Denial of Motion to DQ â Cert Petition - Stopa Law Firm

More documents

Recommendations

Info

8. In the process of preparing said motion, Petitioners encountered an Assignment of Mortgage in the Official Records of Hillsborough County, Florida (“the Assignment”), which assignment purports to convey the Mortgage from MERS to the Bank. Petitioners then filed their Motion to Disqualify, with the Assignment of Mortgage attached thereto. See Appendix to Petition, 4. Consistent with Florida procedure, Petitioners signed the Motion to Disqualify under oath. See Appendix to Petition, 4. 9. In the Motion to Disqualify, Petitioners showed: a. Petitioners never signed a Note and Mortgage with the Bank, so the Bank’s standing had to be predicated on some sort of assignment or transfer of the Note and Mortgage, apparently from MERS to the Bank; b. The Official Records of Hillsborough County, Florida, reflect an Assignment of Mortgage from MERS, as Nominee for Unimortgage, to the Bank, executed on October 12, 2009 (the same date the lawsuit was filed) and recorded on October 19, 2009; c. The Assignment was “prepared by” and to be “returned to” the Bank’s counsel, Shapiro; d. Instead of identifying the address of MERS, the purported assignor, the Assignment lists Shapiro’s name and address in MERS’ place; e. The Notary block on the Assignment indicates the Assignment 4
was executed in Harris County, Texas, which is where, as the Assignment reflects, the Bank conducts business, not MERS (which conducts business in Ocala, Florida); and f. The Assignment reflects it was executed by Marti Noriega, purportedly as Vice President of MERS, yet Marti Noriega is actually the Assistant Vice President of the Bank. See Appendix to Petition, 4. 10. As Petitioners asserted in the Motion to Disqualify, these facts, viewed together, raise serious concerns. For instance, if the Assignment were a legitimate business transaction, and the Bank actually obtained the Assignment from MERS, as Nominee for Unimortgage, then why did Shapiro, the Bank’s counsel in this case, prepare the Assignment On or about the same day the lawsuit was filed Why was it signed and notarized in Texas, where the Bank conducts business, instead of Ocala, where MERS conducts business Why is Shapiro’s address listed in place of MERS’ address And why was it signed by Marti Noriega, an agent of the Bank, and not an agent of MERS See Appendix to Petition, 4. 11. The legitimacy of the Assignment is one significant concern; the conduct of Shapiro is another. For example, Shapiro is acting as counsel for the Bank against MERS, yet Shapiro currently represents MERS in other, pending 5
Page 1 and 2: MARCUS FRANKLIN and MELISSA FRANKLI
Page 3: Exhibit “A.” As such, it is axi
Page 7 and 8: Essentially, Shapiro argued that th
Page 9 and 10: emergency. After all, even if, argu
Page 11 and 12: was largely predicated), purportedl
Page 13 and 14: 52-53. A written Order followed, se
Page 15 and 16: provides: 30. Meanwhile, Rule 4-1.1
Page 17 and 18: 33. The Comment to Rule 4-1.7, R.Re
Page 19 and 20: II. THE LOWER COURT’S FAILURE TO
Page 21 and 22: MERS (and hence has a conflict unde
Page 23 and 24: 45. Petitioners could go on and on
Page 25 and 26: esponsibilities to each client and
Page 27 and 28: 54. Respectfully, it would be hard
Page 29: CONCLUSION 57. In light of the fore

Denial of Motion to DQ â Cert Petition - Stopa Law Firm

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?

Denial of Motion to DQ â Cert Petition - Stopa Law Firm