It is apodictic there can be no cause of action to foreclose a mortgage unless
we know where the paper is and that it actually represents something.
There is much ” sand in the gears” of our property transfer system in these times. However,
we cannot bend the rules. A person seeking to enforce an instrument conveying an
interest in real property must demonstrate he has directly or indirectly acquired
ownership of the instrument.
The obvious unstated bad news here is that this quote is only the dissent of a decision that overturned a lower court foreclosure TRIAL.
As to your most recent post and “do-overs” for banks, I’d ask you WHY the DCA felt compelled to reverse the lower court’s judgment? The answer must be that this was, in fact, the SECOND action by the same plaintiff on the same note and mortgage, the first of which had already been dismissed. The DCA recognizes the application of Florida’s “two strikes and you’re out” rule, but was NOT willing to apply it to a foreclosure action and so apparently had to twist the narrative to fit their need for a reversal.
What a state of inequality under the law.