**Judy Faber has a history on this site and named in some important cases…check it out!
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
In re
MARIA RENEE BALDERRAMA
Debtor.
CARLA P. MUSSELMAN, TRUSTEE
Plaintiff,
vs.
DEUTSCHE BANK TRSUTE COMPANY
AMERICAS, in trust for Residential
Accredit Loans, Inc. Mortgage Asset-
Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2007-QH5,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION PARTIALLY GRANTING AND
PARTIALLY DENYING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S CROSS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
EXCERPT:
In response, the trustee filed her own cross motion for summary judgment arguing the
various documents Deutsche has provided to support its position, including three different
versions of the note and two versions of the allonge, were ineffective to transfer any interest to
Deutsche and evidence Deutsche‘s bad faith in purporting to own the note.17 The trustee‘s
argument primarily is based on the second allonge provided by Deutsche upon the Court‘s order
compelling discovery. The second allonge includes an endorsement from RFC to Deutsche that
did not exist in the first allonge, and, according to the trustee, Deutsche caused this endorsement
to be made fraudulently to meet the needs of litigation.18 The trustee urges the Court to find
Deutsche has not adequately explained the discrepancies between the two allonges, has not met
its burden to prove it is the legitimate owner of the note, and title to the Property should vest in
the trustee.
[...]
Neither version of the allonge, however, includes dates of the alleged transfers as stated
by Ms. Faber. Even assuming she had the authority to endorse the note to Deutsche, Ms. Faber
does not explain why RFC initially failed to produce the second allonge with the RFC
endorsement in its motion to lift stay, even though it allegedly existed at that time. These ?holes?
present substantial questions of fact as to Deutsche‘s good faith and the second allonge‘s
authenticity. The Court cannot avoid suspecting that the second allonge indeed was created
solely to rebut the trustee‘s assertions in this litigation and did not previously exist. If so, the
Court suggests Deutsche and Ms. Faber individually consider the possible consequences of
propounding potentially false evidence and perjured testimony to the Court.
© 2010-12 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
Related posts:
- IN RE BALDERRAMA | FL BK Court “Deutsche Bank, Not proven to either the trustee or the Court that it holds a validly endorsed promissory note evidencing its purchase of the debt on the disputed property” In re: MARIA RENEE BALDERRAMA, Chapter 7, Debtor. CARLA P....
- BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON v. FAULK | “Capacity, Possession of the fourth page of the note, which includes a blank endorsement” Via: Prof. Adam Levitin You have to read Do We...
- A valentine from Chief United States, Bankruptcy Court Middle Dist. of Florida Judge Karen S. Jennemann on Feburary 14, 2012 A valentine from Chief United States Bankruptcy Judge Karen S....
- Full Deposition of Residential Funding/GMAC JUDY FABER: US BANK v. Cook Make sure you read this carefully…This is a transcript of...
- In RE: BASS | North Carolina Appeals Court Affirms U.S. Bank c/o Wells Fargo ‘Judy Faber’s Invalid Stamp Indorsement, Not the legal holder of a promissory note’ NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS In the Matter of the...
Hello DinSFLA. I see that the judge gave to Trustee until June 3, 2011 for document production requests. Is there a follow-up to this case-has it been adjudged? How would I find that information?