Posts Tagged ‘DJSP Enterprises’
How Can David Stern’s Office Just Ignore The Florida Supreme Court?
Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
One of the most frustrating things I find in the current foreclosure crisis is watching the big foreclosure mills just trample of the rights of real people and just ignore case law, rules of evidence and rules of the Florida Supreme Court. I just cannot understand how they have been permitted to get away with it on such a massive scale. I mean, what if lawyers just announced they would be ignoring rules of civil procedure….oh wait, that’s exactly what DJSP did with the following disclaimer in the SEC Prospectus:
The Supreme Court of Florida has recently taken an active role in ensuring that proper documentation is filed in a
foreclosure action by amending several rules of civil procedure and pertinent forms related to foreclosure actions filed in Florida….
However, DJS may not be successful in complying with these new rules.
Next, read carefully the attached Motion for Rehearing. In it, Stern’s office attempts to justify ignoring the valid rules of the Florida Supreme Court. The Supreme Court provided their response to this argument when it released the following response:
The motion for rehearing on in the alternative is hereby stricken as untimely.
(Apparently the words “shall become effective immediately upon release of this opinion” didn’t make it clear enough)
Now, when no less an authority than the Supreme Court issues an Order interpreting issues relating to their own validly-enacted rules, you would think that would be the end of it right? Well, apparently that’s not the case. Stern’s office makes a strained argument that somehow the Rule is not effective. Forget about the fact that Strern’s office didn’t even file any request for rehearing or clarification….if they took issue with the new Rule, why didn’t they file a response or request for rehearing? They did not. So what should be the sanction if Stern and other mills have taken a gamble on a creative interpretation of court rules or procedure and that gamble is not correct?
I am of the opinion that entire circuits should adopt programs like the one adopted by the Twelfth Circuit where the court reviews complaints and dismisses them on its own motion if they are not in compliance with the rule. I frankly cannot understand why taxpayer dollars should be used to subsidize knowingly improper conduct by the Millionaire Foreclosure Mills or why this conduct goes on with no sanction.
Our judges are under incredible political pressures to clear their foreclosure dockets and dismissing cases when the millionaire foreclosure mills knowingly violate the rules and waste judicial resources is an appropriate sanction that could generate millions of desperately needed revenue for our courts and their overworked staff. I have yet to have Stern’s office set one of my Motions to Dismiss on this issue for hearing, but I promise I’ll be loaded for bear and I will have a court reporter present if they ever develop enough confidence in their argument to set it for hearing.
Well, enough of my editorializing, read the work below, tear it apart and please share your comments and insight. I hope that by sharing this Motion and argument we’ll all be better prepared to oppose these positions.
David Stern- Motion for Rehearing
David Stern- Memo in Support of Motion to Dismiss
David Stern- Opposition to Motion To Dismiss
David Stern- Motion to Dismiss Non Verified
Finally, on a related topic, read a recent Palm Beach Post Article on Fraudulent Assignments of Mortgage it provides an interesting counter point to the detailed and researched reporting that appeared in today’s Mother Jones news. We’re all in this fight together people. Remember, they’re our courtrooms…..not theirs!
BOMBSHELL DEPOSITION OF DAVID STERN EMPLOYEE- MORE EVIDENCE OF MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE TWILIGHT ZONE
Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
I’ve been very clear for years that the work product out of the (ahem) Law Offices of David Stern is about the worst, most unprofessional foreclosure mill in the State of Florida. (I say “ahem” because I just don’t believe there’s much to the “Law Offices of David J. Stern” and that the real operation is “DJSP”, David J Stern Enterprises, the “non-legal” back end of the foreclosure mill.)
My friends over at 4closurefraud just posted the latest, greatest good post that documents just some of the absurd work and facially questionable documents that come out of their office. Take a hop on over to their site and read the latest post about DJSP.
Next, read the transcript posted here for an in-depth look into the weird twilight zone world of document preparation and notary work at The Law Office of David Stern…it promises to blow your mind. We’ve read depositions of one of Stern’s other robo-signers, Cheryl Sammons, but this one is even better!
Keep a close eye on DJSP!
David J. Stern Enterprises (DJSP)- One Investment Advisor Rates it a ‘Buy’
Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
Put this in your list of, “a ha ha ha ha ha” internet stories and mark the following link:
This brilliant advisor thinks you should invest all your money in David J. Stern Enterprises, Inc. for the following reasons:
As a value investor, I like to find fundamentally sound businesses with strong free cash flow generation that are out of favor and/or underfollowed, and where the interests of management are well aligned with shareholders. DJSP Enterprises (DJSP) fits this criteria and appears poised to deliver strong returns for many years, irrespective of whether the economy plods along or slips back into recession.
I’ll put this firmly in the category of “everyone is entitled to their opinion”, but read the report below, print it out and stick it on your wall. Maybe Mr. Fligel should talk to a few attorneys who have experience litigating against the mighty DJSP that he thinks so highly of. And now, the report on David J. Stern Enterprises, DJSP:
Are The Law Offices of David J. Stern Even Law Offices At All?
Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq.
The “Law Offices of David J. Stern” is perhaps the biggest, by volume, Foreclosure Mill in the State of Florida. The general consensus in the legal community and my personal opinion is that the pleading and legal work that bears the identification of the Law Offices of David J. Stern is sloppy and unsophisticated at best and merely word processed non-legal form documents spit out by a computer that no lawyer could possibly sign his bar number to at worst.
I’m particularly offended by the “signatures” that are found on the legal documents submitted by the Law Offices of David J. Stern. When an attorney signs a document, it’s supposed to be an affirmation and an oath and a professional responsibility. But take a look at the arrogant, sloppy mess of a mark that appear on Stern pleadings. Those non-signature sloppy marks are an offense to me and to the court. I don’t think they should qualify as a signature under the rules of civil procedure and even if they might meet the technical definition, if I were a judge, I would strike the pleading just because I find them so arrogant and offensive….I would also be questioning the lawyer who supposedly signed the pleading to determine if that lawyer that allegedly signed them wants to take credit for the “signature”
And now comes the revelations contained within the prospectus filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for an entity known as DJSP Enterprises….read on…
DJSP Enterprises, Inc. (“DJSP”, “we,” “us” or “our”) is a holding company whose primary business operations are
conducted through three wholly owned subsidiaries, DJS Processing, LLC (“DJS LLC”), Professional Title and Abstract Company of
Florida, LLC (“PTA LLC”), and Default Servicing, LLC (“DSI LLC”) of DAL Group LLC (“DAL”), a company in which DJSP holds
a controlling interest. DAL, through its operating subsidiaries, provides non-legal services supporting residential real estate foreclosure, other related legal actions and lender owned real estate (“REO”) services, primarily in Florida.
Now what exactly are those “non-legal services supporting residential real estate foreclosure”? Is this the legal pleadings and real work involved in a Stern foreclosure case? Where is the line between the legal work and non-legal services?
What role does the “Chardan 2008 China Acquisition Corp.”, the “blank check company which has its principal business and/or material operations in China.” have in the prosecution of foreclosure cases in front of Circuit Court Judges throughout Florida?
What exactly were the “non-legal business and assets” that David J. Stern and the Law Offices of David J. Stern (“DJS”) transferred to the DAL Group for:
“(i) $58,500,080 in cash; (ii) $52,469,000 in a promissory note issued by DAL to DJS (the “Stern Deferral Note”); (iii) 1,200,00 DAL Common Units; (iv) 1,666,667 DAL Series A Preferred Units; (v) 3,133,333 DAL Series B Preferred Units; and (vi) the right to receive $35 million in post-closing cash.”
As a result of the Transaction, DAL acquired membership interests in the three limited liability companies (DJS LLC, PTA
LLC and DSI LLC) that together constitute a provider of non-legal residential mortgage foreclosure processing and other services,
principally in the state of Florida.
During the three months ended March 31, 2010, the Company’s revenues from mortgage foreclosure related services, net of revenue from client reimbursements, decreased by $0.6 million, or 2%, to $27.6 million, compared to $28.1 million for the same period lastyear. (What exactly are the kind of mortgage foreclosure related services that a non-lawyer can provide that would generate $27.6 million dollars in three months?)
Our REO liquidation business has a sole customer
through which we generated $3.3 million in revenue for the first quarter of 2010 compared to $1.9 million in the same period last
year, primarily due to an increase in the number of REO liquidation files which grew to 1,728 files in the first quarter of 2010, an
increase of 56%, from 1,111 files in the first quarter of 2009. (Who exactly is this undisclosed sole customer that made this much money off the backs of consumers and shouldn’t the judges granting foreclosure be concerned about who this is?)
Mr. Stern may encounter
conflicts of interest in the execution of his duties on behalf of us. These conflicts may not be resolved in a manner favorable to us. For
example, he may be precluded by his ethical obligations as an attorney or may otherwise be reluctant to take actions on behalf of us
that are in its best interests but are not in the best interests of DJS, his law firm, or its clients. Further, as a licensed attorney, he may
be obligated to take actions on behalf of DJS or its clients that are not in our best interests.
DJS LLC has one law firm customer in Florida, DJS. Each foreclosure, bankruptcy, eviction, litigation, and other mortgage
default related case file referred to DJS will typically have a fixed fee associated with it that is based on a schedule established by
government sponsored entities, such as Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. DJS LLC will be paid a fixed fee by DJS for the services it
renders to DJS.
Regulation of the legal profession may constrain DJS LLC’s, PTA LLC’s and DSI LLC’s s operations, and numerous issues
arising out of that regulation, its interpretation or evolution could impair our ability to provide professional services to
customers and reduce revenues and profitability.
Each state has laws, regulations and codes of professional responsibility that govern the conduct and obligations of attorneys
to their clients and the courts. Adherence to those codes of professional responsibility are a requirement to retaining a license to
practice law in the licensing jurisdiction. The boundaries of the “practice of law,” however, can be indistinct, vary from one state to
another and are the product of complex interactions among state law, bar association standards and constitutional law as formulated
by the U.S. Supreme Court. Many states define the practice of law to include the giving of advice and opinions regarding another
person’s legal rights, the preparation of legal documents or the preparation of court documents for another person. Although we are
not aware of any ruling or interpretation of laws, regulations or other applicable standards that would result in the operations that DJS
LLC will perform being considered the practice of law, we cannot say with certainty that no existing law, regulation or standard will
be interpreted to produce that result, or that a new law, regulation or standard leading to that result will not be adopted in the future.
In addition, all states and the American Bar Association prohibit attorneys from sharing fees for legal services with non-attorneys, so
that if any aspect of our business is deemed to constitute the practice of law, it would not be possible for DJS LLC, PTA LLC or DSI
LLC to perform those services.
