Comments on: Rigby v. Wells Fargo Bank Reversed | “A party must have standing to file suit at its inception and may not remedy this defect by subsequently obtaining standing.” https://4closurefraud.org/2012/04/09/rigby-v-wells-fargo-bank-reversed-a-party-must-have-standing-to-file-suit-at-its-inception-and-may-not-remedy-this-defect-by-subsequently-obtaining-standing/ - Fighting Foreclosure Fraud BY SHARING THE KNOWLEDGE Mon, 09 Apr 2012 20:19:35 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0.4 By: neidermeyer https://4closurefraud.org/2012/04/09/rigby-v-wells-fargo-bank-reversed-a-party-must-have-standing-to-file-suit-at-its-inception-and-may-not-remedy-this-defect-by-subsequently-obtaining-standing/#comment-368351 Mon, 09 Apr 2012 20:19:35 +0000 https://4closurefraud.org/?p=45444#comment-368351 In reply to readdocs.

I’m only finding the same document on findlaw and http://law.justia.com/cases/florida/fourth-district-court-of-appeal/2012/4d10-3587.html … as Option One no longer exists (new name Sand Canyon Corp) and Sand Canyon’s CEO is on record stating they own NOTHING .. I don’t see how any assignment can ever occur to save this case for WF if it’s in front of a judge that is awake.

]]> By: neidermeyer https://4closurefraud.org/2012/04/09/rigby-v-wells-fargo-bank-reversed-a-party-must-have-standing-to-file-suit-at-its-inception-and-may-not-remedy-this-defect-by-subsequently-obtaining-standing/#comment-368347 Mon, 09 Apr 2012 20:12:23 +0000 https://4closurefraud.org/?p=45444#comment-368347 EXCELLENT , I have the same trust and AHMSI masquerading as WF (wink wink .. like we don’t know who the real plaintiff is) and the same issue ,, no assignment giving WF any semblance of standing (among other issues that the judge has warned plaintiff about)…

I WANT TO START SEEING DISMISSALS WITH PREJUDICE!

]]> By: readdocs https://4closurefraud.org/2012/04/09/rigby-v-wells-fargo-bank-reversed-a-party-must-have-standing-to-file-suit-at-its-inception-and-may-not-remedy-this-defect-by-subsequently-obtaining-standing/#comment-368342 Mon, 09 Apr 2012 19:54:05 +0000 https://4closurefraud.org/?p=45444#comment-368342 Was this turned over with prejudice?

]]> By: StuckinSoPa https://4closurefraud.org/2012/04/09/rigby-v-wells-fargo-bank-reversed-a-party-must-have-standing-to-file-suit-at-its-inception-and-may-not-remedy-this-defect-by-subsequently-obtaining-standing/#comment-368314 Mon, 09 Apr 2012 17:50:24 +0000 https://4closurefraud.org/?p=45444#comment-368314 Another robo-ruling gets struck down by a higher (as in NOT BOUGHT AND PAID FOR) court. i can only imagine how many slip thru the fraudclosure legal(?) cracks.

]]>