The party claiming to be holder in due course has the burden of establishing each
statutory requirement by a preponderance of the evidence.26 A key factor is whether Deutsche
received the note (and related mortgage) in good faith. The trustee argues the last-minute
appearance of the second allonge with the alleged endorsement to Deutsche, long after Deutsche
was required to prove its ownership of the note, and only after the Court found the first allonge
insufficient to prove ownership, is evidence of fraud and Deutsche”˜s bad faith. She also disputes
Ms. Faber”˜s authority to act on behalf of RFC to transfer the note to Deutsche. According to the
trustee, “•there is a question of fact as to how the 2007 Allonge came to be, and how the 2010
Allonge came to be, and how Aurora Loan Services obtained in 2010 a copy of the Allonge
lacking Faber”˜s endorsement, if the Allonge was endorsed, as Faber testified in her affidavit . . .
in May 2007.
In the grand design of things you’ll receive an A for hard work. For right now I will subscribe to your point.
Matt, Did you truncate the .pdf file name in your blog post about the DeutcheBank 2nd Mortgage allonge?