Final Order Dismissing Sue Sponte Due to Incompletely Verified Complaint, Action to Foreclosure Residential Mortgage

by Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.


I’ve been screaming since February that it was improper for the Millionaire Foreclosure Mills to ignore the Rules of the Supreme Court of Florida by continuing to file foreclosure complaints that are not verified as required by the rule.

I have respectfully suggested that it was appropriate judicial policy for the courts to Sua Sponte or on their own initiative review all foreclosures filed since the February 17, 2010 and dismiss those cases that are not verified.


Attached here is a copy of the Order.  This is a clear and very appropriate Order and process that should be adopted by circuits all across the state of Florida because it is an appropriate sanction for the flagrant abuses by the Millionaire Foreclosure Mills and quite frankly, this is an important fiscal policy issues.  The citizens of the State of Florida should not be absorbing the costs of judicial administration just because these Millionaire Foreclosure Mills decide they want to flaunt the rules of the State of Florida.

Taxpayers and consumers need to rise up and demand that their Clerks in each circuit adopt the very same policy that has been adopted in the Twelfth Judicial Circuit.  The average citizen should not be forced to bear the financial costs that non-compliance with these important rules costs.

Enough is enough… great job for…

Continue reading here…

Final Order Dismissing Sue Sponte Due to Incompletely Verified Complaint, Action to Foreclosure Residential Mortgage
[scribd id=31208193 key=key-vefduu1belkr97tc5we mode=list]

8 Responses to “Final Order Dismissing Sue Sponte Due to Incompletely Verified Complaint, Action to Foreclosure Residential Mortgage”
  1. sharon says:

    is it too late for me if i have a foreclosure date cancelled and there is already a summary judgement or final judgment already issued. I thought i was going to be approved by Naca AND was rejected i just want to to know if i can ask the judge to have BOA show the original note. I know this should have been done in discovery but is there any recourse since this new case the summons was filed in 2009. this is the second cancelled foreclosure date. they will soon assign another date.

  2. ForeclosureFraud,

    Your comment here below your post is a VERY IMPORTANT piece of information about item #3! Thank you for pointing that out for us all!

    If anyone wants to review a sampling of these “verifications”, check them out here:

  3. Major New Development in 12th Circuit:

    Please reread the dismissal order. Carefully read the third paragraph:

    The language means that the documents accompanying the complaint must show the “client’s” (which is also the plaintiff in a foreclosure action) ownership of the note and mortgage. This means simply submitting the mortgage note, even the original mortgage note, naming the original mortgagee but not the plaintiff will lead to a dismissal unless the documents show a chain of title from the named mortgagee to the plaintiff. This is not just big; it is downright revolutionary. Failure to provide such documentation leads to dismissal of the lawsuit without prejudice. In other words, until the plaintiff can submit the required documentation, the plaintiff cannot foreclose. This goes way beyond the original “Show me the note!” defense. Wow!

  4. Robert Chaney says:

    My child has a foreclosure case in Highlands County, Florida. She had to file a Notice of Failure to Pay Clerk for a Non-Resident Bond to force the Plaintiff to pay the bond (F.S. 57.011).

    The Plaintiff filed a Complaint in 2008 with two counts: 1) to Foreclose on the Note and Mortgage; and 2) to Re-Establish the Lost Note. Plaintiff did not have a copy of the “Assignment” of the Mortgage, so my child filed a Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Cause of Action. The Plaintiff was given 20 days. Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint with an assignment. The Assignment was signed by a Vice President of Plaintiff, who is also a Vice President of the company assigning the mortgage to the Plaintiff!

    Recently, Plaintiff filed an allegedly “original” Note and Mortgage. Then Plaintiff filed a “voluntary dismissal” of Count 2 – Lost Note. My child is going to file a Motion to Strike the “voluntary dismissal” as a nullity, since a person can only voluntarily dismiss an “action,” not a part of an action. (See 340 So.2d 1232 (1976), DESERET RANCHES OF FLORIDA, INC. v. BOWMAN.)

    Our question is, if the court strikes the “voluntary dismissal” and allows Plaintiff to amend its complaint to eliminate count 2, can the Defendants ask the the new amended complaint be “verified” pursuant to the new rules in Florida?

    Thank you,
    Robert Chaney

    • Ron says:

      I work as an expert on mortgage fraud. I am a CPA. This is not legal advice. I work for attorneys who make the argument that any amendment must be verified. Also, I argued before the Third DCA that you cannot just drop one count you must drop all or file a motion to amend and won. I have successively argued on appeals in federal and state court and won. I used the Deseret case for my argument. See Watkins v. Molina 987 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). Do a search for Floyd Watkins. I write briefs on appeal for attorneys amongst my other activities.

Check out what others are saying...
  1. […] We also presented the revenue earning bonanza instituted by Florida’s 12th Circuit as they require a brand new refiling fee to open a new case because they are NOW DISMISSING FORECLOSURE COMPLAINTS SUE SPONTE THAT ARE NOT COMPLETELY VERIFIED! […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *