the courts and judges are VERY , VERY RELUCTANT to Dismiss or Allow Discovery to and thereby to Trial.

  2. losing my home in florida says:

    hi eugene, its sad most americans think they did something wrong by buying the house and not being able to pay for it so they walk away. i am on a mission to sop it. my duty. since it has happened to me and i am trying to find answers. please let anyone you know about www. foreclosure hamlet.com. we are all learing alot and are staying in our homes. 95% go uncontested becuase they didnt know the banks bet on our foreclsoures. the banks did not us due dilignece when aproving such high mortgages for people. if property values were rising 10% a month (litterly doubling values betwen 2002-2004) instead the normal 4% a year. where the people reorting htis fraud. why did it continue. i remember in 2005 looking for a home in brooksville fl (45 miles north of tampa) a 3/2 home was being sold for 270k, it was nice 1 acre. the area and schools were so so, the agent never called me pushing this property even tho i liked it (he did not want us to buy it but could not say it alll he could do was not do anything) i found out the house was sold and the next prperty in the same area was being sold for 334k!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! how horrible. should have realized somehtng was up and rented. whats that say about hind site.

  3. justtiredoftheinjustice says:

    I truly thank you for all of the valuable information, but I have a question………….can the people who lost their homes already going back 2 to 5 years ago…………….can they sue the banks for fraud..

  4. Dawn Casey says:

    NJ has The worst most inept or corrupt Judges I’ve seen a judge in Morris county granted DJ in favor of plaintiff bank of new York Mellon even with their written statement that as trustee we have no ownership of the loan and no right to foreclose. The judge was recently put in foreclosure court after spending his career in family court and I’d rude ignorant and just plain lacking any knowledge of the fraud in foreclosures. I filed a complaint with the judicial oversight committee as my Atty allowed the time to request a rehearing had expired. I’m beginning to end that no one knows how to fight other than the homeowners that researched the fraud. I want to file a counter suit but Atty gets me loan mod app instead. I’m paying him good money to do close to nothing. Crazy. All of it. The amount of foreclosures in Morris county are staggering and all are illegal on their face. Why are none of the homeowners fighting back??? Your website has proven very helpful to me in my pursuit of Justice. Thx


  1. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by savetheusa and DinSFLA, DinSFLA. DinSFLA said: NJ Appeals Court Reverses SJ “Failed To Have Standing” WELLS FARGO v. SANDRA A. FORD http://goo.gl/fb/JejqV […]


Leave a Reply



Please Support Me!

Write your comment within 199 characters.

All Of These Are Troll Comments