Federal Home Loan Mtge. v. Schwartzwald et al. | Ohio Supreme Court unanimously holds that a foreclosure plaintiff must have standing upon the filing of the suit. - FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

Federal Home Loan Mtge. v. Schwartzwald et al. | Ohio Supreme Court unanimously holds that a foreclosure plaintiff must have standing upon the filing of the suit.

Federal Home Loan Mtge. v. Schwartzwald et al. | Ohio Supreme Court unanimously holds that a foreclosure plaintiff must have standing upon the filing of the suit.

Huge victory for Attorney Andrew M. Engel [link]

The Supreme Court of Ohio

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp

v.

Duane Schwartzwald et al.

EXCERPT:

{¶ 1} Duane and Julie Schwartzwald appeal from a judgment of the
Second District Court of Appeals affirming a decree of foreclosure entered in
favor of the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation. In addition, the appellate
court certified that its decision in this case conflicts with decisions of the First and
Eighth Districts on the following issue: “In a mortgage foreclosure action, the
lack of standing or a real party in interest defect can be cured by the assignment of
the mortgage prior to judgment.”

{¶ 2} Federal Home Loan commenced this foreclosure action before it
obtained an assignment of the promissory note and mortgage securing the
Schwartzwalds’ loan. The Schwartzwalds maintained that Federal Home Loan
lacked standing to sue. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of
Federal Home Loan and entered a decree of foreclosure. The appellate court
affirmed, holding that Federal Home Loan had remedied its lack of standing when
it obtained an assignment from the real party in interest.

{¶ 3} However, standing is required to invoke the jurisdiction of the
common pleas court, and therefore it is determined as of the filing of the
complaint. Thus, receiving an assignment of a promissory note and mortgage
from the real party in interest subsequent to the filing of an action but prior to the
entry of judgment does not cure a lack of standing to file a foreclosure action.

{¶ 4} Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is reversed, and
the cause is dismissed.

[…]

[ipaper docId=111677891 access_key=key-1m1jylfr5fthta8u4zov height=600 width=600 /]

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



Comments

comments

This post was written by:

- who has written 11505 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

2 Responses to “Federal Home Loan Mtge. v. Schwartzwald et al. | Ohio Supreme Court unanimously holds that a foreclosure plaintiff must have standing upon the filing of the suit.”

  1. Charles Reed says:

    Writing is on the Wall, that these foreclosing party don’t and did not have a financial interest in the Notes and were using MERS or some other madness to fraudulently submit documentation to court to illegally assignments.

    The best example of this type of fraud is Ginnie Mae who’s entire portfolio is base on having blank Notes as alleged collateral for it’s Mortgage Backed Security program is just one big Ponzi scheme.

    Ginnie Mae has absolutely no underlying collateral for the securities product that was sold, and cannot allow some servicer to foreclose because the Notes, Debts & Titles have all been separated and the blank Notes are non-negotiable document and are worthless because the holder of the Notes (Ginnie Mae) don’t possess the debt as by law they cannot purchase a home mortgage loan.

    We are currently owed as the US Taxpayers around $24 billion to include in that total treble damage! When is it that we are returned our money?

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. […] is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with Fed. Home Loan Mtge. Corp. v. Schwartzwald, ___ Ohio St.3d ___, 2012-Ohio-5017, ___ N.E.2d […]


Leave a Reply

Advert

Archives