HSBC v Joseph T Buset || OCWEN Guillotined in Florida Bench Trial and then "rapped" for oh so "filthy hands". ||| ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL FOR ** U N C L E A N - H A N D S ** ..... AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFF SHOULD NOT BE ** SANCTIONED FOR FRAUD UPON THE COURT **

Categorized | STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD

HSBC v Joseph T Buset || OCWEN Guillotined in Florida Bench Trial and then “rapped” for oh so “filthy hands”. ||| ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL FOR ** U N C L E A N – H A N D S ** ….. AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFF SHOULD NOT BE ** SANCTIONED FOR FRAUD UPON THE COURT **

HSBC v Joseph T Buset || OCWEN Guillotined in Florida Bench Trial and then “rapped” for oh so “filthy hands”. ||| ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL FOR ** U N C L E A N – H A N D S ** ….. AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFF SHOULD NOT BE ** SANCTIONED FOR FRAUD UPON THE COURT **

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,
IN AND FOR MIAMI DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA

HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FR
FREMONT HOME LOAN TRUST 2005-
B,MORTGAGE-BACKED
CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2005-B,
Plaintiff,

vs.
JOSEPH T. BUSET A/K/A JOSEPH
THOMAS BUSET AND MARGARET
BUSET A/K/A MARGARET JEAN
BUSET, et. al.,
Defendant.
__________________________/

GENERAL JURISDICTION DIVISION

CASE NO.: 12-38811 CA 01
JUDGE: BEATRICE BUTCHKO

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL
FOR UNCLEAN HANDS AND LACK OF SUBSTANTIAL COMPETENT EVIDENCE

AND

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFF SHOULD NOT BE SANCTIONED
FOR FRAUD UPON THE COURT UNDER
THE COURT’S INHERENT CONTEMPT POWERS

THIS CAUSE having come before the Court for Trial on March 17 and 18, 2016, and the
Court having reviewed Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions Under the Court’s Inherent Contempt
Powers for Fraud Upon the Court, and being otherwise advised in the premises, it is hereupon:
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant’s Motion for Involuntary Dismissal after
Trial is GRANTED for the following reasons:

I. The Court Finds Unclean Hands In Plaintiff’s Prosecution of This Action
That Bars the Equitable Relief of Foreclosure

1. The Florida Supreme Court has long recognized the maxim that in equitable
actions such as this foreclosure, “he who comes into equity must come with clean hands.” Bush
v. Baker, 83 So. 704 (Fla. 1920).

2. In Bush, the Florida Supreme Court instructed that the “principal or policy of the
law in withholding relief from a complaint because of ‘unclean hands’ is punitive in nature.”

3. The Court finds several examples of Plaintiff’s unclean hands that mandate
punitive action that affirmatively bars plaintiff’s entitlement to the equitable relief of foreclosure.

A. Unclean Hands Involving the Specific Endorsement and Assignment
of Mortgage That Both Reflect a Transaction that Never Happened

4. Plaintiff’s trial witness, Sherry Keeley, an Ocwen employee, gave extensive
testimony regarding the Assignment of Mortgage (AOM) that Ocwen prepared in June of 2012
and recorded in the Public Records of Miami-Dade County in July of 2012.

5. On its face, this AOM purports to document a sale of Defendant’s loan from
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc (“MERS”) as nominee for the originator,
Freemont Investment and Loan, directly to the securitized trust identified as the plaintiff.

6. Ms. Keeley testified that Ocwen prepared this assignment in preparation for filing
the foreclosure complaint. The Ocwen employee identified the originator of the promissory note
and prepared the AOM to reflect a transfer from MERS, as Nominee of that originator to the
same party as Ocwen intended to name as Plaintiff in the foreclosure action.

7. The Court takes judicial notice that on July 25, 2008, Freemont Investment and
Loan (“Freemont”) entered into a voluntary liquidation and closing which did not result in a new
institution. https://www5.fdic.gov/idasp/confirmation_outside.asp?inCert1=25653. As such, the
status of MERS as nominee for Freemont ended when Freemont closed on July 25, 2008, which
renders the AOM created in 2012 void ab initio.

8. Ms. Keeley further testified the Pooling and Servicing Agreement for this
securitized trust backed up the veracity of the AOM. However, Ms. Keeley later conceded that,
according to the PSA, the chain of title for any loan within this trust went as follows:

[…]

 

<SNIPETS>

I. The Court Finds Unclean Hands In Plaintiff’s Prosecution of This Action
 
That Bars the Equitable Relief of Foreclosure
 
 
A. Unclean Hands Involving the Specific Endorsement and Assignment
 
of Mortgage That Both Reflect a Transaction that Never Happened
 
 
B. Unclean Hands For Violating the Court’s Discovery Order Despite
 
Plaintiff’s Representations That It Fully Complied With That Order
 
 
 
II. Defendant’s Motion For Involuntary Dismissal Is Also Granted For
 
Plaintiff’s Failure to Prove Damages, Conditions Precedent, and Standing
 
 
A. The Legal Fiction That Ocwen’s Loan Boarding Process In This Case
 
Verifies The Accuracy, Reliability of Correctness of the Prior
 
Servicer’s Records
 
 
B. Plaintiff’s Failure To Lay A Predicate For Prior Servicer Litton’s
 
Breach or Default Letter
 
 
C. Plaintiff Failed To Prove Standing By Virtue of an Endorsement and
 
an Assignment of Mortgage Created For Purposes of Litigation That
 
Both Miss a Key Line in the Title of Ownership, namely the Depositor
 
 
 
III. The Promissory Note Is Not A Negotiable Instrument
 

50. The Court gives great weight as the trier of fact to the testimony of Defendant’s
expert witness, Kathleen Cully. Ms. Cully is a Yale Law School graduate that worked her entire career in structured finance transactions since 1985. She was extremely well versed in the Uniform Commercial Code. Among many other tasks and accomplishments, Ms. Cully testified that she led the Citigroup team that created the first pooling and servicing agreement ever. She led Citigroup’s Global Securitization strategy. The Court finds Ms. Cully eminently qualified as
an expert witness in the area of securitized transactions and their interplay with the Model Uniform Commercial Code.

58. This Court does not address the provision described in the Nunez opinion, instead grounding this decision on a myriad of other provisions of the Mortgage establishing the Note is subject to and governed by the Mortgage, rendering the note a non-negotiable instrument.

 
 . . . .
 
 
82. The Court grants Defendants’ Motion for Involuntary Dismissal and enters
 
judgment in favor of the Defendants who shall go forth without day.
 
83. The Court reserves jurisdiction to award prevailing party attorney’s fees and
 
to impose sanctions against Plaintiff under the inherent contempt powers of the court for fraud on the court, and such other orders necessary to fully adjudicate these issues.
 
84. Plaintiff is ordered to produce a corporate representative with most
 
knowledge regarding its efforts to comply with the discovery order dated April 27, 2015, for deposition at the offices of Defendant’s counsel within 15 days from the entry of this  order.
 
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami-Dade County, Florida, on 04/26/16.
 

 

Inline image 1

 

Down Load PDF of This Case

© 2010-17 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.



Comments

comments

This post was written by:

- who has written 8446 posts on FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA.

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 “HSBC v Joseph T Buset || OCWEN Guillotined in Florida Bench Trial and then “rapped” for oh so “filthy hands”. ||| ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL FOR ** U N C L E A N – H A N D S ** ….. AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY PLAINTIFF SHOULD NOT BE ** SANCTIONED FOR FRAUD UPON THE COURT **”

  1. david says:

    Similar cases such as fraud on the court by foreclosure banks are very common here in Bergen county NJ and in fact Bergen county foreclosure judges are aiding and abetting the banksters fraud . Bergen county judges are corrupt and dishonest and will look the other way to bank fraud and will participate in Such foreclosure fraud which is the reason why so many homeowners in Bergen county NJ are losing their homes without ever getting due process of law or even a chance to present their defense . the Bergen county dishonest and corrupt judges Such as “judge” EDWARD A JEREJIAN and “judge Gerald c Escala are well known as the simply rubber stamps that support bank fraud. And since they do not account to no one in the state of NJ they continue to allow fraud in the court in Bergen county NJ to go uninteropted

  2. Elaine Williams says:

    @david in Bergen, NJ – we have the same problem herein Baltimore and Baltimore County Maryland. I have a forensic loan audit prepared by a certified auditor here in Maryland. Noe ONE judge in Baltimore County would even look at what I had. Not one! I love ancestral waterfront property and a five year old house. We all know about the bad behavior from the banks and foreclosure mills – why don’t they? They don’t care. JUDGE TURNBULL started my nightmare by ignoring forged and fabricated documents and JUDGE CAHILL put the nail in the coffin that became my life. My 30 year old daughter was supposed to get married on the waterfront there. That’s never going to happen and because we spent our 401k and five years of our life trying to claw that property back -she won’t get a wedding of any kind. Thanks Judge Cahill. We went all the way to Maryland Court of Special Appeals – we still lost. We had to quit because we were out of money and on the verge of a divorce. I will never ever be whole again.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks


Leave a Reply

GARY DUBIN LAW OFFICES FORECLOSURE DEFENSE HAWAII and CALIFORNIA
Kenneth Eric Trent, www.ForeclosureDestroyer.com

Archives