FL 1st DCA | Lindsey v. Wells Fargo Bank – BOMBSHELL CASE – Assignment of Mortgage Does Not Give Bank Standing, The Note Does Not Follow the Mortgage

Court

FL 1st DCA | Lindsey v. Wells Fargo Bank – BOMBSHELL CASE – Assignment of Mortgage Does Not Give Bank Standing, The Note Does Not Follow the Mortgage

By Matt Weidner

The first DCA today released a bombshell case which adopts the position that our firm has taken for years.

In Lindsey v. Wells Fargo Bank, 1D12-2406 (1st DCA 2013), the lower court granted summary judgment based on an Assignment that did not purport to transfer the Note. There was no indorsement on the note. The first DCA reversed the lower court and vacated the judgment because the Plaintiff failed to establish that it was the holder of the note and mortgage at the time the foreclosure complaint was filed.

We have all been trained to cite Johns v. Gillian and language that the mortgage follows the note in equity absent some intent otherwise.Lindsey tells us that if an assignment is made without the note, the note does not follow the mortgage. Thus an important question is raised: At what point can the note and mortgage become so separated as to prevent the holder of the note from foreclosing on a mortgage?

Copy of the opinion below…

~

4closureFraud.org

~

Lindsey v. Wells Fargo Bank

Comments
9 Responses to “FL 1st DCA | Lindsey v. Wells Fargo Bank – BOMBSHELL CASE – Assignment of Mortgage Does Not Give Bank Standing, The Note Does Not Follow the Mortgage”
  1. Rebecca says:

    So now what? No compensation no case no nothing. Even loss of my granddaughter and family. Lost out In the streets. So confused just a big mess with no money to figure out what’s next
    Enought mind games on iPhone my daughter in law said don’t worry mails safe only they dissapered now she texed never text her again.
    What kind of women keeps her husbands mother living in her car? A non illegal wanting her green card. Looks that way. Thanks America for tearing hearts out of Americans well Southern California there’s no help. There was but when you try to get your mail you never hear back. Why

  2. Rebecca says:

    So now what? No compensation no case no nothing. Even loss of my granddaughter and family. Lost out In the streets. So confused just a big mess with no money to figure out what’s next
    Enought mind games on iPhone my daughter in law said don’t worry mails safe only they dissapered now she texed never text her again.
    What kind of women keeps her husbands mother living in her car? A non illegal wanting her green card. Looks that way. Thanks America for tearing hearts out of Americans well Southern California there’s no help. There was but when you try to get your mail you never hear back. Why

  3. Patrick says:

    A plaintiff will have to establish with an evidentiary basis how and when it came to possess rights in a bearer instrument. The fabricated mortgage assignment from the last endorser to blank is now discounted because the note does not follow a mortgage assignment. Can the plaintiff produce competent evidence it gave consideration to a valid transferor to show it took the bearer note by a purposeful transfer before filing the complaint? Cancelled check or wire transfer receipt would do nicely.

  4. Fastlaw says:

    They’re going to have a hard time proving the acquisition date by endorsements, discovery will keep them busy the depositions will break the banks!

  5. Alabama John says:

    Don’t get bogged down in debating law. That is what they want to do. Keep it simple. It is against the law to file a false report with a Federally insured bank. They have done so and no one is arguing that. They should go to prison for doing so just as you and I would and its 30 years per offense. They have dome millions at 30 years per. Don’t be distracted.

    Sarbanne-Oxley law says if your employees do these crimes (they have openly admitted they have) you, the boss are guilty and held responsible and will do the time. Why is that not being enforced?
    Many other heads of companies unknown to the press and us are in prison today so why not these financial bosses?

  6. Mike says:

    WOW. This is interesting. My only question is how the heck is the bank going to prove the exact date the note was assigned? What happens to all the cases where the bank orginally admits that the note is lost or missing and then suddenly before summary judgment a purported orginal note is filed with blank endorsements. Does this mean that defense lawyers are now tasked with forcing the banks to prove the exaxt date the notes were assisgned?

    Banks can never put dates on these blank endorsements and if dates are put on the blank endorsements there are obviously going be fraudulent. This is interesting, because even if they dismiss and refile the foreclosure the banks will have issues, because the Mortgage FOLLOWS the NOTE. The Note does not FOLLOW the Mortgage.

    Any legal brains wish to share?

Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying...


Leave a Reply