JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION AS PURCHASER OF THE LOANS AND OTHER ASSETS OF WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FORMERLY KNOWN AS WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA (THE “SAVINGS BANK”) FROM THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, ACTING AS RECEIVER FOR THE SAVINGS BANK AND PURSUANT TO ITS
AUTHORITY UNDER THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT, 12 U.S.C. 9 1821(D),

-versus-

FREDERICK W. BUTLER,

EXCERPTS:

FURTHER, why an Order should not be entered that plaintiff pursued the Prosecution of this foreclosure action, and participated and engaged in actions,Constituting Settlement Conferences Before the Court in this Matter, when plaintiff had full knowledge, and plaintiffs counsel knew or should have known, that plaintiff had received payment on May 22,20 10 for the amount specified in paragraph SIXTH of its complaint dated on or about January 19,2010, as due and owing (that is, $434,382.89);

FURTHER, why an Order should not be entered that plaintiff and plaintiffs’ Counsels made material misrepresentations to the Court, on April 14,201 1 and May 2, 2011, for example, thereby engaging in misconduct before the Court;

[…]

FURTHER, why plaintiffs counsels, the law offices of Steven J. Baum, and their co counsel Cullen & Dykman LLP, should not be sanctioned pursuant to New York Judiciary Law 487 for misstatements and misrepresentations made to the Court on May 2, 2011, to defendant during the course of 11 settlement conferences over 12 months, and to defendant’s counsel and the Court with respect to the fact and procedural history of this case;

FURTHER, why Judgment should not be entered pursuant to CPLR 32111(a)(l), 321 l(a)(3), 321 l(a)(7) and 321 l(a)(8) dismissing this foreclosure action with prejudice;

FURTHER, why judgment should not be entered imposing sanctions against Plaintiff on the basis that plaintiffs affidavit of facts- namely its verified summons and complaint — contained material misrepresentations about its legal capacity to sue, about which plaintiff had full knowledge from commencement of this;

[...]

Scribd

3 We note that Turner’s argument that Deutsche Bank possessed unclean hands is an equitable defense to the merits of this lawsuit. This is an issue for the chancery court to consider on remand.

ANGELA L. TURNER

v.

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST
COMPANY

Excerpts:

¶1. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company initiated a foreclosure action in the Warren County Chancery Court and attempted to serve Angela Turner by publication. But before doing so, it neither certified Turner was a non-resident of Mississippi nor alleged she could not be located in the state after a diligent inquiry. Because we find service of process did not strictly comply with the governing rules, we reverse the chancellor’s refusal to set aside the default judgment she entered on behalf of Deutsche Bank when Turner did not respond. We remand the case for further proceedings.

[…]

¶11. Although Deutsche Bank published a summons in the newspaper for three consecutive weeks and filed proof of the publication, Deutsche Bank did not comply with Rule 4(c)(4)(A). It is undisputed that Deutsche Bank never filed a sworn petition or affidavit attesting that Turner was a nonresident or could not be found in Mississippi after a diligent inquiry. Therefore, it follows that Deutsche Bank did not comply with any of the remaining requirements for information that must be included in the petition or affidavit.

¶12. “The rules on service of process are to be strictly construed. If they have not been complied with, the court is without jurisdiction unless the defendant appears of his own volition.” Kolikas v. Kolikas, 821 So. 2d 874, 878 (16) (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (internal citation omitted). Actual notice does not cure defective process. See, e.g., Mosby v. Gandy, 375 So. 2d 1024, 1027 (Miss. 1979). “Even if a defendant is aware of a suit, the failure to comply with rules for the service of process, coupled with the failure of the defendant voluntarily to appear, prevents a judgment from being entered against him.” Sanghi, 759 So. 2d at 1257 (33).

[...]

¶20. Because service of process in this case failed to comply with Rule 4(c), we find the default judgment entered against Turner is void. Caldwell, 533 So. 2d at 417-18 (finding judgment void for defective process by publication). Thus, the chancery court erred in refusing to set the void judgment aside under Rule 60(b). We reverse and remand for further proceedings in which Deutsche Bank will have the opportunity to serve Turner with process.3

[...]

Scribd

Oregonian-

Bank of America said today it mistakenly sent nearly 5,000 Oregonians letters claiming they owe property taxes and might be risking foreclosure when they, in fact, don’t.

Washington County Department of Assessment and Taxation director Rich Hobernicht estimates his office has received 1,000 calls since Monday from homeowners who received letters from BAC Tax Services Corp, an arm of the bank’s BAC Home Loan Servicing division.

Continue reading [OREGONLive]

NOTICE TO THE BAR

NJ RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE RULES – AMENDMENTS TO RULES.
4:64-1 AND 4:64-2; REVISED FORM CERTIFICATIONS/ AFFIDAVITS

Scribd

HuffPO-

In Chicago, it’s the sale of parking meters to the sovereign wealth fund of Abu Dhabi. In Indiana, it’s the sale of the northern toll road to a Spanish and Australian joint venture. In Wisconsin it’s public health and food programs, in California it’s libraries. It’s water treatment plants, schools, toll roads, airports, and power plants. It’s Amtrak. There are revolving doors of corrupt politicians, big banks, and rating agencies. There are conflicts of interest. It’s bipartisan.

And it’s coming to a city near you — it may already be there. We’re talking about the sale of public assets to private investors. You may have heard of one-off deals, but what we’ll be exploring with the Huffington Post is the scale and scope of what is a national and organized campaign to shift the way we govern ourselves. In an era of increasingly stretched local and state budgets, privatization of public assets may be so tempting to local politicians that the trend seems unstoppable. Yet, public outrage has stopped and slowed a number of initiatives.

continue reading [HUFFINGTONPOST]

BLOOMBERG:

The Michigan attorney general’s office subpoenaed three mortgage processors including Lender Processing Services as part of a state probe of robo-signing.

Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette said his office serviced Lender Processing, Fidelity National Financial Inc. (FNF) and CT Corporation System with investigative subpoenas as affiliates of DocX, a mortgage service support provider. The attorney general said he is seeking information about documents signed by DocX employees as “Linda Green.”

The subpoenas are part of a criminal investigation into questionable mortgage documentation filed with Michigan’s Register of Deeds offices, Schuette’s said in a statement today. The subpoenas were approved by the state court in Lansing June 13 and require responses by June 30, Schuette said.

Continue reading [BLOOMBERG]

PRESS RELEASE:

Schuette Issues Subpoenas in Criminal Probe of Mortgage Processors

Contact:  John Sellek or Joy Yearout 517-373-8060
Agency: Attorney General

LANSING- Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette today announced that he has issued criminal investigative subpoenas against national mortgage servicing support providers in an expansion of his office’s investigation into questionable mortgage documentation filed with Michigan’s Register of Deeds offices during the current foreclosure crisis.

“Allegations of forged mortgage documents are very serious and require a thorough investigation,” said Schuette.  “I will continue to work closely with federal and local authorities to find answers on behalf of Michigan homeowners.”

The Attorney General is empowered to pursue criminal investigative subpoenas under the Code of Criminal Procedure (MCL 767A.2(2)).  Schuette’s office has filed criminal investigative subpoenas against DocX, which provides mortgage support services, including creating, processing or recording mortgage assignments or other mortgage documentation.  In addition to DocX, the following companies affiliated with DocX were served with investigative subpoenas by Schuette’s office:

·         Lender Processing Services, Inc.;

·         Fidelity National Financial, Inc.; and

·         CT Corporation System.

Schuette’s office has requested documents regarding the mortgage processing companies’ operations in relation to foreclosure and/or bankruptcy-related document processing.  The subpoenas were approved by the 54B District Court in Ingham County on Monday, June 13, 2011, and the information must be provided to the Attorney General’s Office on or before June 30, 2011.

In April 2011, Schuette launched an investigation after county officials across the state reported that they suspected Assignment of Mortgage documents filed in their offices may have been forged.  A recent “60 Minutes” news broadcast had shown that the name “Linda Green” was signed to thousands of mortgage-related documents nationwide, but with many different variations in handwriting.  County officials in Michigan reviewed their files and found similar documents, thus raising questions about the authenticity of the documents filed.

Schuette is investigating whether certain mortgage processing companies permitted such robosigning of legal documents filed in connection with Michigan foreclosures.  Apart from the question of whether falsified signatures were used, robosigning may also involve individuals signing affidavits to signify that mortgage documentation was properly prepared without ever conducting a proper review of the documents.  Although Michigan is a non-judicial foreclosure state, Schuette is reviewing whether robosigned documents may have been filed with courts in limited cases.

Schuette urges any current or former employees of mortgage servicers or processing companies with knowledge of unlawful practices related to mortgage servicing or the execution of documents in Michigan to call the Attorney General’s Corporate Oversight Division at (517) 373-1160 (517) 373-1160 .

Schuette is also continuing to work with fellow attorneys general in a national workgroup examining mortgage lending practices, including the robosigning issue and consumer protection concerns affecting homeowners nationwide.

Schuette reminds Michigan homeowners that citizens do not need to pay to speak with their lender or servicer or to obtain outside assistance with foreclosure issues.  Free local assistance with foreclosure issues can be found by calling the Michigan State Housing Development Authority at (866) 946-7432 (866) 946-7432.

-30

source: http://www.michigan.gov

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY,
AS TRUSTEE FOR AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE
ASSETS TRUST 2006-5 MORTGAGE-BACKED PASS-HROUGH
CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-5
4600 Regents Boulevard
Suite 200
Irving, TX 75063-1730

-against-

MARTIN SEIDLIN, JUNGKIL HAN, INA ZALOOM

HON SALIANN SCARPULLA, J.:

EXCERPTS:

In this foreclosure action, plaintiff (hereinafter “Deutsche Bank”) moves for leave to voluntarily discontinue without prejudice pursuant to CPLR 3217(b) “due to the assignment of the mortgage being incorrectly and/or incompletely acknowledged.” (Anderson Affirm., 7 6). Defendant Ina Zaloom (“Zaloom”), on behalf of herself and codefendant Martin B. Seidlin (“Seidlin”), cross-moves for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of the plaintiffs complaint with prejudice and an order (a) that no amounts are owed by Zaloom to Deutsche Bank under the mortgage note; (b) that plaintiff may not foreclose the subject mortgage; (c) that bars Deutsche Bank from seeking a deficiency judgment against Zaloom; and (d) that awards sanctions against Deutsche Bank pursuant to 22 NYCRR 5 130- 1.1, including reasonable attorney’s fees.

[...]

However, Deutsche Bank’s pleading against defendant Jungkil Han, previous owner of the subject apartment, is dismissed with prejudice, because Deutsche Bank has not alleged any basis of claim against him.

With respect to Zaloom’s counterclaim, it must also be dismissed without – prejudice. Because both parties agree that plaintiff cannot currently establish by admissible documentation assignment of the note and therefore may not foreclose on defendants’ mortgage, Zaloom cannot currently establish that Deutsche Bank at any time assumed liability for the actions of non-parties American Brokers Conduit and Cutaia Mortgage Group, Inc.

In accordance with the foregoing, it is hereby

ORDERED that plaintiffs motion brought pursuant to CPLR 32 17(b) for leave to discontinue its application of foreclosure is granted in part and denied in part; and it is further

ORDERED that plaintiffs pleading is dismissed without prejudice as against defendants Ina Zaloom and Martin Seidlin; and it is further

ORDERED that plaintiffs pleading is dismissed with prejudice as against defendant Jungkil Wan; and it is further

ORDERED that the Clerk of the County of New York shall cancel and discharge the Notice of Pendency filed in this action in the Office of the Clerk of the County of New York on the 13* day of April, 2009; and it is further

ORDERED that defendant Ina Zaloom’s cross-motion is denied in its entirety; and it is further

ORDERED that defendant Ina Zaloom’s counterclaim is dismissed without prejudice.

This constitutes the decision and order of the Court.

Dated: New York, New York
June 6,201 1

Scribd