Bill Butler, Esq. In Minnesota Nails It!

If you are seeking legal representation or other services call our Florida customer service number at 954-495-9867 and for the West coast the number remains 520-405-1688. Customer service for the livinglies store with workbooks, services and analysis remains the same at 520-405-1688. The people who answer the phone are NOT attorneys and NOT permitted to provide any legal advice, but they can guide you toward some of our products and services.
The selection of an attorney is an important decision  and should only be made after you have interviewed licensed attorneys familiar with investment banking, securities, property law, consumer law, mortgages, foreclosures, and collection procedures. This site is dedicated to providing those services directly or indirectly through attorneys seeking guidance or assistance in representing consumers and homeowners. We are available to any lawyer seeking assistance anywhere in the country, U.S. possessions and territories. Neil Garfield is a licensed member of the Florida Bar and is qualified to appear as an expert witness or litigator in in several states including the district of Columbia. The information on this blog is general information and should NEVER be considered to be advice on one specific case. Consultation with a licensed attorney is required in this highly complex field.

Editor’s Comment: Like a breath of fresh air, I received Bill’s email and I encourage anyone in Minnesota to seek him out. He totally gets it , explains it, and understands it. Here is the beginning of the attached article:


The Butler Liberty Law firm has commenced 27 lawsuits involving 197 plaintiffs challenging the mortgage foreclosure rights of the October 2008 Bailout Banks holding “securitized” mortgages. The plaintiffs’ claims in all of these cases is based on a “quiet title” cause of action.

Quiet title law allows a person in possession of real property (or a person asserting a title interest in vacant property) to bring suit against someone claiming a lien or other interest in real property. A successful quiet title action results in a court “quieting” title to the real property; that is, resolving the claims and interests of the parties and removing and/or voiding any invalid liens or claims.

In 1995 I tried and won the only case I am aware of that resulted in the voiding of two securitized mortgages. In that case, First National Bank of Elk River v. Independent Mortgage Services, 1996 WL 229236 (Minn. Ct. App. No. DX-95- 1919) (FNBER v. IMS), I represented a bank against a mortgage loan securitizer who was claiming rights in a mortgage without having possession of the homeowner’s promissory note and without having ever advanced any funds to the homeowner. As indicated in the decision above, my bank client won the battle of the putative mortgagees because my client was able to produce the original promissory notes with endorsements that clearly indicated that the defendant securitizer and pretender mortgagee had no right, title or interest in the notes.

A note is a promise to pay. A mortgage is security for that promise to pay. No note = no mortgage. The rubber meets the road reality of FNBER v. IMS clearly illustrates this ancient legal principle.

BEWARE Article by Bill Butler

19 Responses

  1. Jan, thanks for that excellent explanation.

  2. to Bob G:
    The protocol on “Removal” to the USDC of any State Court case is based on the U.S. Code, and generally requires (1) a matter of “original jurisdiction,” such as a claim by the plaintiff of a violation of TILA, or Federal Fair Debt Collections Practices Act breaches, or (2) a combination of two factors: (a) a demand in writing somewhere, Pleadings or other papers, that the plaintiff is seeking over $75,000, and (b) complete diversity of the parties. Absent these, the principle of deference to the State Courts keeps the federal courts from accepting a case on Removal.

    Banks that are “national associations” [look for “N.A.” after the name, i.e. USBank, N.A.] are not oganized under some State charter; instead, they derive their Charter from the Office of the Controller of the Currency, or “OCC.” That is treated as being in Washington DC. The “Bank” additionally has a “principal place of business” that it designates to the OCC, and that address is, additional to DC, the address at which it claims “domicile,” and can be sued. For example, Citibank has this little charade where it claims to have its principal place of business in some sleepy little town in South Dakota. This is a complete charade; Citibank is located in New York City, and nobody at head office in Manhattan even knows where South Dakota is within a thousand miles. Asked to point out South Dakota on a map, those lunkheads would point to Arkansas.

    So, unless you are in the State court in South Dakota (not likely), or living in DC and your house is in DC (again not likely), and you want to sue Citibank, you can go file your lawsuit in the State Court, but the Citi lawyers will immediately file a Notice of Removal to the USDC, where they can use the arcane Federal Rules of Practice and Procedure to get the advantage. The next step is a Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss [for failure to state a claim conforming to those Rules]. As this instantly gets hairy, and as the Federal Judges tend to be old cranks and geezers who don’t want to hear your case, the odds are fairly good that your case gets tossed before it gets off the ground.

    One way to avoid this is to avoid making a money demand over $75,000, and to avoid making any claim within one year for that amount, and to avoid making any claim from which it can be reasonably inferred that the demand is over $75,000. So avoid the temptation to write a crank letter demanding $50,000,000 as your settlement amount; it will get tossed in your face in a Removal Motion. Another way is to include an in-State defendant, such as the bank lawyers or the county sheriff, or both. In so doing, you defeat the “diversity” prong of the Removal test.

    But if you do the “joinder” of the in-State defendant simply to defeat Removal, then it is called “fraudulent joinder,” and that is where things go awry. So you have to plead a specific set of bad acts to each in-State defendant with claims of aggrievement and particularized harms and losses attributable to those defendants. The other side will scream fraudulent joinder like a stuck pig, no matter what you Plead, but that is because they are hell-bent on Removal. So it all boils down to how you structure the Pleadings.

    In theory, in the USDC your pleadings are supposed to be “Notice Pleading,” to put the other side fairly on Notice as to the nature and substance of your complaints against them. But the creaky old wrecks sitting on the Federal Bench ignore that, and demand “fact pleading.” I put that down to incipient senility, a common enough factor in the judiciary. If you end up in front of some old crank like Judge Doty sitting on the Federal bench in Minnesota, the way Bill Butler did, you are going to get hammered no matter how elegant your Pleadings are; he will make it up as he goes along, just to gain control of your case (which is why I cannot recommend ever living in Minnesota, until the old drones there finally die, because they are not going to retire on their own). You avoid that by Pleading carefully and with particularity. It is all in your “writing.” Watch out for canned “format” pleadings being sold around the Internet; a lot of that stuff is real garbage, and will wreck your case. Spend the time to do it right. If you cannot stay in the State Court, then sue the bank in either New York or DC; gets you a better forum and a jury that does not much like bankers.


  4. Not sure that I get this entirely. Do the banks get to remove to federal court simply because they are headquartered in another state?

  5. i left for months only to venture back and see that the site is more useless than ever……

  6. usedkarguy….evil is what Sucks and that would be you and your evil friends…..GTFOH…


  7. stripes: you suck! get lost!

  8. The only thing I hate is evil. Its agents and agencies are only a symptom of a much larger problem….Global evil.

  9. You are the only one saying you hope people die, cursing and threatening others Christine. I know you are an agent of evil & that bugs you. Thankfully, I am strong in my faith.

  10. Imbecile,

    Hating everyone and constantly spewing so much venom is like drinking poison and hoping the other people will die. That’s all you’re capable of doing. You do understand that cursing me from morning to night is only hurting you and shortening your life, don’t you? So, please, keep at it.

  11. You are saying there are Billions of Paedophile Satanist Control Freaks just like you Christine..? There are also Billions like me who “get it” and We Reject Satan and all of his evil works. The truth is being revealed about Who, What and Why for a reason. The truth is there is NO SECURITY that ties anyone to this. That is because of the Creator and his Grand Design for mankind. You are no more than a Kabal of counterfeiters …

  12. Imbecile,

    Make me leave! There are billions just like me on this planet. Deal with it.


  14. This is not our Government Christine….this is a sick kabal of imposters who are control freaks. Get the hell out of our Constitutional Republic …. paedophile and Satanist weirdos and your ONE PEOPLES PUBLIC TRUST & NESARA MIND CONTROL CRAP…We don’t want your fixes for fraud…Sue the Kabal of crooks & restore the Rule Of Law and Coin & Issue our own currency..

  15. “…A note is a promise to pay. A mortgage is security for that promise to pay. No note = no mortgage….”

    Yes, Neil—and we know that they are not real notes:

    “…The role that servicers actually occupy is — concealed. Servicers will not disclose WHO they are actually servicing for and this is from the onset of the fictitious refinance to the fraudulent foreclosure in question. Deregulation has allowed servicers to publicly withhold any information that discloses the actual creditor. In fact, disclosure would disclose that the note in question is not a valid UCC instrument but, actually, a modification of the PRIOR mortgage/note. Courts run scared. All they need to hear is the name of bank and they accept this falsity. It does not matter what false capacity that bank is appearing in — including as trustee to a fraudulent trust that holds false and invalid mortgage loans, notes (and UCC instruments). . The Court hears “bank” in name, especially with “NA” attached, and they believe it is valid. This is simply not so. Court is not given the opportunity to hear the evidence that the subprime refinance was orchestrated under fraud, and that no valid UCC instrument exists (NO NOTE), and that the “Bank”, “NA”, and/or servicer, is NOT the creditor.
    Further, under federal law, which preempts state law when there is conflict, the CURRENT creditor must be identified. Servicers are not the creditor if assignment is executed for the ministerial purpose of administering a foreclosure action. No legal rights transferred under this scenario.

    Time for attorneys to wake up. Start digging at records, and pursue records disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act as to the GSEs. This may take a federal action to enforce. But, would clearly win on this as it involves the borrowers’ right to the those records.

    When Neil finally understands that this is about homeowner victims, and not “investors”, we may finally get somewhere.”

  16. Things are moving very, very fast. Some states might lag behind others, some countries may be behind but things are moving in the right direction. Our government is intent on making believe that N. Korea is about to strike. I don’t believe it will happen. And even if it did, it would be very short lived.

    Next: disclosure and implementation of free energy. Once that is out in the open, not one war will ever be justified by anything ever again. This country better reconsider how it makes its money… the biggest weapon manufacturer of the world will really find itself in a bind if, no matter how hard it tries, no one buy that shit any longer…!

    This site may be about foreclosures but the greatest man made financial scandal and foreclosures were intentionally designed to destabilize people, by making them believe that they had a lot to lose by not playing along. As soon as disclosure has taken place, all the money held by the banks will be redirected toward fixing this planet and implementing free energy everywhere. That’s the reason IMF is forgiving so much debt everywhere: to make room for inventors, discoveries and technology. To allow people to obtain the needed education.

    The future looks incredibly bright. Don’t cave in to fear of N. Korea. It is, once again, a man made situation blown out of proportion by the media.

  17. Bill Butler, who has certainly incurred the ire and wrath of the quite incompetent Minnesota Federal Judiciary, is not telling the whole story. The parts he left out are instructive. First, in these titanic legal battles, the homeowners, Butler’s clients, are bringing their suits in the State Court system. The legacy banks then immediately file a Notice of removal into the USDC on the [spurious] theory that since the Bank is chartered by the OCC and has its “registered headquarters” in another State, perforce there must be “diversity of jurisdiction” between the parties, hence under 28 USC 1334 the defendants are entitled to Remove the case into the federal courts.

    Now, this is crass forum-shopping, and these Bankers are past masters at precisely that. The Minnesota federal judges have a peculiar religious orientation, that I ascribe to the ancient doctrines of the Lutheran Church, a stentorian disapproval of debtors. Under this theism, a debtor is “fallen” from God’s Grace, and thus is deserving of not merely disapproval but also punishment. Couple this mindset with someone like USDC Doty, who at age 84 has turned into a crabby old drone and is unfit for the Bench, and you are already beaten no matter how great your case is and how superb your Pleadings are.

    Where counsel Butler ran afoul of these bridge trolls was that he attempted to defeat Removal by diversity claims, by adding in the Bank’s individual attorneys and the law firm as defendants. The lawyers, who are guilty as sin itself and have the dirtiest hands imaginable, creating forged Instruments right in their law offices in MN and pretending that it is MERS in another State, and inducing the rather dumb Hennepin County (Minneapolis) Sheriff’s Office to conduct a “credit sale,” promptly scream “fraudulent joinder,” the doctrine where a plaintiff has “fraudulently” added defendants with the specific intent of defeating any claims of Removal, the added defendants being of the Same State and thus destroying Diversity claims.

    And, in large part, that is precisely what counsel Butler was doing. did he have a proper and legal right to add the lawyer defendants? Of course he did; their acts were outrageous, fraudulent, and tortious; in result, the client was harmed and suffered losses, and was aggrieved. But – big but – all Bill Butler did was make a “bare bones” allegation, and that is where he got into a bucket of blood. These judges leaped on the bare-bones claims like a black-fly onto a moose, and started the “fining” as sanctions for “fraudulent joinder.” Once the first USDC did it, all the others hopped on that bandwagon, and counsel Butler was getting sandbagged.

    What this tells you is that, even in the Federal Courts where “notice pleading” is supposed to be the guide, actually the courts [in MN and likely elsewhere] will require “fact pleading” as in most State Courts. Thus, the individual bad acts of the law defendants have to be pled with particularity, or Removal under “fraudulent joinder” is coming soon enough. And, with old wrecks like Doty sitting on the Bench, men who should have retired at least 20 years ago, you can expect “creative judging” up front and your claims against the law firms to get tossed – and be exposed to Sanctions.

    Would Butler have been whacked only for the Quiet Title claims? Possibly. But by failing to flesh out the factual bases of the claims against the attorneys, he left the door open to the crabby and Old Religion Judges to hammer him. So they did. Moral: be careful how you Plead. and Plead everything with particularity. Second Moral: move out of Minnesota, and file a new suit for “theft by conversion” in another jurisdiction, and ask for treble the appraised value of the house. You have a better forum, and a better claim.

  18. C’mon. Bank against bank? Sure you get a fair hearing. Honeowner against bank with a missing note? Good luck

  19. So frustrating to see things haven’t changed in Minnesota since I left. My heart goes out to Bill Still fighting the good fight in a place, well I’d call it “hell” but it’s too fucking cold!

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: