OBJECTION

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BANKUNITED,
as [purported] successor in interest to [SEIZED] BANKUNITED, FSB.,
purported “plaintiff”,
vs. DISPOSED CASE NO.: 09-6016-CA
JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, et al.

___________________________________________________________________________/
J. FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S OBJECTION TO ANY magistrate, R. 1.490
1. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that Jennifer Franklin Prescott does not consent and
objected to any referral to any magistrate, hearing officer, and/or “special master”, Rule
1.490, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.
JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S OBJECTIONS TO ANY magistrate
2. In particular, J. Franklin Prescott objects and did not consent to any magistrate
a. findings of fact;
b. conclusions of law.
MEMORANDUM
“A REFERRAL TO A MAGISTRATE REQUIRES THE CONSENT OF ALL

PARTIES.” JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT IS ENTITLED TO HAVE THIS
MATTER HEARD BY A JUDGE AND DOES NOT WANT TO HAVE THIS
MATTER HEARD BY ANY MAGISTRATE. JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT
FILE A WRITTEN OBJECTION TO FICTITIOUS referral PRIOR TO
COMMENCEMENT OF THE HEARING.
Here, no hearing can possibly commence.
PUBLICLY RECORDED 08/12/2010 FINAL DISPOSITION
3. On 08/12/2010, Def. Judge Hugh D. Hayes disposed of the fraudulent action.
NO order of referral
4. Here, there were

a. 08/12/2010 Final Disposition;
b. No order of referral;
c. No notice of any hearing;
d. J. Franklin Prescott’s non-consent and objection to any magistrate referral and hearing.
RECORD LACK OF note and mortgage
5. Here, in the recorded absence of any note and/or mortgage, there was
a. No agreement;
b. No debt;
c. No lien;
d. No BankUnited interest.
LACK OF NOTICE OF ANY hearing
6. Court staff asserted and published:
“A party/attorney scheduling a hearing must concurrently notice the matter in

conformance with the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and ensure timely notice is
served on all pro se parties and counsel of record in advance of the hearing. The
original notice must be timely filed with the Clerk of Court. The Judges’ and
Magistrates ask that no courtesy copies be sent to their offices on foreclosure cases
only. The setting party/attorney is responsible for preparing and filing the Order of
Referral pursuant to Rule 1.490, Fl. Civil Rules of Court (also can be found at
www.ca.cjis20.org/web/main/magistrates as a reference, no more signed Order of
Referrals from the above website will be accepted). You will be required to submit
your proposed Order of Referral to the appropriate Judge for each hearing in front
of the Magistrate. This will include all hearings for 10, 15 or 30 minutes and
Special Set hearings. (This will also include any Summary/Default Judgment
hearings requesting more than 5 minutes.)”
Here, no notice was served on Jennifer Franklin Prescott. Here, nothing, no matter, and no
hearing were noticed in violation of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.
BANKUNITED, FSB’S LACK OF standing
7. Pursuant to § 48.23, Fla. Stat.,
2
“1. A notice of lis pendens must contain the following:
a. The names of the parties.”
Here, the fraudulent notice of lis pendens “contained” “BankUnited, FSB”. However here,
said BankUnited was not any note/mortgage holder or party. Here, U.S. agents had seized
BankUnited, FSB.
8. Furthermore here, Jennifer Franklin-Prescott was mischaracterized as a “married woman”
and “Walter Prescott” as “her husband”. However here, “Walter Prescott” is not the
“husband” of Jennifer Franklin Prescott. Here, the notice of lis pendens did not contain the
parties’ names.
NO jurisdiction
9. Here, “BankUnited, FSB” was
a. Not any party;

b. Had no interest;
c. Had no standing.
Here, bankrupt BankUnited, FSB, had no standing, and this Court has no jurisdiction.
RECORD APPEAL - NO jurisdiction
10. Here after disposition and Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s Notice of Appeal, this Court had no
jurisdiction:
NOTICE OF RELEASE & DISCHARGE OF FRAUDULENT lis pendens, CH. 48, F.S.
11. The fraudulent notice of lis pendens, purported INSTR 4318185, Collier County Records,
has been released and discharged. Here admittedly, no note or mortgage could be
3
established, Ch. 48, 71, F. S. Purported Plaintiff bankrupt BankUnited failed and was
seized. In the record absence of any note or mortgage, said seized bank’s fraudulent action
and notice were null & void and did not operate as a lis pendens, Ch. 48.
12. Furthermore, a lis pendens is not effectual for any purpose beyond 1 year from the
commencement of the action and expires, § 48.23, Florida Statutes.
13. Here, the pleadings conclusively proved that no action could be founded on any lost and/or
destroyed note and/or instrument. Therefore, the bankrupt and seized bank’s non-
meritorious action not possibly affect the subject property, and the court controlled and
discharged the fraudulent notice of lis pendens, § 48.23, Fla. Stat. The Docket showed the
08/12/2010 Final Disposition by Def. Judge Hugh D. Hayes.
08/12/2010 FINAL DISPOSITION, FLA.R.CIV.P. 1.998
14. Hereby, prevailing Jennifer Franklin Prescott filed the Final Disposition Form pursuant to
Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.998, 25.075, Florida Statutes. The Docket evidenced
Judge Hugh D. Hayes’ 08/12/2010 Final Disposition before any hearing.
15. Here, the Docket and official record alterations were
a. Arbitrary and capricious;

b. Unlawful.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND PUBLICATION
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the above has been furnished to the
purported non-plaintiff, James E. Albertelli, Erin Quinn Rose, and Erin Rowland, Albertelli Law,
P.O. Box 23028, Tampa, FL 33623, and Defendant Judge Hugh D. Hayes, Naples Courthouse,
3301 E. Tamiami Trail, Naples, FL 34112, on this 31st day of August, 2010.
The pleading is also being published worldwide.
________________________
/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott, Prevailing Victim of seized BankUnited’s record fraud
4
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BANKUNITED,
as [purported] successor in interest to [SEIZED] BANKUNITED, FSB.,
Plaintiff,
vs. CASE NO.: 09-6016-CA
JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, et al.
NOTICE OF APPEAL, DISPOSITION, AND

BANKRUPT BANKUNITED’S SEIZURE
___________________________________________________________________________/
COUNSEL, ALBERTELLI LAW, SERVICE NOTICE OF
NOTICE OF APPEAL AND DISPOSITION IN FAVOR OF J. FRANKLIN PRESCOTT
BANKRUPT BANK SEIZURE INFORMATION AND § 673.3011, FLA. STAT.,
EVIDENCE OF NO entitlement to enforce non-existent instrument
DISPOSITION NOTICE IN FAVOR OF JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT
PURSUANT TO UNIFORM COMMERICAL CODE, AND U.C.C., ART. 3,
AND FLORIDA LAW
NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM ALTERATIONS OF RECORD
1. Jennifer Franklin Prescott, who was never served, hereby appeals from
a. The unlawful alteration of the official documents, records, and Case Docket;
b. The lack of any record of the purported “disposition” in Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s
favor in the Case File;

c. The lack of any record of the dismissal in Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s favor;
d. The absence of the FINAL DISPOSITION FORM, § 25.075, Florida Statutes, and
Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.998, from the Case File;
e. The lack of any record, reason, and/or explanation of the publicly recorded removal of
the August 2010 “complaint” in the Case File;
f. The absence of any record, reason, and explanation of the publicly recorded removal of
the August 2010 “summons” from the Case File;
g. The lack of any transparency, accountability, due process, and equal protection of law;
h. The record lack of any mortgage or note in this facially fraudulent and frivolous action;
i. The lack of any record of the removal of ALFRED CAMNER, Esq., and the CAMNER
LIPSITZ law firm and its Attorneys from the mock proceedings;
j. The record lack of the means of final disposition before any hearing.
RECORD ABSENCE OF FINAL DISPOSITION FORM, § 25.075, FLA. STAT.
2. Jennifer Franklin Prescott could not find the Final Disposition Form, Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.998, in
the Case File on Tuesday, August 17, 2010. See § 25.075, Florida Statutes.
ABSENCE OF DISMISSAL IN JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S FAVOR
3. On Tuesday, August 17, 2010, Jennifer Franklin Prescott could not find the Dismissal in
Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s favor in the Case File.
DEFENDANT JUDGE HUGH D. HAYES SUBSTITUTED COUNSEL ON 08/18/2010
4. On August 18, 2010, Defendant Judge Hayes substituted Counsel, and BILL McCOLLUM,
ATTORNEY GENERAL, and Shelley B. Cridlin, Fla. Bar No. 0022451, made an
appearance as counsel for Defendant Judge Hugh D. Hayes, in place of any and all prior
counsel in Federal Case 2:2009-cv-00791.
2
FALSIFICATIONS AND/OR ALTERATIONS APPARENT
5. Jennifer Franklin Prescott reported Case File demand and/or review in the Clerk of Court’s
Office on August 12, 13, and 16, and 17, 2010. While the electronic Docket showed
a. “disposition”;
b. “complaint”; and
c. “summons”,
none could be ascertained and/or verified in the Naples Courthouse.
DEMANDS FOR CLARIFICATION AND EVIDENCE
6. On Monday, August 16, AM, and Tuesday, August 17, 2010, PM, at the Naples Courthouse,
Jennifer Franklin Prescott demanded to see the Case File evidence of:
a. “disposition”;
b. “complaint”; and
c. “summons” in this fraudulent action.
DEFENDANT JUDGE’S ASSISTANT ASSERTED MISTAKE/ERROR
7. Defendant Hayes’ Judicial Assistant, Jan, stated to Jennifer Franklin Prescott that
a. NO “August 2010 complaint”, and
b. NO “August 2010 summons”
appeared in the Case File.
NO negotiable instrument UNDER GOVERNING CODE
8. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), Article 3, governs Negotiable Instruments.
Pursuant to § 3-104. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, no “negotiable instrument” existed,
and no promise or order to pay a fixed amount of money and interest existed in this
fraudulent action. Bankrupt and seized Bankunited was unable to prove any right to
3
enforce the admittedly non-existent purported “instrument”. Here, the Court may not enter
judgment in favor of seized and bankrupt Bankunited. See UCC, Article 3. Here, the Court
must enter judgment in favor of Jennifer Franklin Prescott. WHEREFORE, Jennifer
Franklin Prescott, who was not served and does not submit to any jurisdiction, moves this
Court to declare the purported action fraudulent and a fraud on the Court, and enter
judgment of dismissal in favor of Jennifer Franklin Prescott.
JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT HOLDS FREE & CLEAR RECORD TITLE
9. Jennifer Franklin Prescott holds unencumbered record title to the subject protected
homestead real property. See Collier County Public Records.
PURPORTED “DISPOSITION”
10. The Case Docket stated “disposition”:
The purported “disposition date” was “08/12/2010”.
RULE 1.540, FLA. R. CIV. P.
11. Rule 1.540(a), Fla.R.Civ.P., authorizes the court to correct mistakes in a judgment. Here,
purported “disposition” appeared on the official Docket. Here there were no note, no
entitlement to enforce the admittedly lost/destroyed note, no service, no hearing, and no
due process. Here, records were altered.
BANKUNITED VIOLATED CH. 49, FLA. STAT.
4
12. Seized and bankrupt Bankunited violated Ch. 49, Fla. Stat., for illegal purposes of
defrauding Jennifer Franklin Prescott and perpetrating fraud on this Court. In this
fraudulent Case, service by publication was not allowed:
49.011 Service of process by publication; cases in which allowed.

49.021 Service of process by publication, upon whom.
49.031 Sworn statement as condition precedent.
49.041 Sworn statement, natural person as defendant.
49.051 Sworn statement, corporation as defendant.
49.061 Sworn statement, parties doing business under a corporate name as defendants.
49.071 Sworn statement, unknown parties as defendants.
49.08 Notice of action, form.
49.09 Notice of action, return day.
49.10 Notice of action, publication, proof.
49.11 Notice of action, posting, proof.
49.12 Mailing of notice of action.
RECORD PERJURY
13. The record and Case File showed perjury by, e.g., Nicholas Krancher. See Exhibits on file.
PURPORTED “SUMMONS”
14. Purportedly, a summons was issued, “ELSA JARERO”, who is not any known party to this
fraudulent action. The summons disappeared from the record without any explanation.
PURPORTED “COMPLAINT”
15. A “complaint” appeared on the Docket.
Pursuant to Rule 1.190, Fla.R.Civ.P., the Court had never granted any leave. The summons
disappeared from the record without any explanation.
PURPORTED plaintiff HAD NO right to enforce FICTITIOUS note
16. Seized and bankrupt BankUnited was not entitled to enforce a fictitious note. Here,
BankUnited was not any holder of any note or mortgage at the time it filed suit or any time
5
thereafter. It is elementary that to be a holder, one must be in possession of the instrument.
See s. 673.3011, F.S. Here, BankUnited was not any proper party to file suit to foreclose a
fictitious un-delivered lost and/or destroyed instrument.
IMPOSSIBILITY OF ANY delivery
17. Under Florida law delivery is necessary to validate a negotiable instrument. A lost and/or
destroyed note or mortgage could not have possibly been delivered.
IMPOSSIBILITY OF ANY reestablishment
18. Here, the lost and/or destroyed note or mortgage could not have possibly been reestablished
pursuant to Ch. 71, Fla. Stat.
EMERGENCY AND THREAT OF FURTHER INJURY
19. Known foreclosure fraud is an EMERGENCY. Further injury must be prevented.
NO note – NO default
20. The purported plaintiff did not own or hold any note. No obligation existed. No “default”
could have possibly occurred. See also Uniform Commercial Code; Negotiable Instruments.
UNKNOWN LOSS OR DESTRUCTION
21. The bankrupt and seized “plaintiff” bank asserted that any “promissory note and mortgage
have been lost or destroyed and are not in the custody or control of Bankunited, and the time
and manner of the loss or destruction is unknown.” In this Case, Bankunited could not have
possibly reestablished any lost or destroyed note or mortgage.
CAMNER KNEW THAT reestablishment WAS IMPOSSIBLE, CH. 71, FLA. STAT.
22. In particular, Founder and Attorney Alfred Camner and his law firm knew that Bankunited
could not have possibly reestablished any lost or destroyed note or mortgage.
SEIZURE OF BANKRUPT BANKUNITED
6
23. On Thursday, May 21, 2009, BankUnited, FSB, Coral Gables, FL was seized by the Office
of Thrift Supervision (OTS), and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)
was named Receiver. Said seizure stripped away the main asset that belonged to the holding
company, BankUnited Financial Corp. Counsel Alfred Camner was the largest shareholder.
24. The June 22 Report by the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Inspector
General (OIG) was critical of the bank’s management and Attorney and Founder Alfred
Camner. See Counsel, Camner Lipsitz law firm.
FAILURE & SEIZURE OF THE PURPORTED plaintiff
25. BankUnited, FSB’s failure in May 2009 cost the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp’s insurance
fund about $5.7 billion – the second most costly failure in FDIC history.
NO instrument, and NO lien
26. Here, there was neither any instrument nor any lien. No property was described.
NO interest, and NO successor in interest
27. Here, Bankunited, FSB, had no interest. Here, Bankunited was not and could not have
possibly been any successor in interest. No sum was due to the plaintiff bankrupt bank.
NO rights and NO standing
28. Here, Bankunited, just like Bankunited, FSB, had no rights and no standing.
NO conditions precedent – FACIALLY FRIVOLOUS action
29. Here, the conditions precedent to the institution of any foreclosure action did not occur and
could not have possibly occurred. Here on its face, the sham action was frivolous.
THE COURT KNEW THAT reestablishment WAS IMPOSSIBLE
30. Here as a matter of law, “reestablishment” was impossible. Here, the falsified “promissory
note and mortgage have been lost or destroyed and are not in the custody or control of
7
Bankunited, and the time and manner of the loss or destruction is unknown.” See Ch. 71,
Fla. Stat.
31. Here, Jennifer Franklin’s record title to her homestead property was free and clear.
PROTECTED HOMESTEAD PROPERTY
32. Franklin Prescott’s property is protected homestead property.
33. As a matter of law, any accounting under a prima facie non-existent note and mortgage was
impossible. The prima facie non-meritorious demand for an accounting was fraudulent.
34. Jennifer Franklin Prescott is not any “married woman”.
35. Jennifer Franklin Prescott is not any defendant and was not served.
36. Hugh D. Hayes is a named party Defendant in several actions. See, e.g., Summons/service,
U.S.A. Ex Rel, et al. v. U.S.A., et al. in U.S. District Court.
RECUSAL LAW
37. In light of the publicly recorded alterations of the official records and documents, Jennifer
Franklin Prescott has been forced to live in fear of public corruption and the lack of any
opportunity of fair, just, and transparent due process and proceedings.
38. Here, Defendant Judge Hayes knew that
a. Bankrupt Bankunited did not hold any instrument;
b. Seized and bankrupt Bankunited had no right to enforce and prosecute;
c. Florida’s real party in interest Rule, Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.210(a), only permitted an action to
be prosecuted if there had been an actual interest.
RULE 1.432 DISQUALIFICATION OF JUDGE

“(a) Grounds. Any party may move to disqualify the judge assigned to the action on
the grounds provided by statute.
(b) Contents. A motion to disqualify shall allege the facts relied on to show the
grounds for disqualification and shall be verified by the party.
8
(c) Time. A motion to disqualify shall be made within a reasonable time after
discovery of the facts constituting grounds for disqualification.
(d) Determination. The judge against whom the motion is directed shall determine
only the legal sufficiency of the motion. The judge shall not pass on the truth of the
facts alleged. If the motion is legally sufficient, the judge shall enter an order of
disqualification and proceed no further in the action.
(e) Judge's Initiative. Nothing in this rule limits a judge's authority to enter an order of
disqualification on the judge's own initiative.”
Said rule was intended to unify the procedure for judicial disqualification.
RULE 2.330. DISQUALIFICATION OF TRIAL JUDGES
39. Said Rule stated:
(a) Application. This rule applies only to county and circuit judges in all matters in
all divisions of court.
(b) Parties. Any party, including the state, may move to disqualify the trial judge
assigned to the case on grounds provided by rule, by statute, or by the Code of
Judicial Conduct.
(c) Motion. A motion to disqualify shall:

(1) be in writing;
(2) allege specifically the facts and reasons upon which the movant relies as the
grounds for disqualification;
(3) be sworn to by the party by signing the motion under oath or by a separate
affidavit;”
SECTION 38.10, FLA. STAT.
40. Section 38.10 gives parties the right to move to disqualify a judge when the party fears that
“he or she will not receive a fair trial . . . on account of the prejudice of the judge of that
court against the applicant or in favor of the adverse party.” Fla. Stat. § 38.10. Rule of
Judicial Administration 2.330 specifies that a motion to disqualify must show that “the party
fears that he or she will not receive a fair trial or hearing because of specifically described
prejudice or bias of the judge.” Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330.
41. S. 38.10, Fla. Stat., stated:
9
38.10 Disqualification of judge for prejudice; application; affidavits; etc.--
Whenever a party to any action or proceeding makes and files an affidavit stating fear
that he or she will not receive a fair trial in the court where the suit is pending on
account of the prejudice of the judge of that court against the applicant or in favor of
the adverse party, the judge shall proceed no further, but another judge shall be
designated in the manner prescribed by the laws of this state for the substitution of
judges for the trial of causes in which the presiding judge is disqualified.
42. Here, Franklin Prescott has been “stating fear that she will not receive a fair trial in the court
where the suit is [purportedly] pending on account of the objective prejudice of the judge of
that court against the applicant. Here, objectively biased Judge Hayes “shall proceed no
further, but another judge shall be designated in the manner prescribed by the laws of this
state for the substitution of judges for the trial of causes in which the presiding judge is
disqualified.”
JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S RIGHT TO APPEAL
43. If the judge denies a motion to disqualify brought under § 38.10 the movant has the right to
appeal. Lynch v. State, ___ So. 2d ___, Nos. SC06-2233, SC07-1246, 2008 WL 4809783, at
*26 (Fla. Nov. 6, 2008). As the Florida Supreme Court recently held: “A motion to
disqualify is governed substantively by section 38.10, Florida Statutes, and procedurally by
Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330. Here, Franklin Prescott’s motion to
disqualify Defendant objectively partial Judge Hayes is citing § 38.10 and Rule 2.330, as
well as Canon 3E(1).
44. The Florida Supreme Court has also held, in effect, that § 38.10 and the Canons require the
same thing. See Livingston v. State, 441 So. 2d 1083, 1086 (Fla. 1983). In Livingston the
court cited the Canon’s requirement that a judge disqualify himself when his “impartiality
might reasonably be questioned” and concluded that it was “totally consistent” with Florida
case law applying § 38.10. Id. Both require disqualification when a party can show “a well
10
grounded fear that she will not receive a fair trial at the hands of the judge.” Id. (quoting
State ex rel. Brown v. Dewell, 179 So. 695, 697-98 (Fla. 1938)); see also Berry v. Berry, 765
So. 2d 855, 857 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000) (quoting Canon 3E(1) when describing the standard for
granting a motion under § 38.10). Here of course, this Court was bound to follow Florida
appellate court decisions interpreting that state’s law. The final arbiter of state law is the
state Supreme Court, which is another way of saying that Florida law is what the Florida
Supreme Court says it is.
CANON(S) 3E(1), 3E(1)(f), FLORIDA CODE OF JUDICIAL CONDUCT
45. The Florida Supreme Court has adopted a Code of Judicial Conduct to govern the actions
of state court judges and candidates for judicial office. Canon 3E(1) states, e.g.:
(1) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s
impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances
where …
46. Those provisions address situations in which a judge must disqualify himself because his
“impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” including when he has “made a public
statement that commits, or appears to commit, the judge with respect to” a particular party,
issue, or controversy. Canon 3E(1) [general disqualification provision in Canon 3E(1)],
3E(1)(f) [“commits clause” at Canon 3E(1)(f)].
47. Canon 3E(1), backed by the threat of a disciplinary proceeding, requires a judge to
disqualify himself if his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Fla. Stat. § 38.10,
supplemented by Rule 2.330, allows a party to have a judge disqualified for the same reason.
48. Canon 3E(1)(f), which the Florida Supreme Court adopted in January 2006, covers one area
in which a judge’s “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” See In re Amendment to
Code of Judicial Conduct, 918 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 2006). In addition to the Florida Supreme
Court, the Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee (Ethics Committee) and the Judicial
11
Qualifications Commission (JQC) have roles in administering the Code. The Florida
Supreme Court established the Ethics Committee “to render written advisory opinions to
inquiring judges concerning the propriety of contemplated judicial and non-judicial conduct.”
Petition of Comm. on Standards of Conduct for Judges, 327 So. 2d 5, 5 (Fla. 1976).
49. Canon 3E is enforced by the Judicial Qualifications Commission, which has the authority
to bring disciplinary charges against a judge.
SPECIFIC ALLEGATIONS – WELL-GROUNDED FEARS
50. Here, Franklin Prescott has been specifically alleging the following facts and reasons upon
which the movant relied as the grounds for Defendant County Judge Hayes’
disqualification. Here, Franklin Prescott had well grounded fears that she will not receive
a fair trial at the hands of Defendant objectively partial and bribed County Judge Hugh D.
Hayes.
ADOPTION BY REFERENCE
51. Jennifer Franklin Prescott adopts by reference the pleadings and EXHIBITS on file and of
record in this Notice of Appeal and Notice of Disposition of facially fraudulent action.
WHEREFORE, Jennifer Franklin Prescott demands
1. An Order clarifying the disposition in favor of J. Franklin Prescott on the official record;
2. An Order declaring the purported action fraudulent and a fraud on the Court;
3. An Order clarifying said purported “disposition”, “summons”, and “complaint”;
4. An Order for judgment and dismissal in favor of Jennifer Franklin Prescott on the record;
5. An Order declaring non-service on any defendant in this fraudulent action, Ch. 49, Fla.
Stat.;
6. An Order extinguishing the facially non-meritorious action;
12
7. An Order declaring the admitted lack of any record of any note or mortgage;
8. An Order declaring any reestablishment of any note or mortgage impossible;
9. An Order declaring the lack of any interest by Bankunited;
10. An Order declaring the action without any merit under existing law;
11. An Order enjoining any further fraud and harassment by Bankunited;
12. An Order for sanctions and expenses against said seized and bankrupt bank and its
dismissed and/or fired attorneys at Camner Lipsitz;
13. An Order removing the fired judicial officers with the Camner Lipsitz firm from these
proceedings, and striking their fraudulent pleadings, because they perpetrated record fraud
and fraud on this Court.
________________________
/s/Jennifer Franklin Prescott, record holder of unencumbered title to homestead property
Victim of bankrupt Bankunited’s record fraud
Victim of seized Bankunited founder Alfred Camner’s record fraud on this Court
EXHIBITS ON FILE: DOCKET ALTERATIONS
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE
U.C.C. Article 3, Negotiable Instruments
PERJURY EVIDENCE, Nicholas Krancher
§ 673.3011, Fla. Stat.; Ch. 71, Fla. Stat.
F.D.I.C. FAILED BANK INFORMATION
13
8/14/2010 Public Inquiry
Find it here...
Site Search
Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - A LL / C ase - 112009C A0060160001XX
Ne w Se a rch R e turn to C ase List
Case Information Printer Friendly Version
Style: BANKUNITED vs FRANKLIN-PR ESC O TT, JENNIFER

Uniform Case Number: 112009C A0060160001XX Filed: 07/09/2009
Clerks Case Number: 0906016C A
Court Type: C IR C UIT CIVIL Disposition Judge: HAYES, HUGH D
Case Type: MO R TGAGE FO R ECLO SUR ES Disposed: 08/12/2010
Judge: HAYES, HUGH D Reopen Reason:
Case Status: DISPO SED Reopened:
Next Court Date: Reopen Close:
Last Docket Date: 08/12/2010 A ppealed:
Parties Dockets Events Financials
1 of 1 page s. Entrie s pe r page : 60
Date Text All Entries

07/09/2009 C A48/R EAL PR O PER TY MO R TGAGE FO R EC LO SUR E (PR E 2010) (FILING)
07/09/2009 C IVIL C O VER SHEET
07/09/2009 C O MPLAINT
07/09/2009 NO TIC E O F LIS PENDENS
07/09/2009 PAID $10.00 PER ISSUANC E O F SUMMO NS $40.00
07/09/2009 R EAL PR O PER TY VALUATIO N SHEET
07/10/2009 SUMMO NS ISSUED
JENNIFER FR ANKLIN PR ESC O TT/ W ALTER P R ESC O TT/ JO HN DO E/ MAR Y DO E/
PLAC ED IN SO UTH FLO R IDA PR O C ESS SER VER S BIN
09/03/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS MAR Y DO E
10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F LO ST O R IGINAL SUMMO NS JO HN DO E
10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JO HN DO E
12/21/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS W ALTER PR ESC O TT
12/21/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT
02/22/2010 NO TIC E O F APP EAR ANC E
AS C O -CO UNSEL BY ER IN M R O SE Q UINN O N BEHALF O F PLT
04/06/2010 ALIAS SUMMO NS ISSUED
JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT/W ALTER PR ESC O TT/P LAC ED IN PR O VEST LLC BIN
05/20/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JENNIFER FR ANKLIN PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 C O RR ESPO NDENCE FR O M C O UNSEL TO C LERK
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E AS TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E AS TO JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E
AS TO ANY AND ALL UNKNO W N PAR TIES C LAIMING
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F DILIGENT SEAR C H AS TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F DILIGENT SEAR C H AS TO JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-P R ESC O TT
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 1/2
06/15/2010 C O RR ESPO NDENCE FR O M C O UNSEL TO GULF C O AST BUSINESS R EVIEW
06/17/2010 LETTER TO GULF C O AST BUSINESS R EVIEW
06/17/2010 NO TIC E O F AC TIO N
TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT/JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PR ESC O TT & ANY AND ALL UNKNO W N
PAR TIES C LAIMING
06/17/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F MAILING MAILED 6/18/10
06/18/2010 C O NFIR MATIO N O F EMAIL R EC EIVED BY GULF C O AST BUSINESS R EVIEW
07/07/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F PUBLIC ATIO N
NO TIC E O F AC TIO N TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT/JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT/ANSW ER
W ITHIN 30 DAYS O F FIRST PUBLIC ATIO N 6/25/10
07/09/2010 MO TIO N TO DISMISS BY JENNIFER FR ANKLIN P RESC O TT
07/22/2010 NO TIC E O F SER VIC E MO TIO N TO DISMISS
07/22/2010 MO TIO N TO DISMISS BY JENNIFER FR ANKLIN P RESC O TT /PR O SE
07/22/2010 MO TIO N TO ENJO IN / BY JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT -P RO SE
07/22/2010 NO TIC E O F SER VIC E
O F PUBLISHED NO TIC E O F R EC O R D & MO TIO N TO DISMISS
BY DEFENDANT
07/23/2010 MO TIO N FO R C LAR IFIC ATIO N O F C O UNSEL
07/23/2010 MO TIO N TO DISMISS
07/23/2010 MO TIO N TO C LAR IFY ALLEGED PLAINTIFFS PUBLISHED NO TIC E O F R EC O R D FR AUD
08/12/2010 MO TIO N TO DISMISS PR O SE JENNIFER FR ANKLIN P RESC O TT
08/12/2010 BANKR UPTC Y BANKUNITED
08/12/2010 C A48/R EAL PR O PER TY MO R TGAGE FO R EC LO SUR E (PR E 2010) (DISPO SITIO N)
08/12/2010 SUMMO NS ISSUED ELSA JAR ER O / PUT IN SO UTH FLO R IDA PR O C ESS BIN
W e dne sday night is re gular m a inte nance tim e on our se rve rs; as a re sult brie f o utage s m ay o ccur.
W e apologize in advance for any inconve nie nce.
Home | Site Map | Search | Disclaimer | Privacy Statement | FA Qs | Contact Us

This we bsite is m aintaine d by The C ollie r C ounty C le rk of the C ircuit C ourt. Unde r Flo rida law, e m ail
addre sse s are public re co rds. If you do not want your e m a il addre ss re le ase d in re sponse to a public
re cords re que st, do not se nd e m ail to this e ntity. Inste ad, co ntact this office by phone or in writing.
Find it here...
Site Search

Court Type: C IR C UIT CIVIL Disposition Judge:
Case Type: MO R TGAGE FO R ECLO SUR ES Disposed:
Case Status: O PEN Reopened:

PAR TIES C LAIMING
BY DEFENDANT
08/12/2010 SUMMO NS ISSUED ELSA JAR ER O / PUT IN SO UTH FLO R IDA PR O C ESS BIN

Find it here...
Site Search


PAR TIES C LAIMING
BY DEFENDANT
W e apolo gize in advance for any inconve nie nce .
8/17/2010 p g
Public
y
Inquiry
Find it here...
Site Search


07/09/2009 C A48/R EAL PR O PER TY MO R TGAGE FO R EC LO SUR E (PR E 2010) (FILING)
07/09/2009 C IVIL C O VER SHEET
07/09/2009 NO TIC E O F LIS PENDENS
07/09/2009 PAID $10.00 PER ISSUANC E O F SUMMO NS $40.00
07/09/2009 R EAL PR O PER TY VALUATIO N SHEET
07/10/2009 SUMMO NS ISSUED
JENNIFER FR ANKLIN PR ESC O TT/ W ALTER P R ESC O TT/ JO HN DO E/ MAR Y DO E/
PLAC ED IN SO UTH FLO R IDA PR O C ESS SER VER S BIN
09/03/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS MAR Y DO E
10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F LO ST O R IGINAL SUMMO NS JO HN DO E
10/14/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JO HN DO E
12/21/2009 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT
02/22/2010 NO TIC E O F APP EAR ANC E
AS C O -CO UNSEL BY ER IN M R O SE Q UINN O N BEHALF O F PLT
04/06/2010 ALIAS SUMMO NS ISSUED
JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT/W ALTER PR ESC O TT/P LAC ED IN PR O VEST LLC BIN
05/20/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F NO N-SER VIC E O F SUMMO NS JENNIFER FR ANKLIN PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 C O RR ESPO NDENCE FR O M C O UNSEL TO C LERK
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E AS TO W ALTER PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E AS TO JENNIFER FR ANKLIN-PR ESC O TT
06/15/2010 AFFIDAVIT O F C O NSTR UC TIVE SER VIC E
AS TO ANY AND ALL UNKNO W N PAR TIES C LAIMING
PAR TIES C LAIMING
BY DEFENDANT
08/17/2010 NO TIC E
O F BANKR UPT BANKUNITED INC IDENT R EPO R T APP AR ENT FALSIFIC ATIO NS NO TIC E
08/17/2010 NO TIC E O F BANKR UPT BANKUNITED
08/17/2010 NO TIC E O F BANKR UPT BANKUNITED DO C KET ALTER ATIO NS EVIDENC E
08/17/2010 NO TIC E O F BANKR UPT NO N SER VIC E NO TIC E
08/17/2010 NO TIC E
O F BANKR UPT BANKUNITED EMER GENC Y DEMAND TO EXTINGUISH FR AUDULENT
AC TIO N
08/18/2010 NO TIC E O F APP EAL
FR O M ALTER ATIO N O F REC O R D NO O R DER ATTAC HED
NO FEES ENC LO SED
08/20/2010 C O RR ESPO NDENCE FR O M
APP EAL CLEER K TO DC A W /NO TIC E O F AP PEAL
NO FEE INC LUDED
08/20/2010 BILLED APP EAL FILING FEE $150.00


OBJECTION

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

OBJECTION

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT

IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA

vs. DISPOSED CASE NO.: 09-6016-CA

JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, et al.

J. FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S OBJECTION TO ANY magistrate, R. 1.490

1.490, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S OBJECTIONS TO ANY magistrate

“A REFERRAL TO A MAGISTRATE REQUIRES THE CONSENT OF ALL

Here, no hearing can possibly commence.

PUBLICLY RECORDED 08/12/2010 FINAL DISPOSITION

3. On 08/12/2010, Def. Judge Hugh D. Hayes disposed of the fraudulent action.

4. Here, there were

RECORD LACK OF note and mortgage

LACK OF NOTICE OF ANY hearing

6. Court staff asserted and published:

“A party/attorney scheduling a hearing must concurrently notice the matter in

hearing were noticed in violation of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

BANKUNITED, FSB’S LACK OF standing

7. Pursuant to § 48.23, Fla. Stat.,

8. Furthermore here, Jennifer Franklin-Prescott was mischaracterized as a “married woman”

9. Here, “BankUnited, FSB” was

a. Not any party;

RECORD APPEAL - NO jurisdiction

commencement of the action and expires, § 48.23, Florida Statutes.

08/12/2010 Final Disposition by Def. Judge Hugh D. Hayes.

08/12/2010 FINAL DISPOSITION, FLA.R.CIV.P. 1.998

Judge Hugh D. Hayes’ 08/12/2010 Final Disposition before any hearing.

15. Here, the Docket and official record alterations were

a. Arbitrary and capricious;

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE AND PUBLICATION

vs. CASE NO.: 09-6016-CA

JENNIFER FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, et al.

NOTICE OF APPEAL, DISPOSITION, AND

COUNSEL, ALBERTELLI LAW, SERVICE NOTICE OF

NOTICE OF APPEAL AND DISPOSITION IN FAVOR OF J. FRANKLIN PRESCOTT

BANKRUPT BANK SEIZURE INFORMATION AND § 673.3011, FLA. STAT.,

EVIDENCE OF NO entitlement to enforce non-existent instrument

DISPOSITION NOTICE IN FAVOR OF JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT

PURSUANT TO UNIFORM COMMERICAL CODE, AND U.C.C., ART. 3,

AND FLORIDA LAW

NOTICE OF APPEAL FROM ALTERATIONS OF RECORD

favor in the Case File;

Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.998, from the Case File;

the August 2010 “complaint” in the Case File;

the August 2010 “summons” from the Case File;

RECORD ABSENCE OF FINAL DISPOSITION FORM, § 25.075, FLA. STAT.

ABSENCE OF DISMISSAL IN JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT’S FAVOR

Jennifer Franklin Prescott’s favor in the Case File.

DEFENDANT JUDGE HUGH D. HAYES SUBSTITUTED COUNSEL ON 08/18/2010

counsel in Federal Case 2:2009-cv-00791.

none could be ascertained and/or verified in the Naples Courthouse.

DEMANDS FOR CLARIFICATION AND EVIDENCE

c. “summons” in this fraudulent action.

DEFENDANT JUDGE’S ASSISTANT ASSERTED MISTAKE/ERROR

a. NO “August 2010 complaint”, and

b. NO “August 2010 summons”

appeared in the Case File.

NO negotiable instrument UNDER GOVERNING CODE

8. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), Article 3, governs Negotiable Instruments.

Pursuant to § 3-104. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, no “negotiable instrument” existed,

must enter judgment in favor of Jennifer Franklin Prescott. WHEREFORE, Jennifer

judgment of dismissal in favor of Jennifer Franklin Prescott.

JENNIFER FRANKLIN PRESCOTT HOLDS FREE & CLEAR RECORD TITLE

homestead real property. See Collier County Public Records.