State Attorney Dennis Ward To Take Closer Look at Robo-signing, The Marshall C. Watson Firm and Patricia Arango

State Attorney Dennis Ward To Take Closer Look at Robo-signing

by Matt Gardi

Excerpts from the report…

State Attorney Ward, who has a MERS clause on his own mortgage, wants to insure that even if the use of MERS is valid, that those individuals signing as MERS officers cross their T’s and dot their I’s. MERS has stringent requirements that those individuals whom sign as officers or secretaries of MERS receive training and take examinations, and have their authority properly documented.

The article then goes on to say…

One such example is illustrated in a deposition taken January 7, 2011 of Patricia Arango, an attorney at Marshall Watson, a law firm in Fort Lauderdale. In that deposition Arango states that neither she, nor her firm are members of MERS, and that she had never taken any training, testing or exams. But yet she has produced numerous assignments of mortgage signing as an assistant secretary on behalf of MERS as nominee for Countrywide and other lenders.

State Attorney Ward has one such case under review that has been filed in his circuit, and has asked his Chief Investigator and Assistant State Attorney Mark Wilson to look into it. Wilson was responsible for successfully prosecuting former Monroe County Schools Superintendent Randy Acevedo and his wife Monique on felony charges associated with misappropriating school district resources.

The case in question is case No. 2009CA1069P in the 16th Judicial Circuit. In it, Arango signs an assignment of mortgage as Assistant Secretary of MERS as nominee for Homebridge Mortgage giving the mortgage to Bank of NY Melon. Days later, in a Lis Pendens signed before Arango’s assignment is even filed, attorneys Karen Thompson and Ingrid Fadil, from Arango’s own Law Firm of Marshall Watson, file for foreclosure on behalf of Plaintiff, Bank of New York Melon.

Then, State Attorney Ward asks for your help…

Ward, who has maintained a fraud hotline (305-892-5790) since he has taken office in January of 2009, also maintains an online form on his web site at that gives the public the opportunity to inform his office of fraud. He suggests that anyone who is aware of potentially questionable documents that have been filed in the 16th Judicial Circuit use these services to report it. He especially would ask that foreclosure defense attorneys who have a good working knowledge of the issue let his office know if they find any such infractions that may rise to level of criminal intent.

You can check out Matt’s article in full here…

I’ll even give State Attorney Ward a head start on a “infraction that may rise to level of criminal intent.”

Check out the Patricia Arango assignment of mortgage below. Be sure to note that it is witnessed and notarized.



Arango Assignment of Mortgage

11 Responses to “State Attorney Dennis Ward To Take Closer Look at Robo-signing, The Marshall C. Watson Firm and Patricia Arango”
  1. Attorney Wendy Alison Nora says:

    Thank you Florida lawyers, homeowners and members of the press for continuing to shine light on the MERS frauds. In Wisconsin, there is a law firm which is robo-signing for MERS and filing the assignments of mortgage robo-signed in-house with the Register of Deeds and in the foreclosure action in court. Some of us have been trying to find the basis for invalidating the law firm’s own in-house robo-signing. The Marshall Watson case with Attorney Patricia Arango, as robo-signer for MERS, combined with the testimony of the President of MERS before Congress made available on will help us go after the robo-signed documents. We know Florida is suffering from the fraudclosure crisis very intensely and your good work in resisting and exposing fraud is helping others throughout the nation. It is actually worse in Wisconsin (another judicial foreclosure state) than it currently is in Wisconsin.
    At least the rules of practice in the Florida courts now require verified pleadings from the foreclosure enterprise’s counsel. (Thank you State of Delaware v. MERSCORP for coming up with a uniform phrase for the foreclosure system–foreclosure enterprise. In RICO pleadings, I call this the racketeering enterprise.) In Wisconsin, the foreclosure enterprise counsel are not required to verify the truthfulness of the allegations in the foreclosure complaint. Then, when we tried to get answers about the signing authority, we were met with a claim of attorney-client privilege by the robo-signing law firm which is also counsel for the foreclosure enterprise.
    Keep up the great work, citizens of Florida!

  2. John says:


    FACT A: Suzanne Leary, a non-attorney employee of Marshall C. Watson, signed my Assignment of Mortgage. She signed as Assistant Secretary for MERS w/o a MERS STAMP/SEAL present.

    QUESTION 1: Is there a problematic legal implication created when an employee for the firm who suing, assign these mortgages?

    QUESTION 2: Furthermore, is not there a requirement to attach (to the Complaint) the document granting specific authority for her to sign on behalf of MERS?

    FACT B: My Assignment of Mortgage was filed with the Lee County Clerk’s office 6 months after the document’s “claimed creation date” and 5 months after the Lis Pendens filing date.

    QUESTION 3: Under Florida law, does the Assignment have to be Filed and recorded in the Lee County Clerk’s office prior to the filing and recording of the Lis Pendens even though the assignment was attached to the complaint?

    QUESTION 4: If Plaintiff claims, the “Late Assignment” was because that the document would have been admissible regardless, because it was a business record, wouldn’t the focus then target the fact that Suzanne Leary has had no intimate, personal knowledge of the mortgage and note as required regarding the business records she effectively claims knowledge of in the assignment?

    QUESTION 5: Why are so many assignments filed after the Lis Pendens, especially when the assignments were physically attached to the Lis Pendens in the first place?

    QUESTION 6: What obvious benefit does the Plaintiff receive in filing these assignments so late other than avoiding the $10 or $18.50 fee 5 months later?

    QUESTION 7: My motion to dismiss was denied because it was filed after the answer. This was a major procedural sanction against the defendant for filing late paperwork. Why is the court so faithfully waiving the late filing of the assignments of mortgage in the majority of the foreclosure cases to benefit the Plaintiff?

    • Bobbi Swann says:

      @ John – I don’t get why your Motion to Dismiss was denied – you HAVE to file an answer to the lis pendens first…did you not file your answer within the 20-day time frame? As to attaching (unrecorded) assignments to the Lis Pendens it does not hold water. Unrecorded assignments are not worth the paper they are printed on. Besides, if the Lis Pendens was filed BEFORE the assignment was recorded they (Plaintiff in your suit) did not have ownership of the note/mortgage at the time they filed the Lis Pendens. MERS has, in other states, been regarded as a non-lender so therefore cannot hold title or ownership of negotiable instruments. See the prior posting on this site (Welcome to the MERS knowlege base) .

    • lvent says:

      What about the selling of a non-performing loan after the Lis Pends and the Foreclosure complaint is filed…..? What about out of state assignments notarized out of state and attached to an old assignment by the Original Plaintiff who brought the fraudclosure?…..The new pretender lender filed 4 assignments after the lis pends and in the 4th assignment reconveyed the loan back to the plaintiff yet is still claiming to have bought and paid for the non-performing loan and is the note holder….They forged my name on the note……my signature is not on the mortgage…I never signed either….they cross-collateralized my commercial property with my homestead property without my forged signature..That cross-collat is still active in MERS and shows up on the title to my house…the cross collat is not included in the fraudclosure complaint…Cross-collateralizing commercial property with homestead property is illegal……I can’t find a lawyer…I am going to file a motion to dismiss on the foreclosure fraud…the lis pends is not even included in the foreclosure complaint paperwork….These judges are horrible…they are turning a blind eye to all of the fraud….!

    • lvent says:

      John, they have no more than 90 days after closing to deliver the endorsed note and the loan file to the trust……and record an assignment..There is no legal fix for this…if no assignment was recorded at your recorders office, within 90 days of the closing, they committed fraud in your name and sold investments in a non-secure loan.. SECURITES FRAUD!!!The big lie is these loans are all securitized..THAT IS BULLSHIT….they never lent us any money….ALL OF THE FRAUD THEY COMMITTED WAS BACKED BY THE U.S. TAXPAYER….THE GOT LOANED THE MONEY….WITH OUR SIGNATURES AS COLLATERAL….They did this all just the opposite of what we thought..They got paid by the U.S. TREASURY, for all of our homes and businesses at Origination, they never lent us any money….and they also got an unlimited line of credit off of the backs of the U.S. TAXPAYER.COLLATERALIZED DEBT OBLIGATIONS….THAT IS ALL OF US….They committed 140 trillion in collateral fraud…their debt….Their mortgage contracts were a fraud from day one….and are all a nullity…THEY NEVER LENT US ANY MONEY…..

  3. Jim Bethea says:

    I did quite a bit of research about MERS in 2005 for some clients of mine ~~ I don’t know if they still have it, but there used to be a blog and a Q & A section ~ Several question that seemed to be repeated over various months where as follows: “How can our office make an official signing of these documents that need a MERS authorized officer to sign” ==== “No problem, you can just sign as a vice-president or any other office title that you so choose to do so because you are now a member of MERS”

    Around or during these same years of my interest in MERS activities, which seemed the more I dug the more fraudulent they appeared to be??? In many states the Recorder of the Deeds Offices were refusing to file any documents of MERS ~~ Two counties in my home state of SC adamently refused until the state forced them to file them against their protest???

    I further discovered that the corporate owners of MERS were allocated via 29 shares of stock, based upon closed holdings. Their corporate by-laws clearly stated that at anytime any share holder wanted to sell their one share that it had to be offered back to the corporation and NEVER could be sold to any outside party of this corporation?

    MERS’s ownership includes ONLY the big banks and title companies which are most likely owned by some of the other mortgage enterprises?

    Where once they were boldly filing the Complaints for Foreclosures in their name as a primary injured party, they now have made formal statements that they are nothing more than a “nominee” [which no courts has provided a proper description for] and will on longer be filing anymore Complaints in their name? So I guess this is suppose to let them off-of-the-hook for their hundreds of thousands of past illegal aiding & abetting foreclosure actions???

    If anyone out there that has any pending courtroom activities w/ MERS included, I believe you should file for a full Discovery to force their hidden corporate owner’s identites to be a recorded matter of the court ~

  4. housemanrob says:

    Not retarded……crooked!

  5. debi p says:

    I guess the only real way to bring this to the light is through everyone and anyone
    Besides Bondi and Scott. These two culprits need the electric chair. Perhaps going around
    Them and making waves will make them look retarded. Hoping any way. So sick of all the
    Lies and deceit in this foreclosure fraud world. Hang in there everyone there
    “May be” an honest one out there yet! Bless all of u still worthy and for the rest may the devil
    Get his full dues without a general ledger! Debi. 561-389-9339

    • Bobbi Swann says:

      As I said on another post, won’t this (fraud) document be just set aside since it was done PRIOR to the settlement with Watson in March, 2011? Did not the settlement with the Florida AG’s office give them immunity for documents such as these prior to the settlement in 2011?

      This is just the beginning of what we will see coming down the road and for which the AG’s office just brushed it away with a $2 mil settlement and where did that money go by the way? Surely not to the homeowner’s who suffered at the hands of Watson…..

Check out what others are saying...
  1. […] was at least one additional investigation into Marshall Watson’s practices.  Former Monroe County state attorney Dennis Ward opened an […]

  2. […] was at least one additional investigation into Marshall Watson’s practices.  Former Monroe County state attorney Dennis Ward opened an […]

Leave a Reply