Foreclosure Defense FloridaGeneral InformationVideos

My Most Devastating and Disturbing Appellate Loss….Florida's 2nd DCA Rejects Entirely The AHMSI v. Hassell Appeal…..(totally disgusted)

Remember the AHMSI v. Hassell appeal (watch video above)?   Remember those oral arguments held just a few days ago?   Remember the solid legal argument on many, many issues that demanded that our nation’s court system reach out and send a message? (It’s all right here….just in case you missed it.)

None of that matters.

In record time, Florida’s 2nd District Court of Appeals rejected all of those arguments and granted (once again) carte blanch for the banks and their debt collectors to do whatever they like in furtherance of their schemes.
This opinion is a perpetuation of all that is wrong in this country.

There is no law. There is only The Banks.   There is only Them.

After hundreds of pages of well written briefs, case law, a trial, clear bad conduct…. nothing else matters……

We should all be terribly, terribly ashamed of what we have allowed to happen in this country.   And even more, shame on our court system for turning their backs on the foundations of a justice system that was supposed to stand for something more….





  • neidermeyer says:

    The bastards give a one word opinion “affirmed” so that they cannot be questioned…

  • J.C. says:

    Sorry to hear about this. It is truly sad how far justice has fallen. Will you be asking the 2 DCA for clarification on the Order affirmed? After they finish counting to ten, will you get up, turn around and pursuing the case in the Supreme Court?

  • Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty, Foe of Tyranny says:

    Cowards! The court didn’t even support the decision.

  • Sharon says:

    Will you appeal to the Florida Supreme Court?

    • there is nowhere to appeal…they are the final say….this is the nation we live in….

      • FR says:

        Sadly I fear, this will be used against me (my case) and anyone else that wants to bring up the issue of non-negotiability. While watching the video, I couldn’t help but feel the [so called] judge on the left wanted nothing to do with your arguments. It appeared as though he would interrupt you just to change the subject (keep you from speaking on topic). I applaud your efforts, but it seems this is another nail in the coffin of justice.
        Well… I might as well start packing, the big boys at The Bank of New York Mellon are coming after me now. If I were to attempt this in my case (pro se), I would probably do more harm than good (now that they have the ammo to kill my case).
        What do I do now? Can’t afford a attorney.

      • FR says:


      • Frustrated says:

        Matt- i am sorry about your loss in your case. you have done so much good though, please keep up the fight for right, i will not say justice, don’t believe there is such a thing. banks and these MBS just do what ever say whatever and judges and courts let it happen. attorney generals let the issues slide under the rug and banks got billions of dollars in bailouts and are using that money to ramp up collections and litigation. I have 3 properties with a big bank servicer and they have represented in total 28 possible names that are owners or my loans or creditors. it is a mess and the judges seem to not care…it has ruined my life.

  • Sharon says:

    Matt, I’m sorry for all of us. Another case is very interesting to me as well and is before the US Supreme Court in USAirways v. McClutchen. This case is an ERISA appeal and is so appalling that if the Supreme Court rules in USAirways’ favor the public will be outraged. The case is an issue of subrogation and USAirways wants McClutchen’s entire settlement. He was disabled in an auto accident and settled for little. USAirways wants all of that money including the attorneys fees.
    ” This case is before the Supreme Court and many are very concerned. I certainly wouldn’t want to be in McCutchen’s place right now but there is a silver lining. If the corporatist Supreme Court rules in USAirways favor in this unconscionable case the entire world will be watching. And US citizens that have been sleeping at the wheel when it comes to ERISA, except when it impacts them personally, will awaken. Just like this election we saw the American people open one eye and reject fanaticism, if the Supreme Court rules in USAirways favor, the other eye of the giant will be opened and our collective eyes will stay open until we restore sanity to the courts. For McCutchen’s sake I hope they rule against USAirways but for our country, a ruling in favor of USAirways means an awakened giant and the games the courts have been playing with our laws will be over. Equity will be restored to our courts.”

  • LA Today says:

    It is hard to find the words, can’t believe that the courts can do this to homeowners. Owning a home is more than the American Dream, it our right to have a safe place to live. How can the courts turn their backs on such fraud. I can only think of one way the banks are paying off the judges. No one wants to talk about this or say anything. I believe it is true and I think they even paid off the lawyer that we had, he changed his mind and just gave up. Judges are supposed to be fair and rule on the law, not take only one side. Since when it is legal to steal homes. Fight on we must, never surrender…

  • JamesM says:

    According to the FL Supreme Court a PCA express NO opinion. (This is one of the reasons it is so difficult to appeal from a PCA)
    The good thing is the court did not enter a written opinion which ruled against your arguments, therefore the arguments are still usable.
    On a side note, I strongly recommend the use of specialist lawyers who are Appellate specialists when drafting and arguing an appeal. Specialists who regularly appear before the DCA in question. They know the judges well and know how to draft and craft arguments to hit the personal hot spots on the judges assigned to the case.

  • Attorney Wendy Alison Nora says:

    The judges did not understand the issue of non-negotiability, the proper application of Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code, or even how to apply Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code, if the mortgage note was a negotiable instrument. @9:48 min. of the video recording: “Is a note negotiable if held by the principal?” to which you properly replied that if the note is being enforced by the principal, it has not been negotiated and negotiability is not an issue. No wonder they just wrote “Affirmed.” They could not have written intelligently on the issues. How is it that homeowners, in a judicial foreclosure state, are not entitled to know the identity of the party foreclosing on their home? The principal is the real party in interest. If the principal did not authorize the foreclosure, the foreclosure is a fraud on the court. All the court seemed to care about is whether or not the homeowner would be subjected to liability for the loan amount beyond the confiscation of the home. This is real estate and is not equivalent to mere monetary value. The Statute of Frauds applies here, in addition to the real party in interest rule and the fact that to have standing to pursue an action, there has to be actual injury to the plaintiff.

  • indio007 says:

    Uhmm where is the actual opinion? I was hoping to see an analysis of “non-negotiable”. I sense they don’t want to touch it.

  • not an auditor anymore says:

    So Matt, let cooler heads prevail? Get together with April, Max, Mark, Chip, et al…. do an autopsy and (other than offering the judicial unfairness and bias “explanation,”) figure out a way to get the court to reconsider, explain their ruling, etc. Opposing counsel seemed to possibly, maybe, hypothetically have B.S.’ed the court? Under 4-3.3 of the Bar Rules, isn’t that a no-no? If you give up now, they do win.

  • not an auditor anymore says:

    BTW, did you guys ever inspect the note itself? The “your honor, we have the (photoshopped) note,” loses all its inherent practicality, doesn’t it?

  • albert says:

    are you surprised ?…you should see how fast the trial judge section 22 in miami dade 11th court resolve his busy schedule…i had 3 hearings i was lucky the first one lasted 1.28 secs….and seems the notary commission showing blatant differences in signatures..(i have 5 fraud notaries)mean nothing…and let’s not forget that

  • Ennis says:

    What the hell is going on? Are they not going to address all the legal issues you so well argued with a written opinion? Is their entire ” opinion” to be a one word statement of ” AFFIRMED”? The record time in issuing this ” opinion” speaks volumes of the corruptness.
    Is our entire Florida court system now so overtly corrupted that they will not even address the issues, much less the law?
    I, like you, am absolutely disgusted.
    I know it’s hard, very hard, but try to keep up the fight!

  • RC Derksen says:

    I wonder if UCC 3-301, 302 etc was focused on and explained to the judges, including the requirements it takes to be the person who has the authority to enforce the note, if it would make a difference.
    302- prove they acquired the note for value, in good faith, transferee had no info suggesting there were any disputes, delinquencies, or other enforcement issues involving your Note.
    One always hopes that they will follow the law, but that seems to be a naive expectation. Does anyone have evidence their retirement fund grows with judgments for the banks?
    Also, I wonder if the wet ink note was truly available. Take a look at it with a jeweler’s glass, to see if it is the original. Fraud on the court?

  • dlennon says:

    For you, and all your contemporaries who have recognized “wrong” and put forth every logical, civilized, means to correct this situation – (it seems the courts are achieving dissolution of “clear title” to property – for everyone involved) – Thank You for your efforts. The lasting effect of those efforts (past, present, future) has yet to be determined. No matter the outcome, you’ve made all the difference by presenting sanity and hope vs. the complete collapse/despair of social awareness/action that would have otherwise prevailed. Know you’ve added to the blessings of life; enjoy the Holidays!

  • Dave says:

    Devil’s Advocate ( it is an excellent movie by the way ), so what if you took a different path and said ” ok ” the note is negotiable, but to ” redeem ” or make demand for payment they have to indorse it. ( can’t cash a check without a party’s name being placed on the instrument and a signature and ” ID “.
    Then you approach through the SEC Rule Making Authority provided at SEC 33-8518 ( I put a short version on your PSA link ) which is the directive for all ABS. )
    Delinquent pool asset is determined by the transaction agreement
    Transaction Agreement is the PSA
    PSA identifies the ” obligor ” ( start by defining the debtor through transformation into the obligor )
    By definition, the ” obligor ” is the party responsible to make payments directly or ” indirectly ” for a pool asset
    If Def. is the obligor, then Def is a party to the PSA ( indirectly by definition )
    If Def. is a party to the PSA, the PSA is genuine issue that can raised
    The PSA will prove FRAUD ( incomplete transfers, etc… )
    FRAUD will win the case !
    Plus Fiduciary violations
    Plus Collection violations
    Also, on the non-negotiable angle The Pla. alleges in the Complaint ” All conditions have been… ” negotiable instrument is to have no conditions yet Pla. pleads there were conditions… maybe should have been raised earlier ?
    Thanks, keep up the hard work, wish I could afford you take my case !

  • Attorney Wendy Alison Nora says:

    I know how discouraging it can be when we believe that the judges will do their jobs and uphold the Rule of Law and then they do not. It is best for us to get over such delusions. Judges are merely human beings, with limited intelligence and are easily deluded into thinking that they are special because they are addressed as “Your Honor” and given absolute immunity for even malicious conduct, if they have jurisdiction. A problem with absolute immunity arises when judges do not have jurisdiction over the subject matter of foreclosure cases when the cases are commenced without standing of the foreclosure claimant. If there is no jurisdiction, their orders and judgments are void, not just voidable, VOID. There is a US Supreme Court extended the doctrine of absolute immunity to judges presiding over cases for which there could be jurisdiction. Stump v. Sparkman, 435 U.S. 349 (1978) But see also Pulliam v. Allen, 466 U.S. 522 (1984) in which a judge was held liable for attorneys’ fees in a civil rights action for a declaratory judgment (damages against the judge were not sought or allowed to be sought, but attorneys’ fees were awarded against the judge.)
    One of my favorite judges, who I have known for decades, just ducked a forged mortgage note and a late filed forged mortgage issue on the grounds that my client had not timely answered the complaint. I had argued that the judgment was void because the pleading of subject matter jurisdiction was false. The foreclosure claimant pleaded that MERS assigned the note and mortgage to it, which, as well all know, MERS could not have done. MERS holds and owns no notes and the servicers assign the mortgages out of MERS (assignee to assignee, which is a legal impossibility.) The judge was, at first, troubled by the truth, hesitated to allow the confiscation of the home by confirming the Sheriff’s sale and then apparently convinced himself that the case was “easy” (his own words in the decision) because my client did not file a timely answer (pro se.) The problem is that there never was a hearing on the confirmation of the Sheriff’s sale, which is a due process violation, and could give rise to a civil rights suit. Now all of you citizens can see into the heart of a lawyer’s conflict: I would have a duty to file a civil rights action against a good and basically honest judge for violating my client’s civil rights to due process, in addition to filing the direct appeal, if my client chooses to proceed. The consequences for me are dire because it will make me an enemy of the judges in that county, where I have practiced for decades. In order to maintain its power, the legal system demands that its judges be protected. There is an unholy reverence for judges, a false religion in which people have had faith in judges. Judges have been declared untouchable by a secular system which has to believe in a higher authority given to humans in place of a divine being. We call those humans our judges or our kings. Such institutional structures, unchecked, violate natural law, as recognized by the Declaration of Independence. The institutional structure cannot be allowed to violate the basic and fundamental rights of the people. When it does, it leads to either tyranny or revolution.
    The rejection of the natural law is biblical in scope because, as the story goes, man and woman first were created to have a direct relationship with God. When they rejected that relationship, the law was given to Moses, who was succeeded by Joshua. Then the people in the “Promised Land” created intermediaries for the law and called them Judges. (Think Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers Deuteronomy, Joshua . . . Judges.) Eventually being disappointed by the Judges, the people asked for Kings and the rest is history. When the law fails and the judges do not preserve it, the people will seek dictatorship (kings.) The kings will fail them and the people will need a Savior. And so it goes. . .
    Let us realize that the judges will not save us. They are as frightened of the ravenous beast which now plunders this land as any of the rest of us. We must free ourselves from the last vestige of FAITH in this system and realize that it is OUR RESPONSIBILITY to hold the system accountable. Faith in human structures is a delusion.

  • Gary Freeman says:

    Sounds to me like we need to get the Judges bonding information and initiate a malfeasance claim after all, they are operating outside their oath and even their BAR oath wherein they all agreed to uphold the law of the land
    Oath of Attorney partially stated as found on Florida Supreme Court website…….
    “I will not counsel or maintain any suit or proceedings which shall appear to me to be unjust, nor debatable nor any defense except such as I believe to be honestly debatable under the law of the land; So help me God”……….
    This is an unbondable offense pursuant to the Uniform Bonding Code and is a risk management issue for the State and the County. Hit where it hurts, in the wallet!

  • Joy says:

    Glad to see at least someone (Gary) brought up the judge’s oath of office (and bond), which is required for them to enter the duties of their office and be acting as a judge. No one prior to Gary even mentioned the oath. An oath of office is also required of all other public servants, and attorneys prior to being admitted to practice law. If a judge is in violation of their oath, and in violation of the judicial canons, then that needs to be addressed and lodged.

Leave a Reply