Below is an order from a Florida Judge in regards to a Jeffrey Stephan Affidavit that was submitted in a foreclosure case by the Florida Default Law Group…
For those who do not know who Mr Stephan is, I suggest Googling his name…
He is that guy that Robo-signed approx 10,000 affidavits a month with personal knowledge under penalty of perjury.
Unfortunately, neither he, nor the dozens of other Robo-signers ever read what they were signing causing hundreds of thousands of foreclosures to be pushed through illegally. The industry calls these crimes “document irregularities” or “technical issues” but we see it differently. According to the “law”, if there is such a thing anymore, these “irregularities” are “FELONIES.”
But that only applies in a land where the law is enforced…
Anyway, the order below speaks for itself.
Look forward to seeing thousands more just like it.
~
4closureFraud.org
~
Motion for Relief GRANTED, Attorney’s Fees Awarded on Affidavit Made in Bad Faith
As a non-lawyer, I see this as not exactly a slap in the face. Far from it. Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel got off for less than the price of the hearing transcript.
Moreover the Plaintiff only needs to pay the $500 fine IF Plaintiff wants to reopen or refile the case.
There is no award against the law firm, who probably drafted every word in the bad affidavit and sent it to the affient for execution, then used the bad affidavit in the case without first verifying it’s integrity.
If Plaintiff does not re-open or re-file the case there is no fine. This is wrong. Having found wrong the court should enforce a penalty now, at this time, on the current Plaintiff, within the current action. Not on some possible future action at a future date.
What happens if Plaintiff sells note to the next bank or trust? Does the next party have to pay the fine of prior Plaintiff before attempting to foreclose? Can a fine or sanction in one action, which will be come final if not appealed, be collected against a second plaintiff and a diffrent law firm before they file a future action?
On a more esoteric note, if the NEW Plaintiff is not before the court until they file the new action, how does court have jurisdiction to enforce a fine they must pay prior to filing the new action?
Furthermore the award of fees and costs under 1.510(g) is correct BUT there should have been an award for all fees and costs to defend the action. This is becuase the court set aside the judgement AND dismissed Plaintiff’s complaint therefore the Defendant is prevailing party in that action.
Where fees and costs can be awarded to one party in a contract (note/mortgage) they are RECIPROCAL, so the other party gets them if they prevail.
Defendant should have gone for ALL fees and costs as the prevailing party in a contract dispute where the contract includes fees and costs. And / Alternatively / since fees and costs are avalible by statue in Foreclosure so are the reciprocal fees and costs for defense. Seems no reason to leave that on the table.
Under the principle of equitable estoppel the Plaintiff cannot now arguing that attorney’s fees and costs are not collectible in this action after having plead for fees and costs in the orignal complaint. (you know they did).
Defendant should bring a motion for all fees and costs within the 30 day limit, based on the new order which is effectively an amended final judgment on Plaintiffs pleadings, for it disposes of plaintiffs case and dismisses the action.
Jeffrey Stephan robo-signed an affidavit in our case in support of the Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment, Besides stating that he had access to our mortgage records, and personal knowledge of all the facts in the case, blah, blah, blah, the affidavit also listed off everything that’s was supposedly due to the Plaintiff. In addition to the principal owed, the insurance and taxes owed, and fees for inspecting the “bank’s property”, it also included the total interest owed at a rate of $28.05 per day, which at the time was from November 1st, 2008 until December 20, 2008 (50 days) and should have been $1,402.50. However, Jeffrey’s calculator must have been malfunctioning or not functioning at all because the figure he came up with, and robo signed, was $11,651.65 ! Imagine that. There’s a bit of a difference between $11,651.65 and $1,402.50. $10,249.15 to be exact, but hey that’s no big deal right ? At that rate, which is $233.00 per day, from November 1, 2008 until today’s date, which is 866 days, the total interest due would be: $201,788.00. That’s almost as much as the $210,000 principal due on our house which is now valued at $168,000 and was once valued at $385,000.
Fortunately, my husband, actiing as a pro se litigant, has staved off the foreclosure with his MERS defense and there hasn’t been any activity on the case since December of 2009. Apparently GMAC doesn’t want to deal with us. We recently learned that the Brevard County Florida 18th Judicial Circuit Court is adding our case to hundreds of others and dismissing them (with prejudice I’m sure) for lack of prosecution. David J. Stern was the Plaintiff attorney and I’m willing to bet he shredded every file in our case right before Fannie Mae came to his office and demanded all the files. I’d be surprised if there was another attorney anywhere in the State of Florida that would want to take up our case.
Who knows, this might turn out well after all.
Than you David J. Stern.
Thank you Cheryl Sammons
Thank you Jeffrey Stephan.
If you’re not going to be prosecuted for your crimes, we might as well profit from it.
Joyce – the dismissals for lack of prosecution are normally WITHOUT prejudice. So Plaintiff, or a later successor in intrest, can re-file the case at a later date.
BUT …. Because you have D Stern law firm, there may be a window of opportunity open to you at this time. Contact me on the foreclosurehamlet.com – User name of JamesM
I will explain to you what others are doing at this time to get simple dismissals with prejudice which prevent the case coming back. I am not a lawyer and it is not legal advice, just a heads up on what others pro se litigants are doing at this time.
Login to the hamelt. After creating a profile, do a members search for me and then send a friends request. After I accept we will be able to message directly through the hamlet.
MMM I will do that also…similar case…same robo signer, same law firm, case dismissed without prejudice as plaintiff did not substitute attorney…attempted foreclosure started in laTE 2008…would like to end this…thanks….
at last a winning case a judge that gets it,\. i ma suprised it didnt go back to the bank becuase we are dead beats and cant afford our mortgages that they approve with fraudulent appraisals knowing most of us would default.