STATE OF NEVADA vs. LENDER PROCESSING SERVICES | Lender Processing Services, Inc. (LPS) Files Motion to Dismiss Nevada Attorney General Complaint

Lender Processing Services, Inc. (LPS) Files Motion to Dismiss Nevada Attorney General Complaint

JACKSONVILLE, Fla., Jan. 31, 2012 /PRNewswire/ — Lender Processing Services, Inc. (NYSE: LPS), a leading provider of integrated technology, data, and analytics to the mortgage and real estate industries, today responded to the civil complaint filed by the Nevada Attorney General against the company in December 2011.

In the company’s Motion to Dismiss, LPS makes clear that the Attorney General’s complaint contains significant legal defects which require the court to dismiss the complaint with prejudice. Perhaps most significantly, LPS points out that the Attorney General’s complaint fails to allege that any document executed by subsidiaries of LPS was incorrect, contained errors, or caused any borrower financial harm.

“LPS filed this Motion to Dismiss in response to the allegations made by the Nevada Attorney General,” said Hugh Harris, LPS president and chief executive officer. “Although we have to defend ourselves against allegations that we believe are untrue, we remain committed to working with the Attorney General’s office to resolve these matters.”

Copy of the motion below…

~

4closureFraud.org

~

Motion to Dismiss

Comments
3 Responses to “STATE OF NEVADA vs. LENDER PROCESSING SERVICES | Lender Processing Services, Inc. (LPS) Files Motion to Dismiss Nevada Attorney General Complaint”
  1. Kat Torrenga says:

    Thank God for this site! I really need help here in MI.

  2. neidermeyer says:

    They want specificity? ,, They want more than 3 examples? ,, They want examples of how people were harmed? They have the balls to request a dismissal with prejudice? Forgery is OK in Georgia with the permission of the person whose name is being signed… Well then show us where for every signature approval was given… even in cases where they were using the name of an ex-employee…

    Sounds like LPS wants war.. but lately calls have outpaced put purchases… what do the insiders know?

  3. indio007 says:

    surrogate signing is expressly permitted?

    Not by a notary.

    Not to mention surrogate signing in place of an executive corporate officer has to be predicated on a corporate resolution changing the by-laws . It must be expressly authorized by a vote of the board of directors. We know this didn’t happen.

    LPS is so full of shit and desperate . I love reading them squirm.

Leave a Reply