Related posts:

1. FANNIE MAE v AMARAL | HAWAII ICA – Here OneWest did not attach the Note to its Complaint and the Declariation fails to establish, or even mention that OneWest possessed the Note at time it filed its Complaint … Order & Judgment VACATED! Congratulations to DUBIN LAW OFFICES 034924951 (1) by DinSFLA on...
2. Bank of America, N.A. v. Reyes-Toledo | HAWAII SUPREME COURT – (1) wrongful foreclosure; (2) declaratory relief; (3) quiet title; and (4) unfair and deceptive trade acts and practices (sometimes “UDAP”) under HRS § 480-1 et seq. Great Job to DUBIN LAW OFFICES! IN THE SUPREME COURT...
3. PennyMac Corp. v. Travis | Hawaii ICA – There is a genuine issue of fact as to when Chase was entitled to enforce the Note, and thus had standing at the time the Complaint was filed Great Job Gary Dubin Law Offices! CAAP-16-0000806sdo by DinSFLA on...
4. Mathis v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC | FL 2DCA- To establish its standing as holder in possession of the note as of the time of trial and as of the time the foreclosure complaint was filed, Nationstar needed to submit both the original note and the original allonge.   BYRON E. MATHIS, Appellant, v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC; UNKNOWN...
5. ELSMAN v HSBC BANK USA AS TRUSTEE FOR MLMI 2006-AF1 | FL 5DCA – HSBC’s evidence failed to establish its status as the holder of the note at the time of filing the foreclosure complaint IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF...