MR. RESNICK: Objection, Your Honor.
11 THE COURT: Grounds?
12 MR. RESNICK: They haven’t introduced
13 this into evidence yet and they’re trying to
14 testify as to the endorsement or not the
15 endorsement.
16 THE COURT: Overruled.
17 THE WITNESS: There is an endorsement
18 from Washington Mutual Bank.
19 MS. CAPOTE: Your Honor, we’d like to
20 introduce this into evidence —
21 MR. RESNICK: Your Honor —
22 MS. CAPOTE: — as part of our Composite
23 Exhibit 1.
24 THE COURT: Thank you. Before you do
25 that, what, Counsel?
MR. RESNICK: Your Honor, we object to
24 her testifying and testifying to documents.
25 She was instructed to bring with her all the
1 documents that she relied upon. She was
2 served a subpoena to do so. She’s testifying
3 as to a chain of custody which she’s telling
4 us is in some computer system which she
5 accessed that has an actual document that
6 they didn’t produce and that she apparently
7 looked at in the last week, although she
8 doesn’t know the date. We believe that’s not
9 proper in order to establish a chain of
10 custody for her to authenticate this note.
11 And we would object to it coming and being
12 used.
13 And we also object to her testifying in
14 this case, given that she was instructed to
15 come here with all of her documents that she
16 relied upon and she’s telling us, although
17 opposing counsel is saying, oh, these are the
18 only four documents, she’s now stated there
19 are other documents out there that they
20 didn’t bring and that we weren’t provided.
21 Thank you.
I like the part when the Judge overruled every single objection from the Defense.
this reads like some low rate movie, courthouse drama
The judge sounds totally unfit to be a judge and it ends with the judge giving an opinion that was obviously already decided upon before either of the attorneys opened their mouths. The JPMorgan Chase attny just wanted his lunch money and the attny for the homeowner just wanted the judge to exercise a brain cell – which did not happen
Sad
Mr. Nardi should have definitely been subpoened to establish the fact that Chase did not have loans list when the P&S agreement by the FDIC was executed…. personally I belive that is a cover up from the begining. The agrement shows the loan list as an exibit, but there is no exibit attached. The FDIC does not acknowledge the exhibit..they dont even answer under FOIA.
Also, the judge appears to be pre opiniated against the Defendant
Good arguements though
Thx
Unreal…she is texting while under oath giving testimony? Chase claims it got the Note/Loan from the FDIC, yet there is no list of Loans that were acquired by Chase. This case must be appealed and overturned.
Matt- thank you for your defending what is right. I have been in issues with banks for years, where i first approached them about helping me with loan mods and or dissolving property when the market crashed. My efforts were combated with short sale approvals that took 18 months then denied, buyer long gone, then deed in lieus were offered and the paperwork came representing a claimed holder that had never been disclosed to me before in RESPA QWR responses from big bank of _______. Also, four years of RESPA letters and multiple substitute trustess stating that four different parties owned my loan. so how can any reasonable person settle when you don’t know who is the other party on the other side of the table. I bought property yes, but didn;t know i would be handcuffed to a bank/servicer that would do what ever it could to foreclose and misrepresent loan owners and never want to stand up and correct the issues and work with us folks, instead wanting to just crush us.
I wrote the attorney general explaining that my loan servicer has told me four different claimed owners for my loan and flop flops back and fourth on them too, all post Settlement. they said they could not help or do anything.
The courts don’t care, judges think all borrowers are deadbeats wanting a free house. which 99.9% of borrowers just want to be treated in good faith and fairly. I nor most borrowers did not know that the appraissed values of properties and the purchase price was so drastically inflated, my properties lost more than 50% in value almost over night.
I feel so trapped and so bullied, they get bailed out and we get stepped on
(Utter Bullsnot!)
A. By — reviewed our business records and
7 we acquired certain assets and liabilities of
8 Washington Mutual Bank from the FDIC on September
9 25th, 2008.
10 THE COURT: How did you do that, ma’am?
11 THE WITNESS: It was an acquisition
12 through the FDIC. Because Washington Mutual
13 was having difficulties and we acquired all
14 of their mortgage loans.
15 MR. RESNICK: Your Honor, I object.
16 That’s hearsay. They have no documentation
17 in their exhibits to demonstrate that. She’s
18 testifying as to a document that she read.
19 We don’t have the business record here and
20 they’ve already told you that these are the
21 four documents that she relied upon in coming
22 here today.
23 THE COURT: Quick response.
24 MS. CAPOTE: Your Honor, the Court may
25 take judicial notice of the Purchase and
46
PLEASANTON, GREENHILL, MEEK AND ASSOCIATES
561-833-7811
1 Assumption Agreement. That is public —
2 capable of verification in the public record.
3 I do have a copy of that today, Your Honor.
4 We didn’t introduce it because it wasn’t
5 listed on our exhibits list. However, it was
6 something that was available to the witness
7 upon her review and is available to opposing
8 counsel and anyone —
9 THE COURT: So you have a copy of the
10 certification of that acquisition; is that
11 what you’re saying?
12 MS. CAPOTE: Your Honor, what I’ve got is
13 a copy of the Purchase and Assumption
14 Agreement.
15 THE COURT: Okay. I’m going to overrule
16 the objection. I’ll determine the probative
17 value as to its admissibility. Go ahead.
18 BY MS. CAPOTE:
19 Q. Did Chase verify the accuracy of the
20 records that it took over from Washington Mutual?
21 A. Yes, we did.
22 Q. And how did it do that?
23 A. We perform a quality control check on all
24 loans that we acquire from any other entity to
25 ascertain that it meets the standards of JPMorgan
47
PLEASANTON, GREENHILL, MEEK AND ASSOCIATES
561-833-7811
1 Chase before we forward it on our books.
………………
The Purchase and Assumption Agreement NEVER SPECIFICALLY listed any MORTGAGES and NOTES TO ANY WAMU OWNED PROPERTIES. JPM Chase may possibly have gained the “Servicing rights” for trusts maybe… BUT WAMU SOLD VIRTUALLY ALL NOTES INTO SECURITIZATION (prior to mid 2007), HENCE, WAMU NO LONGER COULD OWN WHAT IT SOLD (as seller) TO OTHERS (as buyers)! The endorsement in blank on the note is proof of that sale!
I read through this case. While I’m not an attorney Iam living through my foreclosure case on my investment condo which is going on
year three. Thanks to your help and advise BOA was unable to foreclose as they were unprepared for trial and the case was dismissed. In three years they have been unsucessful at showing an original or copy of any document. The chain is Pulte Morgage,Countrywide,BOA, and now finally NationsStar Mortgage.
The Transcript shows the Judge to be fed up with his job, or is it frustration. If this continues I think the court system just wants to put an end to the foreclosure world at any cost.
In Brevard County, the trials started with one law firm (Marshall Watson) taking the lead and setting all pro se defendants cases up for trial. It has been slaughter by default and ignorance. I am sure Watson anticipated the result correctly! So much for Rocket Docket; mass graves are so much more efficient!!
UCC 3 and 9 combined (improperly) gives a Judge sooo much to work with. All that was needed was mass trials!!
Hopefully you and other knowledgeable defense attorneys will be able to successfully navigate these shark infested waters presided over by the rulers of the deep. Watch out for the spear guns!!