OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order!
Another Great Contribution by Matthew Weidner.
Search this blog and you will see that for months now I’ve been arguing that the “evidence” submitted by Plaintiffs in foreclosure cases does not even come close to meeting the legal and evidentiary requirements for courts to grant summary judgment.
After performing extensive legal research to confirm this hunch, I have drafted and filed detailed memoranda, supported by all available case law, that stands for the proposition that the practices used by virtually every foreclosure mill in the state do not provide the evidentiary basis for a court to grant summary judgment.
So why are courts across this state continuing to grant summary judgment? There really is NO LEGAL BASIS TO SUPPORT THE GRANTING OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT IN THE VAST MAJORITY OF FORECLOSURE CASES CURRENTLY FILED IN COURTS ACROSS THIS STATE.
I attach here the most fantastic transcript of a hearing I’ve heard in a long time. This transcript shows a couple things:
First, the judges in the Sixth Circuit of Florida really, really get it.
Second, this particular judge goes far and above to do his job and deliver real, hard, honest legal work.
Third, as I mentioned above…the current processes and procedures used by the foreclosure mills do not provide courts the evidentiary or legal basis required to grant summary judgment.
But now the big question that comes to mind….now that this judge gets it…and now that my memos and others like my friend and fellow Foreclosure Fighter Mike Wasylik are starting to leak out there…
What happens to all the hundreds of thousands of homes that have been foreclose on by improper evidence?
Some excerpts from the beginning of the transcript… Be sure to read it in its entirety. It is an absolute must read…
Gmac Mortgage LLC
v
Debbie Visicaro, et al.
April 7, 2010
THE COURT: Okay, we are here today in GMAC v Visicaro. This is a motion for rehearing the previously drafted motion for summary judgement…
MR. WASYLIK: I am here for Defendants… We have submitted a fairly detailed brief…
THE COURT: What’s the Plaintiff’s position regarding the motion…
MR FRAISER: I object… You’ve considered all the evidence before when you entered the summary judgment back in January 2010. The opposing party then could not support their position on any genuine material facts. Right now, Your Honor, there are no convincing exigent, you know, circumstances being offered up at the time.
THE COURT: Did you not read the motion? It sounds liker you’re making a very generalized argument, and this is an, as I viewed it, extremely targeted motion which basically elaborates on the assertions that were raised at the time of the motion for summary judgment.
As I recall that, counsel appeared on behalf of his clients, I think it was by phone and made arguments that the Court really gave short shrift to it, did not review the case…
Since that time, the Court delved further into it…
I’ve had several events which have occurred in cases which cause the Court to have great concern about the validity of fillings in our mortgage foreclosure cases, and that precipitated my reevaluation of the evidentiary considerations.
I’ll give you an example of that. I have one case that was called up for summary judgment hearing, and I thought it was going to be the typical granted situation, and then a lawyer showed up for the defendant homeowner.
I was beginning to recite to the lawyer what I had typically recited, that there was no affidavit in opposition. And the lawyer said, “Well, I thought you might want to see this,” and handed me some documents which were from another file in our circuit, and it turned out, it was the same note and mortgage that was in a separate and independent file.
There was a different plaintiff pursuing a foreclosure proceeding on the same note and mortgage as the one that was being proceeded on. Both of the cases contained allegations in the original complaints that the separate plaintiffs were owners and holders of the note. Both of them had gone so far to have affidavits filed in support of a summary judgment whereby an individual represented to the court in the affidavit that the separate plaintiffs had possessed the note and had lost the note while it was in their possession.
Interestedly, both affidavits, although they were different plaintiffs, purported the same facts and they were executed by the same individual in alleged capacity as a director of two separate corporations, one of which was ultimately found to me to be an assignee of the original note…
So that really increased my interest in this subject matter, because
I really honestly don’t have any confidence that any of the documents the Courts are receiving on these mass foreclosures are valid…
So I’ve said enough…
Honorable
Anthony Rondolino
Be sure to read the transcript in its entirety below…
4closureFraud
Gmac Mortgage LLC v Debbie Visicaro, Et Al.
Comments
19 Responses to “OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order!”Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying...-
[...] OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order! [...]
-
[...] finding, according to a statewide foreclosure task force that recommended the verification rule, that two different lenders would sometimes file suit on the same note at the same time because it wasn’t clear who the true owner [...]
-
[...] finding, according to a statewide foreclosure task force that recommended the verification rule, that two different lenders would sometimes file suit on the same note at the same time because it wasn’t clear who the true owner [...]
-
[...] OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order! [...]
-
[...] OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order! [...]
-
[...] NY Post – Florida Judge Reverses own Summary Judgement after GMAC Lawyer Could Only Manage a Ralph Kramden-like hamina-hamina-hamina Published April 26, 2010 Corruption , Fannie Mae , Foreclosure Fraud , MERS , Mortgage Fraud , bankruptcy , cdo , cds , foreclosure , freddie mac , mortgage electronic registration system , securities fraud Leave a Comment Tags: 4closurefraud, affidavit, Anthony Rondolino, appeal foreclosure, bank fraud, clouded title, conspiracy, criminal, fight the banks, foreclosure, Foreclosure Defense, Foreclosure Fraud, forgery, fraud, Gmac Mortgage, livinglies, MERS, Mike Wasylik, mortgage electronic registration system, motion to dismiss, ny post, OVERRULED, produce the note, summary judgment, Visicaro, wrongful foreclosure This story in the NY-POST is in regards to OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order! [...]
-
[...] OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order! [...]
-
[...] OVERRULED!!! Florida Judge Reverses His own Summary Judgment Order! [...]
-
[...] an unrelated hearing in a separate matter last week, Anthony Rondolino, a state-court judge in St. Petersburg, Fla., said that an affidavit [...]
This is not about free houses. This is about due process and unclean hands. If you owe me money is it really ok that I can go to court without the agreement and lie and fabricate the agreement and have that be ok? Does you owing me money justify ANYTHING I might do to collect that debt in court? Should the court take my word if I say I bought the debt from Bob who bought it from Mike who bought it from Keith to whom you owed the money. And if I lie and perjure myself in court to collect the debt then you should lose your house but nothing should happen to me? Is that the corporate capitalist country we have become?
As a non-practicing attorney who happened to be suing Bank of America and FNMA over a non-foreclosure matter anyway, I just got into theis fight. There is soooo much to look at it takes a while to come up to speed here. But here is my question: My Title Company says I have a copy of the original note in my closing packet. So with all of these fabricated notes, how come nobody has just come forward with their copy of the note from their closing to show the fabricated notes are fabricated?
In most cases (all that I have seen) the closing agent does not provide a copy of the closing documents post signing. Meaning that they purportedly copy the packet of documents that the buyer (new homeowner) is to sign before he/she signs them. So it may do little good to present an alleged copy of an unsigned note.
Hope that helps.
Just one question to the defense attorneys…. Is your Client paying his/her mortgage?
I am sooooooooooooooo tired of people who are not paying on their obligations (you signed the promissory note, you said you’d pay it back or they could take the house). Who cares if B of A or GMAC owns the note, let them fight about whose house it really is.
What we can be absolutely certain of is that it is NOT the home of the “borrower” who fails to pay his mortgage…….. and he/she has absolutely no right to stay.
Well, actually, there’s a huge issue for any homeowner with a recourse mortgage, whether or not the homeowner is up to date on payments. The homeowner certainly doesn’t want to be paying the money to the *wrong party* as he will then be told later he has to pay the money *again* to the right party!
Also, even on a non-recourse mortgage, what if you’re trying to renegotiate the loan? You have a very real interest in making sure you are dealing with the actual creditor, not someone else. If you are foreclosed on by the *actual* creditor you may be able to negotiate with them. If foreclosed by someone else, you really can’t!
Apparently you do not understand that this is a contract. The bank is trying to say that it is the other party in the contract and therefore due damages and restitution WITHOUT BEING ABLE TO PROVE that it is indeed the other party in the contract. Now, whether or not the homeowner is in default is immaterial at this point. The issue is whether the bank is the proper party to sue. The burden of proof is on the bank to prove it, not the homeowner. If the bank played fast and loose with the documentation while it was selling and reselling the notes as mortgage backed securities, well, tough noogies to the bank, and you should feel the same way because the banks and the foreclosure mills are fabricating false documents to replace the ones they sold/lost. The judges are allowing them to get away with this fraud. The banks have been paid by Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac with YOUR TAX DOLLARS. The homeowners are being denied due process when the judges ride roughshod over the rules of procedure to help railroad the homeowners. Are you OK with this? If the banks had complied with state law and the Uniform Commercial Code and filed the paper assignments when the loan was bought and sold, the banks would not have this problem. But they disregarded the law because they wanted to save money on the recordation fees and the cost associated with creating the documents, not to mention the time it took away from flipping the notes. You should be as concerned as the homeowners, because once the rule of law is no longer relevant in this country, the only thing left is influence peddling. And God help you when you are the victim.
you stated the answer to your own question. If they have never been transferred the note then they cannot claim to own the house. That is the premise of “show me the note” b/c we KNOW that banks buy & sell notes and therefore none of them have the note. So in your scenario, “…let them fight about whose house it is really.” is te exact same scenario within this matrix.
Be blessed.
I totally disagree. It depends on the circumstance. There are millions of home buyers,who were scammed by unscrupulous brokers and predatory sub-prime lenders. Some of the sub-prime lenders,were shut down for fraud. They violated TILA and RESPA laws.
It is not viable or feasible that persons can choose to commit crimes to do business and then claim that they made agreements that are enforceable. A legal outcome achieved by a criminal act is void as a matter of law.
Sir, Our group says, We praise your courage to stand up for the homeowners! The Law Offices of David J. Stern, are doing a lot of (???) behind the scenes……
Have you read Living Lies? Have you read Ripoffreport.com Report#541158 & all of its responses? Have you read 4closure fraud site? Have you read about Mr. Krondes, story told again by Private Eye, Mr. Bill Warner (investigating Mr. Stern’s operation of ???)? Have you read about Ellen rendering Quiet Titles on $$$$$$ homes but why? Is that because Mr. Stern is telling her what to do, too (is what we were told)? Have you read about Ronrico & Jose, who want to tell about the FRAUD that is going on against those homeowners, alleged by Mr. Stern to not be Fraud? Who do you believe?
There is a lot going on???
We pray for all of those victims! God Bless You!