Florida Supreme Court to Address Foreclosure Fraud


COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary SEE LIVINGLIES LITIGATION SUPPORT AT LUMINAQ.COM

Florida Supreme Court to Address Foreclosure Fraud | ROMAN PINO vs THE BANK OF NEW YORK

Posted by Foreclosure Fraud on April 11, 2011 · 11 Comments

This is extremely big news all!

First some background…

Case involving alleged foreclosure fraud headed to Florida Supreme Court

A South Florida homeowner who is fighting a mortgage foreclosure could end up reshaping state law.

An appeals court on Wednesday asked the Florida Supreme Court to consider Roman Pino’s case as a matter of “great public importance,” a move legal experts say could result in reforms in foreclosure cases where there is evidence of fraud in the way documents were handled by lenders, mortgage servicers and law firms.

The decision by the 4th District Court of Appeal in West Palm Beach to send the case to the state Supreme Court was unusual, because neither the homeowner nor the bank seeking to foreclose on Pino’s home had asked for such a review.

“We conclude that this is a question of great public importance, as many, many mortgage foreclosures appear tainted with suspect documents,” the appeals court wrote.

If the case is taken up by the Supreme Court and results in a decision in favor of the homeowner, legal experts who specialize in foreclosure law say the case has the potential to affect thousands of foreclosures across the state where there are allegations of document fraud.

“There is this huge problem that is evident across the state. The District Court of Appeal is handing this up to the Supreme Court because of the importance of this bigger problem,” said South Florida attorney Margery Golant, who works with The Florida Bar to educate attorneys about proper document handling in foreclosure cases.

You can check out the rest of the report here…


Although the 12-member appeals court, in a 9-1 ruling (with one recusal and one retirement subsequent to the hearing and prior to the issuance of the ruling) affirmed a lower court ruling in favor of the foreclosure mill, it obviously felt that it should be the state Supreme Court that should take a look at this issue and make the ultimate decision as to how to proceed when dealing with the dubious practices engaged in by foreclosure mills. In this regard, the court observed:

We conclude that this is a question of great public importance, as many, many mortgage foreclosures appear tainted with suspect documents. The defendant has requested a denial of the equitable right to foreclose the mortgage at all. If this is an available remedy as a sanction after a voluntary dismissal, it may dramatically affect the mortgage foreclosure crisis in this State.

In support of the homeowner’s position in this case, the following excerpt gives a taste of the vigorous, six-page dissent originally authored by the since-retired Judge Farmer (concurred with and formally filed by Judge Mark E. Polen) (bold text is my emphasis):

This issue is one of unusual prominence and importance. Recently, the Supreme Court promulgated changes to a rule of procedure made necessary by the current wave of mortgage foreclosure litigation. See In re Amendments to Rules of Civil Procedure, 44 So. 3d 555 (Fla. 2010). In approving one amendment, the court pointedly explained:

“[R]ule 1.110(b) is amended to require verification of mortgage foreclosure complaints involving residential real property. The primary purposes of this amendment are (1) to provide incentive for the plaintiff to appropriately investigate and verify its ownership of the note or right to enforce the note and ensure that the allegations in the complaint are accurate; (2) to conserve judicial resources that are currently being wasted on inappropriately pleaded ‘lost note’ counts and inconsistent allegations; (3) to prevent the wasting of judicial resources and harm to defendants resulting from suits brought by plaintiffs not entitled to enforce the note; and (4) to give trial courts greater authority to sanction plaintiffs who make false allegations.” [e.s.]

44 So. 3d at 556. I think this rule change adds significant authority for the court system to take appropriate action when there has been, as here, a colorable showing of false or fraudulent evidence. We read this rule change as an important refutation of BNY Mellon’s lack of jurisdiction argument to avoid dealing with the issue founded on inapt procedural arcana.

Decision-making in our courts depends on genuine, reliable evidence. The system cannot tolerate even an attempted use of fraudulent documents and false evidence in our courts. The judicial branch long ago recognized its responsibility to deal with, and punish, the attempted use of false and fraudulent evidence. When such an attempt has been colorably raised by a party, courts must be most vigilant to address the issue and pursue it to a resolution.

Oral arguments can be viewed here…

30 Responses

  1. […] View the original article here Tags:Address, COURT, FLORIDA, Foreclosure, fraud, Supreme. This entry was posted on Saturday, April 30th, 2011 at 5:00 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment, or trackback from your own site. You can . « YOUR LOSS EQUALS BANK PROFIT EQUALS EXECUTIVE BONUSES Leave a comment Name (required) […]

  2. tnharry,

    The woman just finished saying that she was stripped of her right to due process (and possibly her home) and you question her about the relevancy of her comment??? WTH??? You have the heart of a mortgage banker for sure.


    I’m not yelling, the caps are for emphasis.

  3. This is a like a horror movie that keeps get worse. In an effort to stay on top of information we are constantly looking for good information. Thank you for your blog. I write for the http://www.SarasotaShortSaleBlog.com and appreciate your contribution.

  4. Big round of applause for Michael O.


  5. Im not a her …but ……I just sit hear seeing people cry out and the answers are their in front of you . Its heart breaking …..I know the guys on the street and have writtin the criminal PPM and was a CFO and know what the accounting scheme is all about…It’s your home so …..

    .Hey , do you know Pico ….Frank or Sparkey ? Good Luck

  6. Vilify me if you need to, that’s fine. I wasn’t trying to pick on Mary. I’m trying to point out to the community and Neil that his site is in dire need of a forum to accommodate these discussions instead of forcing the use of the comments section. There’s no continuity and no separation of issues. No one calls M. Soliman on her bizarre stream of consciousness rants…

    One other quick thing – there are cases being cited and quoted from all over the country here. Just in case someone doesn’t already know this, a California case carries very little weight outside of California, as does any state in relation to another. I know this is an opportunity to share information with each other, but not all of it will be helpful to you depending on where you are located in relation to the commenter.

  7. We continue to focus our emphasis is on IASB and FASB rules for accounting with reference to Trust crimes against humanity. This stuff is like a Chinese puzzle that you can only work in the dark . . . after the pieces are thrown into the air. But in the 2,200 pages of Cantonese are gems, gold, stuff the judge has not heard and compelling arguments that raise merit for the question of improper and unethical means and methods for deceptively dismantling trust assets.

    If you know me, then you understand my reliance on accounting. Everything we do in life is uncertain with the exception of Death and Case law….right?


    Literally everything that one does in their working life is reported and all business and consumer activities are subject to IRS as taxable earnings. Consider how IRS reporting for Trust earnings and expenses especially are especially sensitive for the sole reason they are not taxed at the corporate or “business level. That is the pass through feature that draws investor exuberance. And the taxable bottom line falls on GAAP. Breach it and you join Madoff and a lean cuisine diet.

    If you were engaged to assist the Fed back in 2002 for purposes of filing a claim against Enron, World Com, Tyco and the cable TV family – what would be your weapon of preference? Blacks Law or Wiley’s GAAP for accounting professionals? Maybe Wikileaks – but anyway. The times are not a changing and it’s the same thing and same issues at work with a reversal of players –

    wow. . .wait a minute! Who is it really foreclosing on you ?


  8. Mary ,,

    No need to apologize ,, I have a real problem with the format of Neils site ,, information washes away and is hard to find after the fact .. I often put things “out of place” myself out of necessity … The important thing is that you had a reporter and (hopefully) will not give up and will appeal…

    Here’s some information that everyone should see and download from SCRIBD ,, The keynote to the National Association of Attorney Generals April 2011


  9. Hey tnharry, I’m posting this even though it’s off topic just because I can. Stop me.

    “Unusual Mortality Event” on Wall Street – Young Bankers Dying as a Result of Catastrophic Cash Spill

    Hundreds of young bankers have washed up on the shores of New York’s East River piers prompting an immediate investigation by the NOAA with some limited assistance from the SEC. The Federal government is controlling information at the moment, but it is widely suspected that the bankers have died off due to the toxic tsunami of unearned cash that crashed into Wall Street last year. The economic earthquake registered 9.3 on the RICO scale and sent a tidal wave of billions of dollars from middle-class America through the nation’s emergency financial floodways, which all empty into the Wall Street Emergency Liquidity Cistern. The floodways and cistern were overwhelmed, however, as their maintenance had been neglected for years and were not built for the enormous amount of money that washed through. Emergency workers have been working day and night to repair the floodway system to ensure that the catastrophic cash flood does not flow back and inundate middle-class America.

    The NOAA and SEC believe its too early to tell if the bankers drowned in the excess unearned cash. Like the mysterious mass die offs of baby bottlenose dolphins in the Gulf of Mexico, the banker deaths have been classified as an Unusual Mortality Event, and will be researched thoroughly. British Petroleum issued a press release claiming no responsibility for either the dolphins or the bankers.


  10. Thanks everyone for your support and I do apologize for commenting, not trying to take away from the post. Sorry Neil.

    I had a court reporter with me and did object and raised quite a bit of issues within my time frame, but it did not seem to matter to this judge. Shameful really. Bias for the honorable is not a good thing, no matter what.

  11. In Salazar V US Bank The court held that the failure by US Bank to duly record and acknowledge a deed of trust before conducting the private non-judicial foreclosure sale resulted in a VOID SALE – no tender required.

    Good case to know about for real estate professionals looking to protect their clients facing foreclosure or bankruptcy.
    April 11 2011
    Sorry this is off topic but the court even address’s Gomes!

  12. New CA Bankruptcy Order- Salazar v US Bank–Statutory Foreclosure Scheme Trumps MERS’ Proposed Alternative System

  13. Mary’s situation is typical when one is before a court determined to foreclose — no matter what. It is not enough for some to be saved from a system in disarray — everyone should have that opportunity.

    As far as Florida — let’s hope this does not go by the wayside — as it did in NJ. Perhaps, Florida is taking direction from NJ. Despite a strong showing in NJ for Order to Show Cause — rights were mediated away. Homeowners are in no better position than before the settlement – which largely emphasized that foreclosures must go through.

    Hope Florida is different.

  14. Even the L.A. Police force know:
    City Councilman Dennis Zine, a former LAPD motorcycle sergeant, said he was disappointed with the verdict, saying the department should have resolved the matter long before it entered the court system.

    “You can’t violate the law to enforce the law,” Zine said.

  15. Mary posted here because she needed to talk to somebody about her sit and the articles/stories posted by Neil drop away.

    I’m ok with Mary’s post but I do understand your point tnharry.

  16. Good to hear John. I’m headed there myself.

  17. EULE – that’s a complaint with allegations, not findings of fact. Come back when there are some Orders from that Court that can be relied upon by others.

    KICKBOXER – Mary certainly has the right to comment here, and she can also write her statements on the wall of the restroom of her local Applebee’s. Neither of those would make her comments relevant to discussion of the article to which she initially commented. That was my only point.

  18. ROBO NEWS from Maryland :

  19. Quote:

    “tnharry, on April 12, 2011 at 10:48 am said:

    To Mary – sorry to hear you’ve had a rough day, but why in the world would you post it as a comment to the above story? Unless it’s in some way related to the Florida Supreme Court, it’s quite random.”

    Mary posted here because she CAN, and because she is a free person.

    We share news with each other relating to our own foreclosure cases. If Neil didn’t question her reason for commenting, nobody should.

  20. Mary,

    Did you object to EVERYTHING so you can pursue your case further on appeal? Please do not give up hope and continue the fight.

  21. TNL: Be sure to take anything the mortgage industry shills at Housingwire write with a large grain of salt – Yves Smith (Naked Capitalism) regularly and spectacularly shreds their articles/opinions. : )

  22. Mary check the judges investments I think it’s something like judicial watch of there is a conflict of interest ( say blackrock investments / Goldman sacs) you must quickly say so and get it on record. Ask your attorney I’m obviously not
    but you can find out easily about your judges investments for starters. Bad day sure.., tomorrow is another day and so get your big girl
    panties on and fight

  23. Foreclosure note enough for trustee standing — http://www.housingwire.com/2011/04/11/foreclosure-note-enough-for-trustee-standing-florida-appellate-court — that’s some scary ruling here in Florida – no chain of title arguments, etc.

  24. Mary, Thanks for the information, I just got back from appeals court and it went a lot better then the lower court. They seemed to care more.

  25. I’ll wear the moniker “troll” with pride if it means the comments bear some semblance of relating to the subject matter of the article. Inevitably it turns into a random “I was screwed by law firm ABC or judge XYZ today” followed by 8 comments of “me too” when the article goes without relevant commentary.

  26. Mary, I’m sorry to hear that. I have a similar situation – BK originator who transferred assets without trustee’s permission. What court did this happen in? Was it BK court, Fed or state court? And what state, if I may ask. Will you appeal? And please ignore the troll telling you not to comment here & he never does have anything productive to say – some people enjoy kicking a person when they are down & probably pulling the wings off flies too and burning ants in the sun under a magnifying glass.

  27. To Mary – sorry to hear you’ve had a rough day, but why in the world would you post it as a comment to the above story? Unless it’s in some way related to the Florida Supreme Court, it’s quite random.

  28. I was stripped on my rights today in status conference hearing for due process and the right to outstanding discovery. Potential assignment fraud. A to D transfer and they don’t have to document proof of how they got it. Even knowing that the originating lender is under bankruptcy while this assignment was created and knowing that I have n AP pending there regarding the mortgage contract, fraud, misrep., etc. This just kept stating they have the note, Only one alleged endorsement. Which is a stamp signature. Nothing plead of when it was placed there, when they got the alleged note and where it has been for three years. Total injustice this judge served upon me today. He made several comments which I feel which is in the record to be partial to Plaintiff.

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: