4th DCA Summary Judgement Reversed – Servedio v USBank

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
July Term 2010
GUISEPPE SERVEDIO
a/k/a Joseph Servedio,
Appellant,
v.
US BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Indenture Trustee, on behalf of
the holders of Terwin Mortgage Trust 2007-AHL1, Asset-Backed
Securities Series 2007-AHL1,
Appellee.
No. 4D10-1898
[October 27, 2010]

The  issue presented in this appeal  is whether the trial court erred  in  granting a final  summary  judgment of  foreclosure where appellee  failed  to file with the court a copy of the original note and mortgage prior to the  entry of  judgment.   Because  the absence  of  the  original note  created a  genuine  issue of material  fact  regarding appellee’s standing  to  foreclose  on the mortgage, summary judgment was not proper. We reverse.

Even  if  the  trial  court  considered  the  note  and mortgage  at  the hearing,  the documents were not authenticated,  filed, and served more than twenty days before  the hearing as  required by Rules 1.510(c) and 1.510(e).   Appellee’s  failure  to  abide  by  these  rules  also  necessitates reversing  the order granting summary  judgment.   Verizzo, 28 So. 3d at 977-78; Mack v. Commercial  Indus. Park,  Inc., 541 So. 2d 800  (Fla. 4th DCA 1989).

~

4closureFraud.org


I sure could use some…

~

Servedio v USBank

Comments
9 Responses to “4th DCA Summary Judgement Reversed – Servedio v USBank”
  1. Elyse says:

    I have finally contacted the FBI and they are investigating the foreclosure mills around the country!! It’s a friggin crime what the banks have been doing…it’s certainly not a paper issue!! The FBI knows it and I suggest anyone who has real proof and how it effected you, call your local FBI and bring them your evidence…

    Now I have more hope because some of the Judges aren’t “getting it” or their retirements are based with a certain bank…

    The politicians are being controled by the banksters so the FBI is my Big New Hope!!

    Just wanted to share,
    Elyse
    elyse@gte.net

  2. PJDJ01 says:

    like New York, force banks to pay legal fees when they loose.

  3. PJDJ01 says:

    Good to see an appellate court stepping up. Take notice bankers. Time to cancel outright all those pending sales and reconsider how you want to restart your foreclosure actions when you do not have legal standing.

    Florida needs to address the rocket dockets, and like New York, force banks to pay legal fees when they loose.

  4. PJDJ01 says:

    Good to see an appellate court stepping up. Take notice bankers. Time to cancel outright all those pending sales and reconsider how you want to restart your foreclosure actions when you do not have legal standing.

    Florida needs to address the rocket dockets, and like New Year, force banks to pay legal fees when they loose.

    • Michael says:

      They do force banks to pay legal fees when they lose, the banks just don’t lose very often. It’s tough to lose in rocket docket. Remember, you’re dealing with a “court” where judges have shown up with orders pre-signed; that is, they’ve pre-judged the cases. Or where judges announce to the courtroom that the court won’t listen to or accept any defense: that they’ll ignore the law.

      Lucky for defendants (and bad for the counties) Congress addressed this type of issue right after the Civil War, when they were trying to get the southern courts to behave like real courts. The rule, Fed. Sec. 1983, says that any government agency that systematically deprives a person of a civil right — like due process — is on the hook for damages.

      There’s a good chance that Judges Blanc, Sasser, Colton, and the rest who didn’t stop them — in their arrogance and contempt for the law — may have wiped out not only their own pension funds but also threatened what’s left of our County’s school budgets. They forgot they were judges and decided they were dictators; Americans aren’t into dictators.

  5. Equity Free says:

    With all that is now known, the no defense foreclosures were slam-dunk victories for the banks, and their cronies . I only heard about Judge Shacht in NY keeping banks honest, I never heard of any judge in Florida until early last summer when Lisa and Micheal’s work started becoming public . Since then, I think it was Judge Rondolino who slammed a DJ Stern lawyer and said I don’t think any of these papers being submitted are truthful . If the numbers I have been hearing are correct, 85- 95 % of millions of foreclosures are unsubstantiated.
    Equitable solution going forward could be rather simple with present laws ?? First charge and prosecute every lawyer that broke existing laws . We know who they are . We will get to the plaintiffs .This is for no-contest cases . Moratorium only to review docs already submitted, if fraudulent, slam dunk for county . Remember their ” unprecidented” arrangement with banks . We use that not to buy house, county gets it free . Bank cannot prove it they lose it . Charge and prosecute lawyer who filed the docs . No refiling of complaint . They have been doing this for years w/o any remorse or respect for the law . Resume cases all no-defense cases done by law, papers bogus, no resubmitting, slam dunk county . Let the free market work and true value will be restored . Defended cases same laws, they prove it legally , you owe it at the FAIR VALUE, not their (banks) inflated bubble price .They cannot prove it they lose it . Slam dunk home owner . Predatory loan victims, those that cannot afford the home their in even at fair value . Charge and prosecute lenders, lawyers .Not the borrowers fault, they get choice of a county home that they can afford from county pool . Just some thoughts on a solution going forward . Every one welcome to add on , refine, define and shape a equitable solution to this nitemare . .

  6. PETER SYNDER!

    EXCELLENT! Knowing Shapiro Fishman’s fondness for “Motions for Rehearing”………….well………… they are the mill that did this fine admission to the Florida Supreme Court basically admitting that they don’t know who owns any of these notes and/or if there is any debt obligation whatsoever….

    http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/summaries/briefs/09/09-1460/Filed_02-26-2010_Shapiro_Motion_Rehearing.pdf

  7. Elaine S says:

    I thought Attorney Weidner had supplied on his website proof that US Bank NA was not registered in the State of Florida to do business? Wouldn’t this also undermine legal standing for allowing a summary judgement? Why wouldn’t this also be material to this appeal?

  8. Michael says:

    A KO punch for Peter!!

    Also a strong argument on the thoughts of the 4th towards the rocket docket, especially in light of recent events; whatever was left of it just blew up. It’s almost like the appellate court just remembered these are summary judgment hearings and the same summary judgment, that people learn in their first few weeks of law school, applies.

    Apparently they 4th saw some problems that other judges somehow didn’t see.

Leave a Reply