Wow—Plaintiff Must Prove Standing in Order to Foreclose….(depressing actually)

The depressing part is this keeps getting repeated over and over and over again…
Appellants, Jerome and Bea Saver, pro se, appeal the trial court’s
order granting final judgment of foreclosure in favor of Appellee, JP
Morgan Chase Bank, National Association, as Acquirer of Certain Assets
and Liabilities of Washington Mutual Bank From the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation, Acting as Receiver (” JP Morgan”). We reverse.
The underlying cause is a foreclosure action. After being served with
the foreclosure complaint, Appellants moved to dismiss the case for lack
of standing. Appellants asserted in their motion that the complaint did
not ” allege or indicate that [JP Morgan] owns the note and mortgage
which are the subjects of the [JP Morgan’s] Complaint.” JP Morgan
moved for summary judgment, without establishing when it became the
holder or owner of the note. On the day of the hearing on the motion for
summary judgment, Appellants filed a response in which they again
raised lack of standing. Nothing in the record suggests that the trial
court had the benefit of the response. The trial court entered summary
judgment in favor of JP Morgan. Appellants moved for rehearing
asserting that there were issues of material fact regarding JP Morgan’s
standing to bring the cause of action. The trial court summarily denied
the motion. This appeal follows.
A plaintiff seeking foreclosure in a mortgage proceeding must
establish that it had standing to foreclose at the time it filed suit.
McLean v. JP Morgan Chase Bank Nat’l Ass’n
A foreclosure plaintiff has standing so long as it was the
holder of the mortgage at the time it filed suit. Id. If the plaintiff’s name
is not on the mortgage, it can establish standing by proving that the
mortgage was either assigned or equitably transferred prior to the date it
filed the complaint. Id. The following evidence is sufficient to establish
standing in such a scenario: 1) a special endorsement on the note in
favor of the plaintiff or a blank endorsement, 2) evidence of an
assignment from the payee to the plaintiff, or 3) an affidavit of ownership.
Id. at 174.
Here, J P Morgan’s affidavits were executed after it filed suit.
Additionally, they did not state when JP Morgan became the owner of the
note nor did they indicate that JP Morgan was the owner of the note
before it filed suit. Thus, JP Morgan failed to submit evidence that it
held the mortgage at the time it filed suit, and the trial court erred in
granting summary judgment in its favor.