Foreclosure Defense Florida

What is The Florida Supreme Court Made A Rule And Attorneys Just Ignored it- Part V

The Florida Supreme Court published its Rule that as of February 11, 2010 requires foreclosures complaints to be verified.   A Motion for Re-hearing or Clarification was filed by Shapiro & Fishman seeking clarification of this rule.

I am dumbfounded that the foreclosure mills continue to file complaints post-February 11 that are not verified, but they are apparently doing this across the state with impunity. (If anyone is now seeing verified complaints, please post this information. Likewise, if everyone is still seeing unverified, please advise.) Page 10 of the Published Amended Rules states that comments to the rule must be received by the Court by April 12, 2010. Shapiro has filed a Motion for Rehearing and I believe they and others are using this as a basis to argue that they do not need to comply with the rule now.

However, the language on the comments refers only to the amendments to form 1.966 (a), the Final Judgment form, and not Rule 1.110(b), the Verified Complaint Rule.   I don’t see any problems with the Final Judgment Rule at all.   And if my read of the Rue   is correct, Rule 1.110(b) is solid, good law with no legitimate legal basis for challenge or rehearing in any way.

Did Shaprio and Fishman catch this or did they read the Rule carefully and are just filing a baseless and improper Motion?

The Rule and Comments here sc09-1460



  • Okay, you are all not going to believe this, well only if you have your tin foil hat nearby…

    Is it a brand new “Cullaro” all over again?

    Mark Romance, works for Richman Greer who is the attorney for Shapiro Fishman that wrote their motion for rehearing? He is also on the FL Supreme Court Task Force, hearing a Motion on Rehearing by Shapiro Fishman and Ben Ezra Katz? On top of that, he is the Civil Procedure Rules Committee Chair?

    See the service list of Ben Ezra

    Mark A. Romance, Esq.
    Civil Procedure Rules Committee Chair Richman Greer P A
    201 S Biscayne Blvd Ste 1000 Miami, Florida 33131-4327

    See attorney for Shapiro

    Richman Greer

    See opinion bottom page 10

    An original and nine paper copies of all comments must be filed with the Court on or before April 12, 2010, with a certificate of service verifying that a copy has been served on the Committee Chair, Mark A. Romance

    This can’t be right can it?


  • Alina says:

    Wow. All I can say is that Mr. Romance’s law firm did not read the Supreme Court’s Amendments to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Top of page 10 clearly states that comments are to be for 1.966(a) only as the Supreme Court did not elicit comments prior to the proposed amendment.

    There is a definite conflict of interest and Mr. Romance’s firm should withdraw from representing Shapiro. Didn’t anyone at his firm run a conflict check (standard procedure in any law firm b4 accepting any case)?

    Someone should tip off the Supreme Court Task Force.

  • KeyWestT says:

    My foreclosure includes a verification and in fact the complaint is referred to as a “verified foreclosure complaint”. Monroe County – filed 03/08/2010 by Kass and Schuler. The wrinkle is that the verification says it is being verified by the alleged bank that is foreclosing, but the signature block has a name, a stamp that says “Vice President” and the name of the *servicer* of the mortgage. In other words, to cut to the chase, I have a loan with Bank A (with MERS as mortgagee) and I have had the same “servicer” for two years – but, a new bank has come along and claimed my mortgage and note, filed a suspect assignment after the complaint was filed, and that complaint is written in the name of the new bank, but by a person from my servicer for the last two years. My servicer also happens to *exclusively* service the plaintiff – but the plaintiff alleges to only have been assigned my mortgage AFTER the complaint was filed. Joy.

    • JamesM2 says:

      Be bold, name the bank and servicing company. That way we may be able to offer more support.
      Have you reined an attorney or filed an answer ?

      The document that supposedly verifies your complaint my not be valid at all. Do look at it very hard.

  • PJ says:

    Thanks for that 4cf…. did not get as far as you, but read the re-address, since Shapiro (etal) is one crafty individual, and found it rather simplistic in language for such a serious issue raised by the court… your good work and time puts it all in perspective and sadly points to the wink,wink,nod,nod that is going on… this combined with the efforts to make FL a non-judicial state, looks like this little tit for tat was meant to distract from the real issue at hand FRAUD!

    Kudo’s to you and your hard work!

  • Pj says:

    Matt or 4CF , would you be kind enough to post the PDF re-address by Shapiro & Fishman to a recent post at Livinglies, there is someone there looking for info on this firm, not savvy enough to do so and can not find a link on line to cut and paste…Thanks

    Also came across an on line article that where LPS via the LOGS network showered each and every affiliate of the Shapiro Network of Attorneys across the country with accolades and awards in 2008. Will try my best to post the link!

    Perhaps that should be sent to the investigators.

Leave a Reply