Professional Documents
Culture Documents
It’s really something that we have to get the scoop on foreclosure mill con artist David J. Stern from the AP and not
some police blotter, but that’s life in post-rule of law America. The story provides a service, however, profiling a man
who’s really a symbol for the foreclosure fraud crisis. Stern sought to corner the market in shepherding foreclosures
through Florida’s courts. He saw them as a growth opportunity and he wanted to increase profits. He did so through
cutting corners along every step of the way, becoming an expert in the kind of skills needed to keep the foreclosure
train moving – document fraud, fabrication, forgery, etc. He and his firm were very good at what they did, which was
basically commit crimes against homeowners and state courts. And it paid off with a suite of cars, yachts, fabulous
homes and all manner of luxury goods. His possessions increased in a direct relationship to the repossessions his
law firm were illegally pushing through the courts.
As Yves Smith points out, the article intimates that the foreclosure mills came up with robo-signing as a cost-cutting
measure, and that fits with how Stern ran his business. The key for him was volume, processing as many
foreclosures as possible. So he would naturally welcome the idea of having one employee sign off on all the
foreclosure documents as a dedicated job every day. This benefited the servicers as well, since they didn’t want a
whole lot of scrutiny on verification and would rather the question of whether or not they own the mortgages go
unexplored. Stern was the perfect role player for this era, because he was always basically a garden-variety crook:
Almost from the beginning, Stern faced trouble. In 1998, he was named in a class-action lawsuit
alleging that he padded fees on foreclosed homeowners. Stern settled for $2.2 million. According to
legal testimony at the time from a Fannie Mae official, Fannie was warned about troubles at the Stern
firm. But Fannie continued referring cases to Stern. Fannie Mae spokeswoman Amy Bonitatibus says,
“At all times, Fannie Mae has had a reasonable expectation that our servicers and the law firms adhere
to proper procedures and conduct under the law. In instances where we learn that servicers or law firms
are not adhering to our requirements or applicable law, we immediately engage and take appropriate
action, which may include termination.”
Soon after, Stern was sued again, this time for sexual harassment. A former paralegal alleged that
Stern created a “sexually-laden” atmosphere in which he routinely “touched and grabbed and subjected
to simulated intercourse” his employees. Stern settled that suit in 2000 for an undisclosed amount.
By this time, lawyers and homeowner activists were also warning lenders, federal regulators and the
Florida Bar about Stern. In 2002, the Florida Supreme Court reprimanded Stern for submitting
“potentially misleading” fee affidavits.
Even a built-for-speed operation like Stern’s firm could not keep up with the volume of foreclosures. As the article
explains, law firms typically get a flat fee per foreclosure, but must get the foreclosure done within a set time frame,
usually around six months, to collect. This led to the need for a solution that streamlined the process as much as
possible.
Employee depositions paint a picture of a firm under constant pressure from the banks to move faster.
The longer it took to foreclose, the more money the banks stood to lose. Like so many in the industry,
Stern had a strategy to cope with all the volume and velocity: robo-signing. One employee testified that
Stern’s chief lieutenant, a one-time file clerk named Cheryl Samons who rose to become the firm’s chief
…firedoglake.com/…/david-j-stern-ban… 1/2
2/21/2011 David J. Stern: Bandleader for a Symp…
operating officer, signed as many as 1,000 foreclosure affidavits a day without reading a single word.
The employee said Samons’ hand got so tired that she told three other employees to forge her
signature. Samons also signed numerous mortgage assignments with a notary stamp that didn’t even
exist at the time of signing. Notary stamps are only valid for four years. The only way Samons could
have signed mortgage assignments at the time they were supposedly notarized was if she had been
capable of time travel.
Stern rewarded Samons with a new BMW SUV every year, paid all her bills and took care of the
mortgage payment on her home, according to testimony from two employees. Samons did not respond
to request for comment.
The people getting foreclosed upon were an inconvenient facet of this scheme. And when Stern showed how this
model could work, the servicers undoubtedly pressured every other firm they worked with to operate in the same
fashion. This keeps fees to a minimum and benefits the servicers by giving them an out rather than modifications,
which aren’t cost-effective for them.
The servicer model never had to deal with a flood of delinquent loans before the popping of the housing bubble in 2006;
they were too new to ever need to confront such a problem. And the resultant chaos proved that they simply could not
handle the flood without cutting corners massively and maximizing profits through forms of abuse like illegal fee
increases. The foreclosure mills worked in concert with this.
This kind of profile, quite rare for the AP, exposes the clear fraud at the heart of the mortgage servicing, modification
and foreclosure system. Stern’s company is now a penny stock, he’s being investigated by the state Attorney
General and federal prosecutors, his staff has shrunk from 1,200 to 200, banks have abandoned him, and his
headquarters is in default. He hasn’t gone to jail yet but he’s a likely candidate.
However, if we are to learn anything from this episode, it’s how depressingly normal Stern’s machinations were.
…firedoglake.com/…/david-j-stern-ban… 2/2
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE TWENTIETH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA
BANKUNITED,
non-successor in interest to [lawfully seized] BANKUNITED, FSB.,
purported plaintiff(s),
CERTIFIED DELIVERIES
The Honorable Daniel R. Monaco
The Hon. Hugh D. Hayes, “Disposition Judge”
Circuit Court Judges, Twentieth Judicial Circuit
Judicial Assistants Karen / Jan
Collier County Government Complex
3301 Tamiami Trail East
Naples, Florida 34112
Phone: 239.774.8118; 239.252.8119;
Fax: 239.252.8870; 239.775.5538; 239.774.9654; 239-252-8020
Email: dmonaco@ca.cjis20.org, jmetcalfe@ca.cjis20.org, hhayes@ca.cjis20.org
RE:
CANCELLATION of unlawful hearing in disposed wrongful foreclosure case 09-6016-CA
“BANKUNITED” v. FRANKLIN-PRESCOTT, JENNIFER
DISPOSED CASE NO. 09-6016-CA; DISPOSITION JUDGE HAYES, HUGH D.
UNAUTHORIZED “02/22/11 HEARING” [AMENDED TO 02/14/11 & CANCELLED]
Foreclosure Fortune Buys Bugatti, Yacht, Blake Griffin's All-Star Slam Dunk Over Car Win
Gets Record TV Audience
Advertisement
A screengrab taken from Google Earth Florida has the third-highest residential foreclosure rate in the
shows the home of David J. Stern in Fort
Lauderdale, Florida. The larger boat to
U.S., and Stern, 50, has made a fortune off the bust. His
the right is his yacht, "Misunderstood". foreclosure-processing business has generated hundreds of
Source: Google Earth/wbipi.com via
Bloomberg
millions of dollars in revenue preparing documents for the cases
that his law firm brings on behalf of lenders seeking to reclaim
homes from borrowers who can’t pay their mortgages.
‘His Acumen’
“David’s wealth is a reflection of his acumen and the tremendous volume of foreclosures,” Tew
said in an interview yesterday. “He had something to do with the acumen part. He had nothing
to do with the amount of foreclosures we have.”
Stern’s firm handles thousands of cases a month. It conducted a review of its files and found 21
had “issues with the affidavits,” Stern said in a Sept. 8 conference call to discuss second-quarter
results for DJSP Enterprises Inc. DJSP provides non-legal foreclosure services, such as title
searches, for his law firm, Law Offices of David J. Stern PA. Both businesses share the same
bloomberg.com/…/florida-attorney-bu… 1/5
2/21/2011 Foreclosure Fortune Buys Bugatti, Yac…
Plantation, Florida, address. Market Snapshot
U.S. Europe Asia
Stern sold those operations this year in a transaction that formed DJSP, a publicly traded
NIKKEI 10794.20 -48.57 (-0.45%)
company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. Stern, the chairman and chief executive
officer of DJSP, declined through his attorney to be interviewed for this story. TOPIX 970.26 -3.34 (-0.34%)
Advertisements
“He started from scratch and has built a wonderful legal practice and has made a lot of money,”
Tew said. “That’s the American dream isn’t it?”
One in 34 housing units in Florida was in the foreclosure process or bank-owned as of Oct. 1, Sponsored Links
the third-highest rate in the country, according to Irvine, California-based RealtyTrac Inc., 10 Keys to Short Selling
which monitors foreclosure data. State courts have hired additional judges to hear foreclosure Do you want to start Short Selling? This
Free report will show you how.
cases and clear the backlog. MoneyMorning.com/Short_Selling
in 2006, according to the regulatory filing. Revenue from non-law-firm operations jumped to Home Foreclosures in USA
$199.2 million in 2008 from $40.4 million over the same period, the filing said. DJSP depends Buy foreclosed Property in the USA Now.
Guarnateed High Yield Returns
on the firm for case referrals, according to the regulatory filing. CashflowGold.com
Stern’s law firm received more than 6,000 new foreclosure cases a month and managed
100,000 at any given time, according to the filing, which is dated Dec. 28, 2009.
“David and foreclosure lawyers are foreclosing legitimate mortgages that are in default,” Tew
said. “And yet, they have been successfully villainized.”
According to the filing, the law firm has represented the biggest banks and mortgage servicers in
the U.S., including Wells Fargo & Co.; Goldman Sachs Group Inc.’s Litton Loan Servicing,
Countrywide Financial, now owned by Bank of America Corp.; and government-supported
Fannie Mae, the mortgage- financing company. Stern was named Fannie Mae’s attorney of the
year in 1998 and 1999, according to the filing.
The Florida Bar, which regulates lawyers in the state, has an open investigation into Stern,
according to Karen Kirksey, a spokeswoman. She declined to comment on the nature of the
investigation because it’s confidential. The Supreme Court of Florida approved a reprimand of
Stern in 2002 after the bar said he submitted “potentially misleading” affidavits about his costs
in foreclosure cases, according to court documents. He consented to the reprimand, court
documents show.
bloomberg.com/…/florida-attorney-bu… 2/5
2/21/2011 Foreclosure Fortune Buys Bugatti, Yac…
At an investor conference in California in March, Stern told investors that rising foreclosures
were the key to DJSP’s success, according to a securities lawsuit filed against Stern and DJSP
filed in federal court in Florida in July. Foreclosures, he said, would stay high until 2017, even as
President Barack Obama acted to keep people in their homes.
“No matter what the Obama administration brings our way, we have found the way to create a
profit center on it,” Stern said at the conference, according to the lawsuit.
‘A Factory’
Hilton Wiener, a Florida attorney who has defended homeowners in foreclosure cases against
Stern’s firm, described Stern’s operations as “more similar to a factory than a law firm.” The
business, he said, depends on homeowners’ not contesting foreclosures so that cases can move
quickly through the courts to judgment, Wiener said, basing his view on former Stern paralegals
whom he has hired.
“This is like a production line,” he said. “The bank needs them to get certain results. It just
becomes a foreclosure processing mill.”
Stern’s employees were under pressure to process cases as quickly as possible, according to a
deposition of Tammie Lou Kapusta, a former paralegal in his law firm.
Under oath, Kapusta told lawyers for the Florida attorney general’s office that Stern’s business
grew from about 250 employees in 2008, when she started, to 1,100 when she was fired in July
2009. She said she was fired after refusing to follow a practice that she said she believed was
improper.
Employees repeatedly signed affidavits without reviewing them, forged signatures, and
improperly notarized and backdated documents, she said, according to a transcript of the
interview.
“Everything was about getting the judgments entered because we have to report back to the
banks,” Kapusta said.
Tew, Stern’s attorney, declined to comment specifically on Kapusta’s allegations. He said that she
was fired for cause and that she provided no evidence to back her claims.
Kelly Scott, a legal assistant who said she left the firm in February 2009 due to illness, made
allegations similar to Kapusta’s in a sworn interview Oct. 4 with the Florida attorney general’s
office.
Paralegals at Stern’s firm signed documents on behalf of bank employees and had the authority
to do so, Tew said. In May 2009, they stopped that practice so that only bank employees now
sign the documents.
Fixed Fees
Stern’s businesses are paid fixed fees for legal and nonlegal work, such as $400 for title searches,
according to the regulatory filing and Stern’s remarks at the investor conference, as quoted in
the securities lawsuit. Profit depends on cutting costs and boosting volume. The business is
supported by an operation in the Philippines that provides data entry and document preparation,
according to the filing.
This year, Stern made about $146 million when he sold his non-legal foreclosure operations to
China-based Chardan 2008 China Acquisition Corp., a “blank check” company originally
formed to do business in China, according to a regulatory filing. The company was renamed
bloomberg.com/…/florida-attorney-bu… 3/5
2/21/2011 Foreclosure Fortune Buys Bugatti, Yac…
DJSP Enterprises.
Stern and his businesses were paid as much as $58.3 million in cash, given a note of at least
$52.7 million and promised another $35 million in cash that must be paid in full within five
years, according to the filing. He also received about 6 million common and preferred shares in
the company. Stern is the seventh-largest shareholder of DJSP with a stake of 4.2 percent,
according to Bloomberg data.
DJSP reported a profit of $3.8 million on revenue of $56.1 million in the second quarter.
On Oct. 14 DJSP said it was laying off 10 percent of its workforce because foreclosure referrals
had “declined dramatically,” after lenders including Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase &
Co. suspended foreclosures and evictions.
DJSP rose 9 cents to $1.60 yesterday in Nasdaq Stock Market trading. The shares have dropped
82 percent this year.
To contact the editor responsible for this story: David E. Rovella at drovella@bloomberg.net.
10 Keys to Short
Selling
Do you w ant to start
Short Selling? This Free
report w ill show you
Play Video Play Video Play Video how .
MoneyMorning.com/S…
Big Lenders May Be First Douglas Holtz-Eakin Boeing Unveils 747-8
to Settle Foreclosure P… Discusses FCIC Repo… Passenger Jet
Related News
Executive · Law · U.S. · Real Estate
Sponsored Links
"Give a Gift of Bloomberg Markets Magazine and Get Great Savings! "
Rate this Page Worldw ide Rates & Business Exchange Solutions
Bonds Radio
Regions Bloomberg on Tw itter Careers
Currencies Video
Go to the old version Markets Bloomberg on Facebook Contact Us
of Bloomberg.com Mutual Funds Podcasts
Industries Bloomberg Briefs Press Room
ETFs
Economy Personalities Bloomberg Government Help
Commodities
Politics Keene On Demand Bloomberg HT Sitemap
Economic
Law Calendar 日本語サイト Trademarks
Mobile
Environment Bloomberg Law Feedback
Science
Leaders Bloomberg Link
Opinion Technology Bloomberg Markets Magazine
Muse: Arts, Bloomberg New Energy Finance
Culture &
Spend Bloomberg Open Symbology
Sports Bloomberg Press
Bloomberg Sports
Bloomberg UTV
bloomberg.com/…/florida-attorney-bu… 4/5
2/21/2011 Foreclosure Fortune Buys Bugatti, Yac…
©2011 BLOOMBERG L.P. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Terms of Service Privacy Policy Advertising
Unless indicated otherw ise, intraday market data is at least 15 minutes delayed.
bloomberg.com/…/florida-attorney-bu… 5/5
2. “BankUnited” has had no right to sue and/or schedule any hearing. Here, Jennifer Franklin-
Prescott did not owe any debt to “plaintiff BankUnited” pursuant to the evidence on file in
this disposed wrongful action. The record and evidence never identified “BankUnited”.
AFTER DISPOSITION THE MOTIONS WERE MOOT
3. After the 08/12/2010 DISPOSITION, the “Motion to Dismiss” was MOOT.
“BANKUNITED” KNEW/CONCEALED THAT IT LACKED ANY STANDING
4. “Plaintiff BankUnited” was not any “creditor” in the disposed wrongful action.
5. Here, undersigned “Camner Lipsitz, PA”, and/or founder of bankrupt and defunct
“BankUnited, FSB”, Alfred Camner, Esq., “represented the interest of the plaintiff
[BankUnited]”. See facially frivolous and insufficient Complaint. “BankUnited” had
fraudulently alleged in the Complaint (¶ 16, Count II) that “plaintiff” [“BankUnited”] owns
and holds the note and mortgage.”
6. The purported note and/or mortgage within the four corners of the disposed complaint did
not identify “BankUnited” as a “lender”.
“BANKUNITED” AND/OR “ALBERTELLI LAW” DECEIVED THE COURT
7. Here, “BankUnited” and/or “Albertelli Law” perpetrated fraud on the Court, because after
disposition in the record absence of any “BankUnited” note, “BankUnited” falsely
pretended entitlement to the “hearing” of a MOOT “Motion to Dismiss / Enjoin”.
“… it is the responsibility of the lawyers to keep the judge's office informed. Our
office cannot possibly call all the lawyers on a trial docket to check the status of each
case prior to trial. PLEASE let us know when you have settled or otherwise
disposed of your case. Please cancel your trials and hearings.”
“BANKUNITED’S” SANCTIONABLE CONDUCT AND FRAUD
8. Here, “BankUnited” failed to comply with the Rules …
“PLEASE READ THE "GENERAL RULES AND REQUIREMENTS" AND
ENSURE THAT YOUR ATTORNEY HAS BOTH READ AND
UNDERSTANDS THE "GENERAL RULES AND REQUIREMENTS" AND
THE "STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL COURTESY AND CONDUCT."
The Standards of Professional Courtesy and Conduct govern scheduling,
hearings, motion practice, submissions to the Court, etc. and may be found at
www.ca.cjis20.org/pdf/ao_2_20.pdf
FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULES, REQUIREMENTS, AND
STANDARDS MAY RESULT IN IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS AND THE
MATTER NOT BEING HEARD”
See Judicial “Office Policies and Procedures”.
ARBITRARY & CAPRICIOUS SCHEDULING OF UNAUTHORIZED HEARING
9. Arbitrary, ambiguous, and/or unlawful acts undermine the authority of this Court. Here,
violations of this Court’s “OFFICE POLICES AND PROCEDURES” in favor of crooked
bank lawyers threatened the integrity of the Court.
COURT ADMINISTRATION MUST CANCEL UNAUTHORIZED 02/22/11 HEARING
VIOLATIONS OF “OFFICE POLICIES & PROCEDURES” IN DISPOSED CASE
10. All motions other than MSJ and DJ will be CANCELLED by Court Administration. In this
disposed action, “Motions to Dismiss / Enjoin” were scheduled without any authority.
2
“Only hearings for Summary and Default Judgments may be scheduled on the
Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday dockets before Judge Daniel Monaco. These
timeslots will be in 5 minute increments. (DO NOT schedule any other kind of
motions on this docket.) All motions other than MSJ and DJ will be cancelled by
Court Administration. No additional motions will be heard with the
Summary/Default Judgments before Judge Monaco.”
See “OFFICE POLICIES AND PROCEDURE, Senior Judge Foreclosure, Collier County
Clerk of Court.
MANDATORY CANCELLATION FOR LACK OF SERVICE IN DISPOSED ACTION
“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.” Id.
11. Here accordingly, “BankUnited” was not entitled to sue nor to any hearing and did not serve
any “timely notice” of hearing on Jennifer Franklin-Prescott as also conclusively evidenced
by the Clerk’s 02/18/2011 Docket.
UNAUTHORIZED ATTORNEY “ANDREW LEE FIVECOAT”, ESQ.
12. “Andrew Lee Fivecoat” had no authority to schedule any hearing in said disposed wrongful
foreclosure action. Here, Fivecoat knew and/or fraudulently concealed that “BankUnited”
had no standing and that the exhibits on file conclusively evidenced that “BankUnited” was
not identified as “lender” and was not any note holder and/or owner.
PRIMA FACIE FRIVOLITY IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY “BANKUNITED” NOTE
13. Professor Stephen Gillers, an expert in legal ethics at New York University, believes that the
involvement of lawyers in questionable transactions could damage the overall reputation of
the legal profession, “which does not fare well in public opinion” throughout history:
“When the consequence of a lawyer plying his trade is the loss of someone’s home,
and it turns out there are documents being given to the courts that have no basis in
reality, the profession gets a very big black eye,” Gillers said.
See New York Times, “Judges Berate Bank Lawyers in Foreclosures”.
FIVECOAT CONCEALED PRIMA FACIE NULLITY OF PURPORTED NOTE
14. Here, Fivecoat knew that the complaint in this disposed action had been “incredible,
outrageous, ludicrous and disingenuous”, because no note had been properly executed and
no note and/or instrument “transferred” from bankrupt and lawfully seized “BankUnited,
FSB”, to the “F.D.I.C.”, and/or “BankUnited”. Disgraced founder of defunct “BankUnited,
FSB”, Alfred Camner, Esq., and/or Camner Lipsitz, PA, had filed the facially frivolous
complaint on 07/09/2009.
A. L. FIVECOAT, ESQ., LACKS AUTHORITY
15. Here, A. L. Fivecoat has lacked any authority to appear. Fivecoat knew/concealed that
bankrupt “BankUnited, FSB” is not any party to this disposed action.
3
MANDATORY CANCELLATION OF HEARING
4
(Fla. 1952), cert. denied, 344 U.S. 878, 73 S. Ct. 165, 97 L.Ed. 680 (1952). Here,
“BankUnited” never had any standing in the first place and cannot frivolously “re-litigate”
its prima facie lack of standing.
21. In dealing with the identities of the parties, estoppel requires that the “real parties in interest”
be identical. See Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company v. Cox, 338 So.2d 190 (Fla. 1976).
The well-established rule in Florida has been and continues to be that estoppel may be
asserted when the identical issue has been litigated between the same parties or their privies.
See Trucking Employees of North Jersey Welfare Fund, Inc. v. Romano, 450 So.2d 843 - 45
(Fla. 1984). Here the file and evidence in this disposed action had conclusively evidenced
that “BankUnited” was not any “real party in interest”
BINDING PRECEDENT: BAC FUNDING CONSORTIUM SUPPORTED DISPOSITION
22. The Second District confronted a similar situation in BAC Funding Consortium, Inc.
ISAOA/ATIMA v. Jean-Jacques, 28 So. 3d 936 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010), when the trial court had
granted the alleged assignee U.S. Bank's motion for summary judgment. That court reversed
because, inter alia, "[t]he incomplete, unsigned, and unauthenticated assignment attached as
an exhibit to U.S. Bank's response to BAC's motion to dismiss did not constitute admissible
evidence establishing U.S. Bank's standing to foreclose the note and mortgage." Id. at 939.
Said Appellate Court in BAC Funding Consortium, properly noted that U.S. Bank was
"required to prove that it validly held the note and mortgage it sought to foreclose." Id.
RECORD LACK OF ANY ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE:
“BANKUNITED” WAS NOT ANY OWNER AND HAD NO RIGHT TO SUE PRESCOTT
23. In the instant case, the purported note was, e.g., not properly executed, not assigned, the
falsely pretended assignment not recorded, and the endorsement in blank was unsigned and
unauthenticated, creating genuine issues of material fact as to whether “BankUnited” was
ever the lawful owner and holder of the purported note and/or mortgage. As
in BAC Funding Consortium, here there were no supporting affidavits or deposition
testimony in the record to establish that “BankUnited” validly owned and held the improperly
executed note and mortgage, no evidence of an assignment to “BankUnited”, no proof of
purchase of the debt nor any other evidence of an effective transfer to “BankUnited”.
AUTOMATICALLY DISSOLVED “LIS PENDENS”
24. Here, the improper and unauthorized lis pendens was automatically dissolved upon the
disposition of foreclosure. See Rule 1.420(f), Fla. R. Civ. P. (2010). The validity of a notice
of lis pendens is one year from filing. § 48.23(2), Fla. Stat. (2010).
25. In this disposed action, the purported “plaintiff” sought to re-establish the missing note in
“COUNT I (Reestablishment of Lost Instruments)” of the complaint (see p. 2 of 8). Franklin-
Prescott had filed her answer(s) and motions to dismiss and proven plaintiff’s lack of
standing, which was one of the ultimate affirmative defenses. Here, the record reflected
that plaintiff could not possibly re-establish the note and that no authentic note could possibly
be proven under the Evidence Code.
FRAUD ON THE COURT & RECORD EVDENCE THEREOF
26. Here however, alleged ‘plaintiff(s)’, BankUnited & BankUnited, FSB, fraudulently asserted:
“that all conditions to the institutions of this action have occurred, been performed or
excused …”
5
27. Prior to the 08/12/2010 disposition, plaintiff had failed to re-establish and could not have
possibly re-established the destroyed and/or lost note/mortgage. Here, the time and manner
of the loss/destruction had been uinknown. See UCC §§ 3-309; 3-305.
FILE & DOCKET SHOWED FRAUD EVIDENCE & DEMAND IN DISPOSED ACTION
6
FRAUD - INVESTIGATIONS BY THE FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL
31. Foreclosure mills like “Albertelli Law” have been under investigation, which evidenced so-
called “robo signing” of fraudulent documents and/or affidavits. See, e.g., Office of the
Florida Attorney General, Dept. of Legal Affairs, AG # L10-3-1145, IN RE: Investigation of
Law Offices of David J. Stern, P.A..
“ROBO-SIGNING” OF FRAUDULENT AFFIDAVITS – NO FILE REVIEW
32. In this disposed wrongful foreclosure action, Ashley Simon, Esq., Florida Bar 64472, stated
under oath that she “had not reviewed the actual file in this [disposed] case.” See prima facie
fraudulent “Affidavit as to reasonable attorneys fees”; 11/10/2010 “Notice of Filing”.
33. Employees of “foreclosure mills” in Florida [e.g. Jeffrey Stephan; Angela Nolan, Cheryl
Samon] admitted under oath that they signed hundreds of affidavits a day to process pending
foreclosures without actually having read or checked the documents. It later came to light
that said employees were not alone, and in 23 states that require a court to approve a
foreclosure, thousands of foreclosures are now potentially under question. Robo-signing and
similar practices are unlawful and egregious.
“FORECLOSURE GATE”
34. The lender, formerly known as GMAC, admitted that employees signed thousands of
foreclosure documents without reading them, a practice dubbed “robo-signing”.
35. In this disposed action, Jennifer Franklin-Prescott has been defending against, e.g., “robo
signing”, “BankUnited” fraud, and the cover-up by foreclosure mill “Albertelli Law”.
“BANKUNITED’S” FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION
36. In this disposed action, “BankUnited” had failed to show they it had the contractual right to
enforce the alleged note, which had never been properly executed. Accordingly, any hearing
under these circumstances would be unlawful and unauthorized. The allegations by
“BankUnited” have been facially frivolous and unsupported. The Exhibits on file did not
identify “BankUnited” as any note holder and/or owner. Here, the alleged note was never
properly executed.
7
ILLEGALITY OF “ROCKET DOCKET”
37. Here after said 08/12/2010 disposition and in the absence of any note and standing,
“BankUnited” was not entitled to “5 minute increments” of a “rocket docket”, because
“BankUnited’s” fraud on the Court is illegal. In this disposed Case, “BankUnited” and/or
Attorney Fivecoat are playing “another round of [illegal] games of paper”.
38. Cases like this have led experts like Katherine Porter, visiting professor of law at Harvard
University, to seriously question the mortgage industry:
“The foreclosures and the whole loss of wealth are going to deepen the
disappointment and distrust in financial institutions to follow the rules of law," Porter
said, "and be fair when dealing with the little guy.”
PUBLICATIONS AS TO DISPOSED WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE ACTION
39. The communications with the Court and Officers are published at, e.g., www.scribd.com,
www.YouTube.com. See www.google.com.
Respectfully,
ATTACHMENTS
Docket et al.
CC:
Florida Bar
New York Times
June M. Clarkson, Esq., Theresa B. Edwards, Esq.
Mark R. Briesmeister, Financial Investigator
Office of the Florida Attorney General
8
5. “BankUnited, FSB” was not any “plaintiff” in this disposed action.
6. The electronic docket in this disposed action had erroneously listed “BankUnited, FSB” as a
7. In this disposed action, “Plaintiff” “BankUnited” had deceptively alleged “that all conditions
“General Allegations”).
8. The “subject mortgage referenced” in the wrongful complaint identified “BankUnited, FSB”
9. The “logo” of bankrupt and lawfully seized “BankUnited, FSB” included a palm tree and
“BANKUNITED”.
10. “Plaintiff BankUnited” had falsely alleged that “The plaintiff [is] named in the attached
complaint [“BankUnited”] is the creditor to whom the debt is owed … The undersigned
attorney represents the interest of the plaintiff.” See “Notice Required by the Debt Collection
11. “Plaintiff BankUnited” was not any “creditor” in the disposed wrongful action.
12. Jennifer Franklin-Prescott did not owe any debt to “plaintiff BankUnited” pursuant to the
13. Undersigned “Camner Lipsitz, PA”, and/or founder of bankrupt and defunct “BankUnited,
FSB”, Alfred Camner, Esq., “represented the interest of the plaintiff [BankUnited]”.
14. “BankUnited” had fraudulently alleged in the Complaint (¶ 16, Count II) that “plaintiff”
15. The purported note and/or mortgage within the four corners of the disposed complaint did
2
16. The purported note/mortgage identified “BankUnited, FSB” as a “lender”.
17. No admissible evidence of any obligation to pay money to “BankUnited” existed on the
record of this disposed wrongful action, and Jennifer Franklin-Prescott was not obligated to
18. “Plaintiff BankUnited’s” purported “01/12/2011 Affidavits as to amounts due and attorneys
fees” were fraudulent and not founded on any note and/or mortgage identifying
“BankUnited” as a “lender”.
19. An affidavit that is not executed in accordance with the requirements of Ch. 92, Florida
21. “BankUnited” has had no right to enforce the falsely pretended mortgage/note.
25. “BankUnited” could not have possibly been entitled to any summary disposition and/or
26. “Pedro Luis Licourt” is not any known party to the disposed action, Case # 09-6016-CA
27. The purported “Amended Motion for Summary Judgment and for Attorney Fees against
Pedro Luis Licourt” was erroneous, irrational, and irrelevant to said disposed action.
28. Said action was disposed, because here no note and/or mortgage had been “transferred”” to
“BankUnited”.
3
29. The record and/or docket of this disposed action conclusively evidenced the “genuine issues
of material fact”, which prohibited any summary disposition after the 08/12/2011
disposition.
30. The “02/08/2011 “Amended Mtoin for Summary Judgment and for Attorney Fees against
Pedro Luis Lizourt” was erroneous, irrational, and irrelevant to said disposed action.
31. There was no service of notice of 02/14/2011 hearing upon Jennifer Franklin-Prescott nor
32. There was no service of notice of 02/22/2011 hearing upon Franklin-Prescott, and the
33. In this disposed action, the purported “Defendant’s motion to dismiss/motion to enjoin” was
34. Jennifer Franklin-Prescott was never properly served either by personal service of process or
by any other service of process in strict compliance with Chapters 48 and 49, Florida
Statutes.
35. “BankUnited” failed to conduct a diligent search in strict compliance with the Florida
36. The record established that the falsely alleged service by publication was void.
37. Florida’s Statutes governing service of process are to be strictly construed to assure that
38. Any judgment against a defendant based upon improper service by publication would have
4
2/18/2011 Public Inquiry
Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - A LL / C ase - 112009C A0060160001XX
(FAX) NO TIC E O F O PPO SITIO N & O PPO SITIO N EVIDENC E/FR AUD EVIDENC E &
UNAVAILABILITY IN DISPO SED AC TIO N/NO TIFIC ATIO N O F C O URT & C LER K ET AL
02/07/2011 NO TIC E
O F FR AUDULENT AFFIDAVITS BY JASO N M TAR O KH ESQ & O F UNLAW FUL/
UNAUTHO R IZED AC T BY ALBER TELLI LAW (UNSIGNED)
02/08/2011 NO TIC E O F HEARING
02/22/11 @10:00A.M., DEFENDANT'S MO TIO N TO DISMISS/MO TIO N TO ENJO IN
02/08/2011 AMENDED NO TIC E O F HEAR ING
02/14/11 @3:30P M AMENDED MO TIO NFO R SUMMAR Y JUDGMENT AND FO R
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 1/2
2/18/2011 Public Inquiry
02/14/11 @3:30P.M. AMENDED MO TIO NFO R SUMMAR Y JUDGMENT AND FO R
ATTO R NEY FEES AGAINST PEDR O LUIS LIC O UR T
02/08/2011 AMENDED
MTO IN FO R SUMMAR Y JUDGMENT AND FO R ATTO R NEY FEES AGAINST P EDR O LUIS
LIC O UR T
02/09/2011 DEMAND
O F FO R ENSIC R EVIEW & AUDIT AND NO TIC E O F FR AUDULENT AND/O R INAC C UR ATE
AC C O UNTING IN DISPO SED AC TIO N
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.
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 2/2
2/18/2011 Public Inquiry
Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - A LL / C ase - 112009C A0060160001XX
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.
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 1/1
2/17/2011 Public Inquiry
Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - A LL / C ase - 112009C A0060160001XX
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 2/3
2/21/2011 MyFax Notification - Fax Sent Successf…
From: MyFax Free <myfaxfree@myfax.com>
To: Jennifer Franklin-Prescott <naplesnano@aol.com>
Subject: MyFax Notification - Fax Sent Successfully
Date: Sun, Feb 20, 2011 8:40 pm
Your fax to HON. DANIEL R. MONACO at +1 (239) 252-8870 has been successfully sent:
Your fax was delivered at 2/20/2011 7:40:23 AM, and contained 21 page(s).
mail.aol.com/…/PrintMessage.aspx 1/1
2/21/2011 MyFax Notification - Fax Sent Successf…
From: MyFax Free <myfaxfree@myfax.com>
To: Jennifer Franklin-Prescott <naplesnano@aol.com>
Subject: MyFax Notification - Fax Sent Successfully
Date: Mon, Feb 21, 2011 1:53 pm
Your fax to HON. HUGH D. HAYES at +1 (239) 774-9654 has been successfully sent:
Your fax was delivered at 2/21/2011 12:51:36 AM, and contained 21 page(s).
mail.aol.com/…/PrintMessage.aspx 1/1