6 28 08 To 8 21 12 Most of Cv08-01709 Carpentier Flanagan Ocr Opt A9

Case Information
Case Description: CV08-01709 - J CARPENTIER, ETAL/ AAMES FUNDING

CORP., ETAL(D7) - Non Jury -
Filing Date: 26-Jun-2008
Case Type: FC - FORECLOSURE
Status: NEF - Proof of Electronic Service
Case Cross Reference
Cross Reference Number
Case
Parties (top)
Seq Type Name
2 PLTF - Plaintiff CARPENTIER, JAMES S
3 PLTF - Plaintiff CARPENTIER, JOAN E
5 DEFT - Defendant AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION
DBA AAMES HOME LOAN,
7 DEFT - Defendant WINDSOR MANAGEMENT CO.,
8 DEFT - Defendant RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS,
INC,
9 DEFT - Defendant QUALITY LOANS SERVICE
CORPORATION,
12 ATTY - Attorney Zimbelman, Esq., Eric
13 ATTY - Attorney Zimbelman, Esq., Eric
18 ATTY - Attorney Schuler-Hintz, Esq., Kristin A.
20 PROP - Pro
Per-Pltf/Pet/Appellant
ProPer Person,
Event
Information (top)
Date/Time Hearing Judge Event Description Outcome
1. 12-Jul-2012 at
14:40
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
S1 - Request for
Submission
S200 - Request for
Submission Complet
filed on: 21-Aug-2012
Extra Text:
2. 12-Mar-2012 at
16:50
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
S1 - Request for
Submission
S200 - Request for
Submission Complet
filed on: 20-Apr-2012
Extra Text:
3. 12-Jul-2010 at
10:35
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
S1 - Request for
Submission
S200 - Request for
Submission Complet
filed on: 15-Jul-2010
Extra Text:
4. 16-Nov-2009 at Honorable H844 - TRIAL - D845 - Vacated filed
Notice: This is NOT an Official Court Record
4. 16-Nov-2009 at
10:00
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
H844 - TRIAL -
NON JURY
D845 - Vacated filed
on: 15-Jun-2009
Extra Text: Notice
of Bankruptcy and
Automatic Stay filed
05.20.09
5. 24-Jun-2009 at
09:00
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
H756 -
PRE-TRIAL
CONFERENCE
D845 - Vacated filed
on: 15-Jun-2009
Extra Text: Notice
of Bankruptcy and
Automatic Stay filed
05.20.09
6. 19-Mar-2009 at
13:00
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
H820 - STATUS
HEARING
D435 - Heard ... filed
on: 19-Mar-2009
Extra Text:
7. 06-Mar-2009 at
13:30
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
H816 - STATUS
CONFERENCE
D844 - Vacated-Reset
filed on: 06-Mar-2009
Extra Text:
PLAINTIFF FAILED
TO APPEAR
8. 13-Feb-2009 at
15:30
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
H820 - STATUS
HEARING
D435 - Heard ... filed
on: 13-Feb-2009
Extra Text:
9. 13-Jan-2009 at
14:50
Honorable
PATRICK FLANAGAN
S1 - Request for
Submission
S200 - Request for
Submission Complet
filed on: 22-Jan-2009
Extra Text:
10. 08-Dec-2008 at
10:20
Honorable
CONNIE STEINHEIMER
S1 - Request for
Submission
S200 - Request for
Submission Complet
filed on: 13-Jan-2009
Extra Text: CASE
TRANSFERRED TO
DEPARTMENT 7
11. 17-Jul-2008 at
15:00
Honorable
CONNIE STEINHEIMER
H764 -
PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION
D425 - Granted filed
on: 17-Jul-2008
Extra Text:
$1,000.00 BOND TO
REMAIN IN EFFECT
12. 17-Jul-2008 at
15:00
Honorable
CONNIE STEINHEIMER
H364 -
HEARING...
D802 - Set in Error
filed on: 07-Jul-2008
Extra Text:
13. 07-Jul-2008 at
16:30
Honorable
CONNIE STEINHEIMER
H364 -
HEARING...
D425 - Granted filed
on: 07-Jul-2008
Extra Text: TRO
GRANTED; ONE
THOUSAND DOLLAR
BOND TO BE
POSTED. HEARING
TO EXTEND TRO SET.
Docket Entry
Information (top)
Docket Description Date Filed Extra Text
1. CHECK - **Trust
Disbursement
09-Sep-2013 Extra Text: A Disbursement of $1,000.00 on Check
Number 25723
2. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
05-Sep-2013 Extra Text: Transaction 3973125 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 09-05-2013:09:06:28
3. 2985 - Ord Return
Funds on Deposit
05-Sep-2013 Extra Text: TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
BOND - Transaction 3973100 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 09-05-2013:09:02:41
4. 2540 - Notice of
Entry of Ord
22-Aug-2012Extra Text: Transaction 3168375 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 08-22-2012:13:49:28
5. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 08-22-2012:13:50:42
6. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 08-21-2012:09:32:48
7. 3370 - Order ... 21-Aug-2012Extra Text: [GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MTN FOR
SANCTIONS; AND DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MTN
TO ALTER OR AMEND ORDER, OR NEW TRIAL,
OR PLED IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO
SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - ks]
8. F140 - Adj
Summary Judgment
21-Aug-2012Extra Text:
9. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 08-21-2012:16:38:16
10. 4300 -
Withdrawal of
Counsel
20-Aug-2012Extra Text: MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL
OF RECORD. ZACHARY COUGHLIN, ESQ.
WITHDRAWS AS COUNSEL OF RECORD FOR
PLAINTIFFS, JAMES AND JOAN CARPENTIER
ETAL - Transaction 3162061 - Approved By:
LMATHEUS : 08-21-2012:09:17:44
11. 1325 - ** Case
Reopened
12-Jul-2012 Extra Text:
12. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
12-Jul-2012 Extra Text: Transaction 3078448 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 07-12-2012:14:17:11
13. 3860 - Request
for Submission
12-Jul-2012 Extra Text: REQUEST FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS
AND OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO ALTER OR
AMEND ORDER, OR NEW TRIAL OR PLED IN
THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION - Transaction 3078304 -
Approved By: AZION : 07-12-2012:14:14:58
DOCUMENT TITLE: REQUEST FOR RULE 11
SANCTIONS AND OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO
ALTER OR AMEND ORDER, OR NEW TRIAL OR
PLED IN THE ALTERNATIVE MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION PARTY SUBMITTING:
KRISTIN SCHULER-HINTZ ESQ DATE
SUBMITTED: 07-12-12 SUBMITTED BY: AZION
DATE RECEIVED JUDGE OFFICE:
14. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
05-Jun-2012 Extra Text: Transaction 2996834 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 06-05-2012:10:11:04
15. 2650 -
Opposition to ...
05-Jun-2012 Extra Text: OPPOSITION TO REQUEST FOR
SANCTIONS ETC. - Transaction 2996151 - Approved
By: LMATHEUS : 06-05-2012:10:09:32
16. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
17-May-2012Extra Text: Transaction 2961790 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 05-17-2012:16:35:36
17. 3870 - Request 17-May-2012Extra Text: RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS,
INC AND QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP'S
REQUEST FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS AND
OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND
ORDER, OR NEW TRIAL, OR PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR
Approved By: SHAMBRIG : 05-17-2012:16:31:03
18. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
08-May-2012Extra Text: Transaction 2938457 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 05-08-2012:11:30:42
19. 2250 - Mtn Alter
or Amend Judgment
07-May-2012Extra Text: MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND
ORDER, OR NEW TRIAL, OR PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR
Approved By: LMATHEUS : 05-08-2012:11:25:36
20. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
23-Apr-2012 Extra Text: Transaction 2906618 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 04-23-2012:14:58:14
21. 2540 - Notice of
Entry of Ord
NOREVIEW : 04-23-2012:14:55:09
22. 1315 - ** Case
Closed
20-Apr-2012 Extra Text:
23. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 04-20-2012:15:52:33
24. 3370 - Order ... 20-Apr-2012 Extra Text: Transaction 2903883 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 04-20-2012:15:50:22
25. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
12-Mar-2012Extra Text: Transaction 2817403 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 03-12-2012:10:47:41
26. 3860 - Request
for Submission
12-Mar-2012Extra Text: PLTFS EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
TRO/INJUNCTION OR PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER
GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT - Transaction
2817321 - Approved By: MLAWRENC :
03-12-2012:10:45:06 DOCUMENT TITLE: PLTFS
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TRO/INJUNCTION
OR PLED IN THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO
SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT PARTY SUBMITTING: KRISTIN
SCHULER-HINTZ ESQ DATE SUBMITTED:
03-12-12 SUBMITTED BY: MLAWRENCE DATE
RECEIVED JUDGE OFFICE:
27. 1325 - ** Case
Reopened
12-Mar-2012Extra Text:
28. 4105 -
Supplemental ...
13-Jan-2012 Extra Text: SUPPLEMENT TO REPLY TO
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EMERGENCY
MOTION FOR TRO/INJUCTION; OR PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER
2698406 - Approved By: LMATHEUS :
01-13-2012:08:55:58
29. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
13-Jan-2012 Extra Text: Transaction 2698706 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 01-13-2012:08:58:45
30. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 01-11-2012:16:44:13
31. 3790 - Reply
to/in Opposition
11-Jan-2012 Extra Text: REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFF'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
TRO/INJUNCTION; OR PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER
2695149 - Approved By: LMATHEUS :
01-11-2012:16:41:28
32. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 01-04-2012:09:46:06
33. 2645 -
Opposition to Mtn ...
04-Jan-2012 Extra Text: RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS,
INC AND QUALITY LOAN SERVICE COR'S
REQUEST FOR RULE 11 SANCTIONS AND
OPPOSITION TO EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
TRO/INJUNCTION OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING
SUMMARY JUDGMENT - Transaction 2679368 -
34. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 01-03-2012:08:48:40
35. 2222 - Mtn for
TRO
31-Dec-2011 Extra Text: EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
TRO/INJUNCTION OR PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER
2676622 - Approved By: AZION :
01-03-2012:08:45:55
Appearance
27-Oct-2011 Extra Text: ZACH COUGHLIN, ESQ. / JONI &
JOHN CARPENTIER
37. F140 - Adj
Summary Judgment
38. 3370 - Order ... 15-Jul-2010 Extra Text: Transaction 1600783 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 07-15-2010:11:22:08
39. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 07-15-2010:11:25:26
40. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 07-15-2010:16:12:44
Entry of Ord
AZION : 07-15-2010:16:04:14
42. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
NOREVIEW : 07-12-2010:09:58:59
43. 3860 - Request
for Submission
12-Jul-2010 Extra Text: DEFT'S RESIDENTIAL CREDIT
SOLUTIONS INC, AND QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT - Transaction 1591509 - Approved By:
AZION : 07-12-2010:09:57:40 DOCUMENT TITLE:
DEFT'S RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS INC,
AND QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION'S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PARTY
SUBMITTING: KRISTIN SCHULER-HINTZ ESQ
DATE SUBMITTED: 07-12-10 SUBMITTED BY:
AZION DATE RECEIVED JUDGE OFFICE:
44. 1325 - ** Case
Reopened
45. NEF - Proof of
Electronic Service
23-Jun-2010 Extra Text: Transaction 1559076 - Approved By:
NOREVIEW : 06-23-2010:12:03:58
46. PAYRC -
**Payment Receipted
23-Jun-2010 Extra Text: A Payment of $200.00 was made on
receipt DCDC278200.
47. $2200 - $Mtn for
Summary Judgment
23-Jun-2010 Extra Text: DEFT'S RESIDENTIAL CREDIT
SOLUTIONS, INC AND QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORP'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT -
Transaction 1559053 - Approved By: AZION :
06-23-2010:12:01:34
48. 1360 - Certificate
of Service
05-Aug-2009Extra Text:
49. 1315 - ** Case
Closed
15-Jun-2009 Extra Text: NOTICE OF BANKRUPTCY AND
AUTOMATIC STAY FILED 05.20.09 BY
DEFENDANT AAMES FUNDING CORP.
50. 1030 - Affidavit
in Support...
09-Jun-2009 Extra Text: AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
TO DISMISS OR INT THE ALTERNATIVE FOR
SUMMARY JUIDGMENT
51. 2315 - Mtn to
Dismiss ...
09-Jun-2009 Extra Text: DEFENDANTS' RESIDENTIAL CREDIT
SOLUTIONS, INC., AND QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION'S MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN
THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
52. 2610 - Notice ... 09-Jun-2009 Extra Text: NOTICE OF LODGMENT IN
SUUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE
ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
53. 2610 - Notice ... 20-May-2009Extra Text: NOTICE OF BANKRUPTCY FILING
AND AUTOMATIC STAY
54. MDR - **Mail 01-May-2009Extra Text: MOTION TO DISMISS AND NOTICE OF
54. MDR - **Mail
Desk Return Notes
01-May-2009Extra Text: MOTION TO DISMISS AND NOTICE OF
LODGEMENT REC'D THROUGH MAIL DESK
FROM DEFT'S RETURNED. DOCUMENTS DO
NOT COMPLY WITH RULE 10 (4) (6) (3)(F). yl
55. MIN -
***Minutes
26-Mar-2009Extra Text: STATUS HEARING - 3/19/09 -
Transaction 673139 - Approved By: NOREVIEW :
03-26-2009:11:04:08
56. MIN -
***Minutes
18-Feb-2009 Extra Text: STATUS CONFERENCE 2-13-09 -
02-18-2009:12:40:32
57. 1312 - Case
Assignment
Notification
11-Feb-2009 Extra Text: CASE REASSIGNED TO DEPARTMENT
7 FROM DEPARTMENT 4 PER ADMINISTRATIVE
ORDER
58. 3242 - Ord
Setting Hearing
30-Jan-2009 Extra Text:
Entry of Ord
NDELGADO : 01-26-2009:08:49:52
60. 3005 - Ord
Withdrawal of
Counsel
22-Jan-2009 Extra Text:
61. 4105 -
Supplemental ...
11-Dec-2008 Extra Text: SUPPLEMENT TO THE AFFIDAVIT OF
JAMES M. WALSH IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
WITHDRAW - Transaction 494178 - Approved By:
MPURDY : 12-11-2008:08:41:49
62. MIN -
***Minutes
09-Dec-2008 Extra Text: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION - 7/7/08 -
12-09-2008:16:33:20
63. 3860 - Request
for Submission
05-Dec-2008 Extra Text: DOCUMENT TITLE: MOTION TO
WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY - Transaction 484180 -
Approved By: CGALINDO : 12-05-2008:16:19:31
PARTY SUBMITTING: JAMES MICHAEL WALSH
DATE SUBMITTED: 12-08-08 SUBMITTED BY: C
GALINDO DATE RECEIVED JUDGE OFFICE:
12/10/08
64. 1835 - Joint Case
Conference Report
25-Nov-2008Extra Text: NRCP 16 JOINT CASE CONFERENCE
REPORT - Transaction 473505 - Approved By:
NDELGADO : 11-26-2008:08:22:16
65. 1250 -
Application for
Setting
23-Oct-2008 Extra Text: PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE - 6/24/09 AT
9:00 A.M. NON-JURY TRIAL (2ND SET)-3 DAYS-
11/16/09
66. 2490 - Motion ... 14-Oct-2008 Extra Text: MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS
ATTORNEY OF RECORD - Transaction 409291 -
67. 1030 - Affidavit
in Support...
14-Oct-2008 Extra Text: AFFIDVAIT OF JAMES M. WALSH IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW -
Transaction 409291 - Approved By: AZION :
10-14-2008:10:42:16
68. 1120 - Amended 10-Oct-2008 Extra Text: PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED NOTICE OF
68. 1120 - Amended
...
10-Oct-2008 Extra Text: PLAINTIFF'S AMENDED NOTICE OF
NRCP 16 EARLY CASE CONFERENCE AND
DEMAND FOR PRODUCTION - Transaction
405944 - Approved By: SSTINCHF :
10-10-2008:14:25:26
69. 1120 - Amended
...
10-Oct-2008 Extra Text: AMENDED NOTICE TO SET TRIAL:
10-23-08 AT 11:00 - Transaction 405944 - Approved
By: SSTINCHF : 10-10-2008:14:25:26
Early Case Conferenc
01-Oct-2008 Extra Text: PLAINTIFFS' NOTICE OF NRCP 16
EARLY CASE CONFERENCE AND DEMAND FOR
PRODUCTION - Transaction 389664 - Approved By:
NDELGADO : 10-01-2008:09:24:32
71. 2605 - Notice to
Set
01-Oct-2008 Extra Text: NOTICE TO SET TRIAL - Transaction
389664 - Approved By: NDELGADO :
10-01-2008:09:24:32
72. PAYRC -
**Payment Receipted
30-Sep-2008 Extra Text: A Payment of -$124.00 was made on
receipt DCDC212733.
73. $PLTF - $Addl
Plaintiff/Complaint
29-Sep-2008 Extra Text: QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION
74. $1560 - $Def 1st
Appearance - CV
29-Sep-2008 Extra Text: RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS
INC
75. 1817 - Initial
Appear. Fee
Disclosure
29-Sep-2008 Extra Text: DEFENDANTS' QUALITY LOAN
SERVICE CORPORATION & RESIDENTIAL
CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC'S INITIAL
APPEARANCE FEE DISCLOSURE
76. 1130 - Answer ... 29-Sep-2008 Extra Text: DEFENDANTS' QUALITY LOAN
SERVICE CORPORATION & RESIDENTIAL
CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC'S ANSWER
77. 2610 - Notice ... 25-Sep-2008 Extra Text: NOTICE OF INTENT TO TAKE
DEFAULT - Transaction 382076 - Approved By:
CGALINDO : 09-25-2008:13:25:19
78. 3696 - Pre-Trial
Order
19-Sep-2008 Extra Text:
Entry of Ord
MPURDY : 08-28-2008:13:17:35
80. A120 -
Exemption from
Arbitration
20-Aug-2008Extra Text: INJUNCTIVE RELIFE
81. 3105 - Ord
Granting ...
19-Aug-2008Extra Text: PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
82. PAYRC -
**Payment Receipted
29-Jul-2008 Extra Text: A Payment of -$124.00 was made on
receipt DCDC206537.
83. $1560 - $Def 1st
Appearance - CV
22-Jul-2008 Extra Text: WINDSOR MANAGEMENT CO.
84. 1130 - Answer ... 22-Jul-2008 Extra Text: ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE
84. 1130 - Answer ... 22-Jul-2008 Extra Text: ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSES OF WINDSOR MANAGEMETN CO.
AND ACCREDITED HOME LENNNDERS, INC. AS
SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST TO AAMES FUNDING
CORPORATION DBA AAMES HOME LOAN
85. $DEFT - $Addl
Def/Answer -
Prty/Appear
22-Jul-2008 Extra Text: AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION
DBA AAMES HOME LOAN
86. MIN -
***Minutes
21-Jul-2008 Extra Text: 07/17/08 PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION -
07-21-2008:11:00:19
87. MIN -
***Minutes
21-Jul-2008 Extra Text: 7/17/08 EXHIBITS TO PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION HEARING - Transaction 289717 -
Approved By: NOREVIEW : 07-21-2008:11:03:59
88. 1695 - **
Exhibit(s) ...
17-Jul-2008 Extra Text: PLAINTIFF'S 1 -12
89. 3720 - Proof of
Service
NDELGADO : 07-17-2008:08:10:13
90. 3720 - Proof of
Service
15-Jul-2008 Extra Text: SUMMONS, COMPLAINT AND EX
PARTE APPLICATION FOR TRO SERVED ON
QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION ON
07/09/08 - Transaction 283117 - Approved By:
MPURDY : 07-15-2008:13:02:06
91. 3720 - Proof of
Service
15-Jul-2008 Extra Text: SUMMONS, COMPLAINT, EX PARTE
APPLICATION FOR TRO, OSC, TRO AND NOTICE
OF FILING BOND SERVED ON RESIDENTIAL
CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC. ON 07/09/08 -
Transaction 283117 - Approved By: MPURDY :
07-15-2008:13:02:06
92. FIE -
**Document Filed in
Error
15-Jul-2008 Extra Text: 07/28/2008 - TPRINCE
93. TRO - **TRO
Cash Bond
94. 3355 - Ord to
Show Cause
08-Jul-2008 Extra Text: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE AND
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER (PLAINTIFF
TO POST SECURITY IN THE SUM OF $1,000.00)
95. 2610 - Notice ... 08-Jul-2008 Extra Text: NOTICE OF FILING BOND: BOND IN
THE AMOUNT OF $1, 000. 00 JAMES M. WALSH
ESQ.
96. 3720 - Proof of
Service
08-Jul-2008 Extra Text: AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION dba
AAMES HOME LOAN SERVED ON 07/01/2008 BY
DELIVERING A COPY TO RESIDENT AGENT
NATIONAL REGISTERED AGENT and WINDSOR
MANAGEMENT COMPANY SERVED ON
07/01/2008 BY DELIVERING A COPY WITH
RESIDENT AGENT CORPORATION TRUST OF
NEVADA - Transaction 274235 - Approved By:
TPRINCE : 07-08-2008:13:51:50
97. PAYRC -
**Payment Receipted
27-Jun-2008 Extra Text: A Payment of $171.00 was made on
receipt DCDC203383.
98. 1665 - Ex-Parte
Application...
27-Jun-2008 Extra Text: EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER JAMES
CARPENTIER, ET AL
99. 4090 - **
Summons Issued
27-Jun-2008 Extra Text:
100. $1425 -
$Complaint - Civil
26-Jun-2008 Extra Text: JAMES S CARPENTIER - Transaction
261699 - Approved By: ASMITH :
06-27-2008:08:18:46
101. $DEFT - $Addl
Def/Answer -
Prty/Appear
26-Jun-2008 Extra Text: JOAN E CARPENTIER - Transaction
261699 - Approved By: ASMITH :
06-27-2008:08:18:46
F I L E D
Electronically
06-26-2008:04:39:54 PM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
Transaction # 261699
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CODE: $1425
James M. Walsh, Esq.
Walsh, Baker & Rosevear, P.c.
Nevada State Bar No. 796
9468 Double R Blvd. Suite A
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: (775) 853-0883
Attorney for Plaintiffs
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
IN AND FOR WASHOE COUNTY
JAMES S. CARPENTIER; and
JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION
DBA AAMES HOME LOAN, a California
corporation; WINDSOR MANAGEMENT CO.,
a California corporation; RESIDENTIAL
CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC, a Texas corporation;
QUALITY LOANS SERVICE CORPORATION,
a California corporation; and DOES I - XX, inclusive,
Defendants.
_______________________________________ 1
CASE NO.
DEPT NO.
COMPLAINT
COME NOW, Plaintiffs JAMES S. CARPENTIER and JOAN E. CARPENTIER, by and
through their attorney, James M .Walsh of Walsh, Esq. of Baker & Rosevear, PC, as and for their claims
for relief and hereby alleges and avers as follows.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
1.
At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiffs James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier, hereinafter
collectively referred to as "CARPENTIER," are husband and wife residing in the County of Washoe,
State of Nevada.
2.
Defendants, DOES I through XX are fictitious names; that Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true
names of the individuals, corporations, co-partnerships, and associations so designated by said fictitious
names, and when the true names are discovered, Plaintiffs will seek leave to amend this Complaint and
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CODE: $1425
Walsh, Baker & Rosevear, P.c.
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: (775) 853-0883
JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Defendants.
_______________________________________ 1
CASE NO.
DEPT NO.
COMPLAINT
COME NOW, Plaintiffs JAMES S. CARPENTIER and JOAN E. CARPENTIER, by and
through their attorney, James M .Walsh of Walsh, Esq. of Baker & Rosevear, PC, as and for their claims
for relief and hereby alleges and avers as follows.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
1.
At all times mentioned herein, Plaintiffs James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier, hereinafter
collectively referred to as "CARPENTIER," are husband and wife residing in the County of Washoe,
State of Nevada.
2.
Defendants, DOES I through XX are fictitious names; that Plaintiffs are ignorant of the true
names of the individuals, corporations, co-partnerships, and associations so designated by said fictitious
names, and when the true names are discovered, Plaintiffs will seek leave to amend this Complaint and
1
1
2
3
4
proceedings herein to substitute the true name of said Defendants. Plaintiffs believe that each of the
Defendants designated herein as DOE is negligent or responsible in some manner for the events herein
referred to and negligently, carelessly, recklessly and in a manner that was grossly negligent and willful
and wanton, caused damages proximately thereby to the Plaintiffs as herein alleged.
5 3. At all times mentioned herein, CARPENTIER is the owner of certain real property commonly
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
l4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
known as 2873 Sunny Slope Drive, Sparks Nevada 89434, Washoe County Assessors Parcel Number
030-091-12, hereinafter referred to as the "PROPERTY," and more particularly described as follow:
4.
LOT 6 OF LEWIS HOMES-SPARKS NO.5-A, ACCORDING TO THE MAP
THEREOF, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF WASHOE
COUNTY, STATE OF NEVADA ON JULY19, 1976, AS FILE NO. 417319 AND AS
TRACT MAP NO. 1587.
On or about May 4, 2005, CARPENTIER had an existing mortgage against the PROPERTY in
the approximate principal amount of $150,000.00
5. On or about May 4,2005, CARPENTIER was in default and in financial trouble with regard to
the existing first Deed of Trust in that James S. Carpentier became injured, was unable to work, was
receiving only workman's compensation payments, and Joan E. Carpentier at that time was unemployed.
6. On or about May 4,2005, CARPENTIER was unable to meet their current obligations under the
first Note and Deed of Trust.
7. CARPENTIER received a mail solicitation to refinance their property from Defendant Aames
Funding Corporation dba Aames Home Loan, hereinafter referred to as "AAMES."
8. CARPENTIER contacted Defendant AAMES, AAMES did represent to them tllat AAMES
could cure their financial troubles by refinancing the existing first obligation on the PROPERY, that
they would qualify for such a loan, and that they would generate sufficient funds to meet their
obligations even though Joan E. Carpentier was unemployed and James S. Carpentier received only
disability income.
9. In furtherance of the refinance, Defendant AAMES was required to make a loan application.
Said loan application was filled out by the representatives by Defendant AAMES and intentionally
misstated the income of CARPENTIER to be in excess of $6,000.00 per month. A copy of said loan
application is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 1.
2
1 10.
The true fact was CARPENTIER received only $2400.00 per month, and the true fact was
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
known to Defendant AAMES.
11. Defendant AAMES made a loan to CARPENTIER in the amount of $170,800.00.
12. The loan made by Defendant AAMES was an adjustable rate which would require payments in
excess of$1400.00 per month.
13. At the time of making the loan and filling out the loan application by Defendant AAMES,
Defendant AAMES made the loan without determining or using any commercially reasonable means or
mechanism to determine CARPENTIER's ability to repay the loan and in fact knew or should have
known that CARPENTIER did not have the ability to repay the loan.
14. The $170,800.00 loan closed on or about May 4,2005, and, on or about that date,
CARPENTIER did make, execute and deliver a Deed of Trust securing repayment of the new loan. Sai
Deed of Trust having been given to Defendant Windsor Management Co., a California corporation, as
Trustee by James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier, husband and wife as joint tenants, as Trustors in
favor of Defendant Aames Funding Corporation dba Aames Home Loan, as Beneficiary. Said Deed of
Trust was recorded May 4,2005 as Document No. 3208651, Official Records of Washoe County. A
true and correct copy of said Deed of Trust is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 2.
15. Since the recordation of said Deed of Trust, CARPENTIER has been unable to make all
payments called for under the terms and conditions of the Deed of Trust fuld PromissOlY Note which it
secures and have made known their inability to pay to Defendant AAMES.
16. Defendant AAMES has assigned the right to collect under the terms and conditions of the
Promissory Note and the Deed of Trust to Defendant Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., hereinafter
referred to as "RESIDENTIAL," as of May 31, 2007.
17. CARPENTIER has contacted Defendants AAMES and RESIDENTIAL in an attempt to again
refinance but infonned Defendants AAMES and RESIDENTIAL oftheir inability to qualifY, and
Defendants AAMES and/or RESIDENTIAL offered to provide them with false and fraudulent W2
Forms in order to meet financial requirements. CARPENTIER declined to participate in this loan fraud.
18. As a direct result of CARPENTIER's inability to make payments called for under the refinanced
loan, Quality Loan Service Corp on behalf of Defendant RESIDENTIAL and on further behalf of
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Defendant AAMES did record a Notice of Breach and Default and of Election to Cause Sale of Real
Property Under Deed of Trust on March 12, 200S as Document No. 3629741, Official Records of
Washoe County. Said Notice of Breach and Default is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 3.
19. Subsequent to the recordation of the Notice of Breach and Default, Defendant AAMES has
recorded a Notice of Trustee's Sale scheduling sale on the PROPERTY for July 9, 200S at the hour of
11 :OOam at the County Court House located at Virginia Street and Court Street in the City of Reno. The
Notice of Trustee's Sale was recorded June 19, 200S as Document No. 3661497, Official Records of
Washoe County. A true and con-ect copy of said Notice of Trustee's Sale is attached hereto and marked
as Exhibit 4.
10 20.
The actions of Defendant AAMES in failing to make a determination of CARPENTIER's ability
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
to repay the loan and inducing them to enter into said loan constitutes an unfair lending practice
pursuant to the provisions ofNRS 59SD.100.
21. CARPENTIER has been damaged as a direct and proximate result of unfair lending practices of
Defendants AAMES and RESIDENTIAL, and CARPENTIER is entitled to damages and treble
damages pursuant to the provisions ofNRS 59SD.11 O.
22. CARPENTIER is entitled to their attorney fees pursuant to the provisions ofNRS
59SD.110(2)(b).
23. CARPENTIER is further entitled to an offset against all sums owed under the Promissory Note
secured by the Deed of Trust as herein alleged pursuant to the provisions ofNRS 59SD.l1 0(3).
24. CARPENTIER is further entitled to have this court cure any existing default of the home loan
and cancel the pending foreclosure and Trustee's Sale pursuant to the provisions ofNRS 59SD.ll 0(3).
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
23 25.
Plaintiffs incorporate herein by this reference Paragraph 1 through Paragraph 24 of this
24
25
26
27
28
Complaint as though fully set forth herein.
26. As a direct and proximate result ofthe actions of Defendants AAMES and RESIDENTIAL,
CARPENTIER is in danger of loosing their interest in unique real property by virtue of the foreclosure
sale.
4
1 27.
CARPENTIER is entitled to a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent
2
injunction precluding Defendants from conducting a foreclosure sale of the PROPERTY.
3 28.
4
estate.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
CARPENTIER lacks adequate remedy of law due to the unique character of their interest in real
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs pray for judgment as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
For damages in excess of$10,000;
For treble damages;
For temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and permanent injunction barring
foreclosure ofthe Deed of Trust recorded in favor of Defendant AAMES.
F or attorneys fee;
For costs of suit herein inculTed; and
For such other and further relief as this court may deem proper.
The undersigned does hereby affirm that the Complaint, filed in the above-referenced matter,
does not contain the social security number of any person.
15
Dated of June, 2008.
16
17
18
19
es M .Walsh, Esq.
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
VERIFICATION
STATE OF NEVADA )
):ss
COUNTY WASHOE )
Under penalty of perjury, the undersigned JAMES S. CARPENTIER and JOAN E.
CARPENTIER declare:
1. They are the Plaintiffs named in the foregoing Complaint;
2. They know the contents thereof and that the pleading is true and correct to their
knowledge except for those matters stated on information and belief and, as to such
matters, they believe them to be true.
DATED tIns 2.Ld
4L
day of June, 2008.

ES S. Cp.RPENTIER
SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me
day of June, 2008 by
JAMES S. CARPENTIER and JOAN E. CARPENTIER.

TRACY L. KING g
23 NO
g Notary Public - State of Nevada
Appointmeni Recorded in Washoe County i
24
E No: 02-73990-2 - Expires April 1. 2010
'lIIIIIIUllnnllllllnn'llllt1III,."gl.I","nUU'"IIIII"11ItllllllllllllllllllnflillUII;
25
26
27
28
6
'<t!llEGL..
=- 0 QI(I('f)C
_ om .... 2
,- 1111(\1..-1-
,-(")0....0
=N
n
- r-cnlSl
-", -

;;;;;;;;iiiii QIJ...OO
-" "
_Olf)O
=OlWN
, =mE_
_ IaN
_ ""N
;;:;::;;;ii. CI ......
-,,"
-
-'"
"
>-
w

,= I... >-
-
,_ woc
=O'I ..... U::I
-<>>- 0
= r-z .... u
-_wo
=00.... .... 41
_
-

..... IIIC
O'J03C
8 ...
'"
....
"'
0
...
...
'"
-l
'"
00
-l
'"

'"
'"
;>
"'
..:
;>
'"' '"
:>!
"'
z
Oil
z
Z
'"
o:!
'"
0
,'"'
OJ
'" OJ
00
'"
OJ

OJ
...
'"
..,
z
..,
OJ
..,
::
..,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

CODE: 1130
ERIC B. ZIMBELMAN, ESQ.
Nevada Bar No. 9407
PEEL BRIMLEY LLP
ORIGINAL
3333 E. Serene Avenue, Suite 200
Henderson, Nevada 89074-6571
(702) 990-7272
Attorneys for Aames Home Lenders, Inc
And Windsor Management Co ..

F I LED
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF WASHOE
JAMES S. CARPENTIER; and JOAN E.
CARPENTIER, husband and wife,
Plaintiff,
vs.
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION DBA
AAMES HOME LOAN, a California
CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC., a Texas
corporation; QUALITY LOANS SERVICE
CORPORATION, a California corporation; ;
DOES I-XX, inclusive,
Defendants .
CASE NO.: CV08-0l709
DEPT. NO.: 4
ANSWER AND AFFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSES OF WINDSOR
MANAGEMENT CO. AND
ACCREDITED HOME LENNDERS,
INC. AS SUCCESSOR IN INTEREST
TO AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION
DBA AAMES HOME LOAN
Defendants WINDSOR MANAGEMENT CO. and AAMES FUNDING
CORPORATION DBA AAMES HOME LOAN. ("Aames"), appearing through its successor in
interest ACCREDITED HOME LENDERS, INC., by and through their counsel, Peel Brimley
LLP, hereby reply to the Amended Complaint of James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier
("Carpentier") as follows:
1. Answering Paragraph 1 of the Amended Complaint, Aames and Windsor are
without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations
contained therein and therefore deny same.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
0.".
12
0 ....
"'0
=-"''''
......... 00
13
tf.l
r
~
;.. '" '"
'" " ~
14 ...l<"
::."'!;!
;: z __
= '" z 15
:;l ~
~ o o a
~ ~ S
16
=- z
~ '"
t
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

contained therein and therefore deny same .
11. Answering Paragraph 11 of the Amended Complaint, Aames and Windsor admit
that Aames made a loan to Carpentier in the amount of $170,800.00.
- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
8 .... 12
"'S
I'."'=-
.... ""00
13
'1
,.. '" Q
'" ,..
14

Oi z
15
'" 00

'" ...

16
.., z
.., ..

17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

13. Answering Paragraph 13 of the Amended Complaint, Aames and Windsor deny
the allegations.
contained therein and therefore deny same .
the allegations contained therein.
- 3 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
g ....
12
Nli:;
",,,,,,,
...l"'" 13
~ ~ <
;>0 ~ C:)
~ > ~
14
..l < '"
:;! .. z
;: z
= "' z
15 c
. . . i ~ ~
, ' ~
'" .",
16
",r.lQ
.., Z
.., ..
;:;=
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

25. Answering the Paragraph 25 of the Amended Complaint, no response is required
of Aames or Windsor thereto, hut Aames and Windsor incorporate hy reference their responses to
the preceding paragraphs of this Answer.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Having Answered Carpentier's Complaint, Aames and Windsor hereby assert the
following Affirmative Defenses:
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Carpentier's Complaint herein fails to state a claim against Aames or Windsor, upon
which relief can be granted.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Carpentier is estopped from pursuing any claim against Aames or Windsor
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Any claim of Carpentier is barred by the doctrine of laches.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The claims alleged by Carpentier are barred by the applicable Nevada statutes of
limitation.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The claims alleged by Carpentier are barred by the statute of frauds.
-4-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
g.,.
12
~ ~ ~
....l .... '"
13
~ ~ <
" "' Q
"' >
14
' <C >
~ "' ~
'" z
<'l ::Hi
15
"' gj
'"''''
"' .",
"'",Q
16
.... z
.... '"
;:j=
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Aames and Windsor are informed, believe, and thereon allege that if any contract,
obligation, or addendum, as alleged in Carpentier's Complaint on file herein, have been entered
into, any duty of performance of Aames and Windsor are excused by reason of a breach of
condition precedent by Carpentier.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Aames and Windsor are informed, believes, and thereon alleges that if any contract,
into, any duty of performance of Aames and Windsor are excused by reason of a breach of
condition subsequent by Carpentier.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Aames and Windsor are informed, believes, and thereon alleges that if any contract,
into, any duty of performance of Aames and Windsor are excused by reason of a breach of an
implied condition by Carpentier.
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The claims alleged by Carpentier are barred by the parol evidence rule.
TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Carpentier failed to mitigate its damages, if any, and therefore, any recovery awarded to
Carpentier against Aames or Windsor should be reduced by that amount not mitigated.
ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Carpentier is barred by the doctrine of unclean hands and by its own failure to deal in
good faith and deal fairly with Aames and/or Windsor.
TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
By virtue of the acts, deeds, conduct and/or the failure or omission to act under the
circumstances, Carpentier has waived its rights, if any existed, to assert any claims against Aames
and Windsor.
- 5 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
=..,.
12
=t--
""= .... "'0>
..,l"QO
13
~ ~ <
,. '" "
'" > <t
14
' ~
:. '" z
iii Z
= : : l ~ 15
..s ~ ~
'" . '"
~ ~
16
.... ..,z
.., '"
;:p::
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The damages that are alleged to have been incurred by Carpentier, if any, were the direct
result in whole or in part, of Carpentier's own intentional, willful, and/or negligent acts and
deeds.
FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The claims of Carpentier as alleged in the Complaint, and the loss and damage, if any in
fact exist, are the direct and proximate result of the acts, deeds, omission or failure to act, or the
conduct of parties known and unknown, over whom Aames and Windsor had no control, nor the
right, duty or obligation to control.
FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Carpentier approved of acts which are the subject matter of Carpentier's Complaint and
consequently is barred from recovering against Aames and Windsor.
SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Damages alleged by Carpentier are speculative and not foreseeable within the terms of the
contract.
SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Carpentier has failed to plead fraud, mistake, malice, intent, knowledge, or any other
condition of mind with requisite particularity as is required by of Nevada Rules of Civil
Procedure, Rule 9(f).
EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Aames and Windsor incorporates by reference each and every affirmative defense set
forth in Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 8(c) as if fully set forth herein
NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Some of the foregoing Affirmative Defenses have been plead for purposes of non-waiver.
Aames and Windsor have not concluded discovery in this matter and under Rule 11 of the
Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure specifically reserve the right to amend this Answer to include
additional Affirmative Defenses and Cross-Claims and Counter-Claims if discovery of facts so
warrant.
- 6 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
g".
12

"'""'''''
13
00:, -ot
,. '" "
'" > <:
14
..l<>
:;: '"
:2 z
="';Z:
15
" 0 "' 00
..l 'Jl "
'" . '"
"' ... " 16
"-..,;z:
..,,,,
;;;=
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

PRAYER FOR REUEF
WHEREFORE, Aames and Windsor respectfully request this Court enter judgment as
follows:
1. That Plaintiffs take nothing by virtue of this complaint;
2. That Plaintiffs' complaint be dismissed with prejudice;
3. For an award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit; and
4. For such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
Dated this&aay of July, 2008.
PEEL BRIMLEY LLP

Nevada Bar No. 9407
- 7 -
Attorneys for Aames Home Lenders, inc
And Windsor Management Co ..
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
0..,
12
0"
"'0

13
'"" 0 <
;.l Q
-- > <
::l<> 14

= ;.l z
15 0: 0
. '" '"
... <IJ 0:
'" .;.l
;.l r.l Q
16
""",z
",,,,
;::;:c
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

AFFIRMATION
Pursuant to NRS 239B.030
The undersigned does hereby affirm that the preceding (insert document name) filed in
District Court Case number
Does not contain the social security number of any person.
-OR-
D Contains the social security number of a person as required by:
A. A specific state or federal law, to wit:
(State specific law)
-OR-
B. For the administration of a public program or for an application for a federal or
state grant.
July 25, 2008
Date
Cary B. Domina. Esq.
Print Name
Associate
Title
- 8 -
, .
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
g ...
12
",r--

...l'""" 13
Ul '"'t
>- r.J =
>
14
::;; "' z
:i z
15
"' i2

.",
g:",c
16
'" z
'" '"
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I certify that I am an employee of PEEL BRIMLEY LLP and that
on thisc:J ,L..f-ctay of July, 2008 I caused the above and foregoing document entitled ANSWER
AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES OF AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION DBA
AAMES HOME LOAN to be served as follows:
[k( by placing same to be deposited for mailing in the United States Mail, in a sealed
envelope upon which first class postage was prepaid in Las Vegas, Nevada; and/or
D pursuant to EDCR 7.26, to be sent via facsimile; and/or
D to be hand-delivered;
to the party(ies) and/or attorney(s) listed below at the address and/or facsimile number indicated
below:
Walsh, Baker & Rosevear, P.C.
Reno, Nevada 89521
Attorneys for James S. Carpentier and
Joan E. Carpentier
An Employee of Peel Brimley LLP
- 8 -
CASE NO. CV08-01709 TITLE: J. CARPENTER, ET AL. VS. AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION, ET
AL.

DATE, JUDGE
OFFICERS OF
COURT PRESENT APPEARANCES-HEARING CONT'D TO
7/7/08
HONORABLE
CONNIE
STEINHEIMER
DEPT. NO.4
R. Cotter
(Clerk)
Not Reported
(Reporter)
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
J ames Michael Walsh, Esq., present on behalf of the Plaintiffs.
Discussion ensued regarding Ex Parte Application for Temporary
Restraining Order previously filed by counsel Walsh, and status of the
Defendant Windsor Management Company.
COURT ENTERED ORDER granting Temporary Restraining Order. Plaintiff
shall post a One Thousand Dollar (1,000.00) bond and Counsel Walsh shall
serve the Order on all parties no later than J uly 14, 2008. Preliminary
Injunction hearing set.

7/17/08
3:00 p.m.
Preliminary
Injunction

F I L E D
Electronically
12-09-2008:04:32:40 PM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court

CASE NO. CV08-01709 J CARPENTIER ET AL V AAMES FUNDING CORP ET AL

DATE, J UDGE
OFFICERS OF
COURT PRESENT APPEARANCES-HEARING ________________
2/13/09
HONORABLE
PATRICK
FLANAGAN
DEPT. NO. 7
M. Conway
(Clerk)
S. Koetting
(Reporter)

STATUS HEARING
J . Carpentier was present in Court acting in Proper Persona.
Kristin Schuler-Hintz, Esq. was present telephonically on behalf of Defendants
Residential Credit Solutions who were not present.
Eric Zimbelman, Esq. was present telephonically on behalf of Defendants Windsor
Management Co and Aames Funding Corporation.
4:02 p.m. Court convened with Court, counsel and the plaintiff present.
J oan Carpentier addressed the Court and advised that she plans on retaining new
counsel.
Counsel Schuler-Hintz addressed the Court and feels that a settlement conference may
be beneficial. Counsel Zimbelman concurred.
COURT ORDERED: Matter continued for Status Hearing, set for March 6, 2009 at
1:30 p.m. to report on counsel and to set a settlement conference. Counsel Schuler-
Hintz and Zimbelman may attend telephonically.
4:10 p.m. Court stood in recess.
F I L E D
Electronically
02-18-2009:12:40:08 PM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
F I L E D
Electronically
10-14-2008:07:31:22 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CODE: 2490
Walsh, Baker & Rosevear, P.e.
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: (775) 853-0883
JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Defendants.
~ /
CASE NO. CV08-01709
DEPT NO. 4
MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD
COMES NOW, James M. Walsh of WALSH, BAKER & ROSEVEAR, P.C. and hereby file
this motion to withdraw as attorney of record in the above entitled action. This Motion is made pursuan
to the provisions of Supreme Court Rule 46 and is based upon the papers and pleadings and the point
and authority filed herewith.
Counsel for Plaintiffs James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier hereby moves this court for an
order allowing him to withdraw on the grounds of Plaintiffs' inability to pay incurred attorney fees and
costs to date due and owing an unpaid sum of$6,285.76. The vast majority of which is 75 days past
due.
Based upon the foregoing it is respectfully requested that Counsel's motion be granted.
1
1
The undersigned does hereby affirm that the Motion to Withdraw as Attorney of Record, filed i
2
Case No. CV08-01709, does not contain the social security number of any person.
DATED this of October 2008.
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury, that I am
employee of WALSH, BAKER & ROSEVEAR that I am over the age of eighteen (18) years, and that
am not a party to, nor interested in, this action. On the __ day of October, 2008, I caused to b
served a true and correct copy of the MOTION TO WITHDRA W AS ATTORNEY OF RECORJ) on al
parties to this action by placing an original or true copy thereof in a sealed envelope placed fo
collection and mailing in the United States Mail, at Reno, Nevada postage paid, following the ordinar
course of business practices addressed as follows:
Eric B. Zimbelman, Esq.
PEEL BRIMLEY LLP
Fax#702-990-7273
Attorney for Defendant Aames Home Lenders, Inc
& Windsor Management Co.
Kristin Schuler-Hintz, Esq.
MCCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP
811 South Sixth Street
Las Vegas, Nevada 89101
Fax#866-339-5691
Attorney for Residential Credit Solutions
& Quality Loan Service
James & Joan Carpentier
2873 Sunny Slope Dr.
Sparks, Nevada 89434
That there is a regular communication by mail between the place of mailing and the place
so addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this K day of October, 2008, at Reno, Nevada.
J n n j ~
an ll:mployeGfWlllsh, Baker & Rosevear
3
F I L E D
Electronically
10-14-2008:07:31:22 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
CODE: 1030
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: (775) 853-0883
JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Defendants.
CASE NO. CV08-01709
DEPT NO. 4
/
AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES M. WALSH IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW
20 STATE OF NEVADA )
)ss
21 COUNTYOFWASHOE )
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I, James M. Walsh, hereby swear under penalty of perjury, that the following assertions are true
of my own personal knowledge as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
P.C.
I am the attorney for Plaintiffs in the above-entitled action.
I have represented the Plaintiffs since the filing ofthe complaint in June 26, 2008.
There is currently due and unpaid in attorney fees and costs in the amount of$6,285.76.
Plaintiffs receive monthly invoices showing the balance owing to Walsh, Baker & Rosevear,
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
The undersigned does hereby affirm that the Affidavit of James M Walsh in Support of th
Motion to Withdraw, filed in Case No. CV08-01709, does not contain the social security number of an
person. ._ /
Dated thiy-' day of October, 2008.
SUBSCRIBED and SWORN before me
. day of October, 2008.
2

ie AMIEJUVE I
:. Notary Public Stata of Nevada i
I App.imm Coon1y !
1 . No: 04-117328-2 E>j>IresMardl 3, 2012 !
(",,,,,,,,,,,,,,"'''''''''""''"'''''"11111111,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,'''''''''''"111111'''
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury, that I am a
am not a party to, nor interested in, this action. On the Il-\fI'- day of October, 2008, I caused to b
served a true and correct copy of the AFFIDA VIT OF JAMES M. WALSH IN SUPPORT 0
MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD on all parties to this action by placing a
original or true copy thereof in a sealed envelope placed for collection and mailing in the United State
Mail, at Reno, Nevada postage paid, following the ordinary course of business practices addressed a
follows:
PEEL BRIMLEY LLP
Fax#702-990-7273
Fax#866-339-5691
so addressed.
Executed this \ L\*' day of October, 2008, at Reno, Nevada.
3
F I L E D
Electronically
12-11-2008:08:18:40 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CODE: 1030
Nevada State BarNo. 796
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: (775) 853-0883
JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Defendants.
CASE NO. CV08-01709
DEPT NO. 4
I
SUPPLEMENT TO THE AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES M. WALSH
STATE OF NEVADA
COUNTY OF WASHOE
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW
)
)ss
)
I, James M. Walsh, hereby swear under penalty of perjury, that the following assertions are true
of my own personal knowledge as follows:
26 1. The last known address of the Plaintiffs is as follows:
27
28
1
1
The undersigned does hereby affirm that the Supplement to the Affidavit of James M. Walsh i
2
Support of the Motion to Withdraw, filed in Case No. CV08-01709, does not contain the social securi
3
number of any person.
4
Dated of December, 2008.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
lu ......... m .. '''''"ntUt''''''''' .. m'''''''j' .. II.u''''''''''''' .. '' .. ''n'''' ... '''''l
'. AMIE JUVE "
i Notary Public State of Nevada
i. . I
! No: 04-87328-2 Expires Mardi 3, 2012 !
.m"",,,.,,,,,,,,"n""",,, ..... ,,,,,,,,,n"U'""""'UII,,,,,,,,,It.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of petjury, that I am a
am not a party to, nor interested in, this action. On the i lor-- day of December, 2008, I caused to b
served a true and correct copy of the SUPPLEMENT TO THE AFFIDA VIT OF JAMES M. WALS
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD on all parties to thi
action by placing an original or true copy thereof in a sealed envelope placed for collection and mailin
in the United States Mail, at Reno, Nevada postage paid, following the ordinary course of busines
practices addressed as follows:
PEEL BRIMLEY LLP
Fax#702-990-7273
Fax#866-339-5691
so addressed.
I declare under penalty of petjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this \\-\V--' day of December, 2008, at Reno, Nevada.
3
-"i:>.
,_ cr:J .....
,_ woe
=rn ..... u::I
-Of- a
I
'=I"--z .... u

=80.. .... 0)
_ IO::!...O
=a:.a ..... .J:
_QUIIlVJU
.... 01;10

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27

CODE: 3005
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: (775) 853-0883

F I LED
JAN 22 2009
JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Defendants.
_________________________________ 1
CASE NO. CV08-01709
DEPT. NO.7
ORDER FOR WITHDRAW OF COUNSEL
The motion of James M. Walsh, Esq. to withdraw as attorney of record for Plaintiffs having been
made and unopposed is hereby granted, and that Plaintiffs are substituted in pro per. Their last known
mailing address is 2873 Sunny Slope Drive, Sparks, Nevada 89434.
DATED this of January, 2009.
Respectfully Submitted By:
28 James M. Walsh, Esq.
WALSH, BAKER & ROSEVEAR, P .C.
9468 Double R Blvd., Ste. A
Reno, Nevada 89521
Phone (775) 853-0883
1
\
. .
" ;."

Original
FILED
1 MOTJ
Kristin A. Schuler-Hintz, Esq., Nevada SBN 7171
2 McCarthy & Holthus, LLP
09. JUN -9 AM 10: S9
'" .'Co" 811 South Sixth Street
iiiiiiiiiiiilDq,<I.-;:'
_ Las Vegas, NV 89101
Iii"';! 5 Phone (702) 685-0329 Ext. 3748
_ Fax (866) 339-5691
KHintz@mccarthyholthus.com

iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiO .....
Attorney for DEFENDANTS' Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. & Quality Loan Servic
-
= w Corporation
===
- (k::l ....
- woe
=01 ...... 0::1
.... 8
,
=00. .... 01
- Ict::LO
;;;;;;;;;;;;;ID'([..-.J:

U--'03l
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
. 17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
JAMES S. CARPENTIER; and JOAN E. )
CARPENTIER, )
Plaintiffs )
vs. )
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION DBA )
AAMES HOME LOAN, a California )
corporation; WINDSOR MANAGEMENT
CO. , a California corporation; . )
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC.,)
a TEXAS corporation; QUALITY LOAN )
SERVICE CORPORATION, a California )
Corporation; and DOES I - XX, inclusive, )
Defendants )
Case No.: CV08-0l709
Department No: 4
DEFENDANTS' RESIDENTIAL CREDIT
SOLUTIONS, INC. AND QUALITY
LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION'S
MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE
ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
COMES NOW Defendants Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., and Quality Loan Servic
Corporation, by and through their counsel of record, Kristin A. Schuler-Hintz, Esq., of McCarth
& Holthus, LLP, and moves the Court to Dismiss Plaintiff's Complaint with prejudice or in th
alternative for Summary Judgment.
This Motion is brought pursuant to NRCP 12(b)(5) for failure to state a claim for relie
against the Defendants.
This Motion is based upon this Notice, the attached Memorandum of Points an
Authorities, and upon all pleadings and documents herein, as well as any argument that may be
III
Nv08-2636
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

presented at the hearing of this, or any other motions/matters; the Court is requested to tak
judicial notice as appropriate_
Dated: 5/26/2009
NOTICE OF MOTIO ' ,

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the undersigned will bring the foregoing Motion t
Dismiss or in the alternative for SUlllffiary Judgment on for hearing on the --------1
day of _________ " 2009 at the hour of ____ amfpm, in Department 4 or a
soon thereafter as my be heard_
Dated: 5/26/2009
~
,MEMORANDUM OF P
I.
SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT
Plaintiffs James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier ("Plaintiffs") complaint cont .
almost no factual allegations against answering Defendants Residential Credit Solutions, Inc.
("RESIDENTIAL") and Quality Loan Service Corporation ("QUALITY), while alleging a wid
variety of unsupported claims for relief.
Plaintiff's complaint, to the extent it is intelligible seeks to stop the foreclosure sale of th
real property commonly known as 2873 Sunny Slope Drive, Sparks, NY 89434 ("Subjec
Property"), alleging unfair lending practices by Defendant AAMES Funding Corporatio
23 ("AAMES") and RESIDENTIAL; intentional misrepresentation by AAMES
24
RESIDENTIAL; and negligence by the DOE Defendants.
25
QUALITY as a Defendant, but fails to specifically allege a single cause of action agains
QUALITY. Furthermore, as set forth herein, the statutory requirements ofNRS 107.080 relativ
Nv08-2636
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

to foreclosure were complied with. As such Plaintiff's complaint fails to establish any viabl
causes of action against the answering Defendants and must be dismissed.
II.
STANDARD GOVERNING MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Summary Judgment is appropriate and is authorized by NRCP 56 when no genuine issu
remains for trial.
l
Summary Judgment is available to resolve issue of law h r ~ the facts are no
in dispute.
2
A Defendant may move for summary Judgment at any time?
The moving party bears the burden of establishing the nonexistence of any genuine issue
of material fact.
4
To establish the facts, conclusory statements along with general allegations ar
insufficient.
5
In addition, any evidence proffered in support of summary judgment must b
admissible.
6
Plaintiff's Complaint is based solely of general allegations unsupported by any evidenc
and/or facts. As such Plaintiff's Complaint should be dismissed or in the alternative answerin
Defendants' should be granted summary judgment.
III.
PLAINTIFF FAILS TO STATE ANY VIABLE CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST
MOVING DEFENDANTS AND AS SUCH SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS APPOPRIATE.
A. The First Claim for Negligence, Unfair Lending Practices, and Fraud Cannot be
Stated Against Answering Defendants
Plaintiff's first claim apparently asserts three causes of action: negligence, unfair lendin
practices, and intentional misrepresentation. Plaintiff's claim for negligence provides only th
1 Shepard v. Harrison 100 Nev. 178,678 P.2d 670 (1984); Pacific Pool Constr. Co. v. McClain's Concrete. Inc. 101
Nev. 557, 706 P.2d. 849 (1985).
2 Molino v. Asher 96 Nev. 814, 618 P.2d 878 (1980).
'Cummings v. City of Las Vegas Mun. Corp. 88 Nev. 479, 499 P.2d. 650 (1972).
4 Pacific Pool Constr. Co. v. McClain's Concrete. Inc. 101 Nev. 557, 706 P.2d. 849 (1985)
l Michael v. Sudeck 107 Nev. 332, 810, P.2d. 12112 (1991).
6 Posadas v. City of Reno 448, 452, 851 P.2d. 438, 442, (1991).
Nv082636
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19

cursory allegation that "each of the Defendants designated herein as DOE is negligent 0
responsible in some manner for the events herein" and does not allege that RESIDENTIAL 0
QUALITY were negligent.
7
Similarly, Plaintiffs Complaint contains no allegations of unfai
lending practices or intentional misrepresentation by QUALITY. Therefore this Motion will onl
address the claims of unfair lending practices and intentional misrepresentation directed a
RESIDENTIAL.
I. Plaintiffs Cannot State a Claim for Unfair Lending Practices Against
RESIDENTIAL.
Plaintiffs' claim for unfair lending practices against RESIDENTIAL is based on N.R.S.
598D.ll 0.
8
Plaintiffs allege they have "been damaged as a direct and proximate result of th
unfair lending practices of ... RESIDENTIAL," without further explanation concerning thes
sections.
9
N.R.S. 598D enumerates ways in which a "lender" can engage in unfair lendin
practices when issuing a loan to a borrower. "Lender" is defmed as "a mortgagee, beneficiary 0
a deed of trust or other creditor who holds a mortgage, deed of trust or other instrument tha
encumbers home property as security for the repayment of a home loan." N.R.S. 598D.050
Further, Section 598D.1 OO(I)(d) provides that is "is an unfair lending practice of a lender to: (d
Finance, directly or indirectly in connection with a home loan, any credit insurance."
The disclosures and public record confinn that AAMES is the lender and designate
beneficiary. RESIDENTIAL is not the lender; it did not broker, negotiate, issue disclosures 0
20 the loans to Plaintiffs. Further, the Complaint does not contain any allegations tha
21 RESIDENTIAL financed any credit insurance for Plaintiffs. Accordingly, no claim can be state
22 against under Section 598D.IOO et seq. regulating lenders or otherwise. The first claims fail.
23
24
25
7 Cpl!. ~ 2.
, Cplt. ~ 20.
9 C p l t ~ 21.
NvOB2636
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

2. Plaintiffs Cannot State a Claim for Fraud Against RESIDENTIAL
The elements of fraud must be alleged "with a high degree of meticulousness" an
specificity: (1) a material representation or deceit that is false; (2) knowledge offalsity; (3) inten
to defraud; (4) justifiable reliance; and (5) resulting damages.1O The circumstances must b
detailed including the time, place and identity of the parties involved. I I General, vague, 0
conclusory allegations are insufficient and to be disregarded.
12
Fraud also requires specific allegations of the what, how, where, by whom, to whom, an
by what means the alleged representations or concealments were made.13 Pleading a cause 0
action for fraud under Rule 9 requires "the plaintiff to allege the who, what, where, and when 0
the alleged fraud." 14
Plaintiffs' claims for fraud are almost all directed at AAMES, and Plaintiffs fail to alleg
facts showing that RESIDENTIAL incurred liability for any alleged acts of AAMES. Plaintiffi
only generally allege that "Defendant AAMES has assigned the right to collect under the term
and conditions of the Promissory Note and Deed of Trust to Defendant Residential Credi
Solutions, Inc .... as of May 31, 2007.,,15 This is not sufficient to state a cause of action fo
fraud by RESIDENTIAL.
No particular misrepresentation by RESIDENTIAL is alleged with specificity 0
otherwise. Plaintiffs only allege against RESIDENTIAL that when they contacted AAMES an
RESIDENTIAL to refinance, "Defendants AAMES and/or RESIDENTIAL offered to provid
them with false or fraudulent W2 Forms in order to meet financial requirements. CARPENTIE
10 Stearns' Properties v. Trans-World Holding Coro.,492 F.Supp. 238, 241-42 (D.Nev 1980); Desaigouder v.
Meyercord, 223 F.3d 1020, 1022-23 (9"' Cir. 2000); F.R.C.P. 9(b) and (t).
11 Brown vs. Keller, 97 Nev. 582, 636 P.2d 874 (1981).
12 Moore v. Kayport Package Express. Inc., 885 F.2d 531, 540 (9" CiT. 1989); Lone Star Ladies Invest Club v
Schlotzky's Inc., 238 F.3d 363, 368 (9" Cir. 1996).
13 See, Stansfield v. Starkey, 220 Cal.App.3d 59, 73, 264 Cal. Rptr. 337, 345 (1990).
14 Williams vs. WMX Technologies. Inc. 112 f.3d 175, 178 (5" Cir. 1997).
15 Cplt. 16.
Nv08-2636
'1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

declined to participate in loan fraud.,,)6 The Complaint fails to allege the who, what, where, an
when, and how as to any affirmative fraud by RESIDENTIAL. Plaintiffs' first claim cannot b
stated against RESIDENTIAL.
B. The Second Claim for Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and
Permanent Injunction Cannot be Stated Against Answering Defendants
Plaintiff's second claim does not state a cause of action; it only asserts tha
"CARPENTIER is entitled to a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction
permanent injunction precluding Defendants from conducting a foreclosure sale of th
PROPERTy.,,)7 Plaintiffs claim that Defendants do have foreclosure rights on the Subjec
Property.
I. All Required Notices Were Provided Pursuant to NRS 107.080.
NRS 107.080 (3) requires the mailing recordation and mailing of a Notice of Default t
all interested parties. Attached as Exhibit "I" to the Notice of Lodgment is a true and correc
copy of the recorded Notice of Breach and Affidavit of Mailing of Notice of Breach. As sho
in the Affidavit of Mailing, notice was sent to Plaintiff s via regular and certified mail, to
variety of addresses.
Attached as Exhibit "2" to the Notice of Lodgment is a true and correct copy of th
Notice of Default which was returned as either undeliverable or certified mail that was no
signed for.
Attached as Exhibit "3" to the Notice of Lodgment is a true and correct copy of th
recorded Notice of Sale, Affidavit of Mailing Notice of Sale via regular and certified mail
Affidavit of Posting and the Affidavit of Publishing.
It is undisputed that Plaintiffs failed to make the payments required by the applicabl
Note and Deed of Trust. Plaintiffs were provided with all statutory notices required as vi
16 Cplt., 17.
11 C p l t ~ 27.
Nv08-2636
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

recording, posting, publishing and mailing. As such, fails to state a claim against Defendant
and should be dismiss or in the alternative Defendant's granted summary judgrnent thereon.
VI.
CONCLUSION
Answering Defendants complied with Nevada Law and properly recorded, published an
mailed (as appropriate) the Notice of Default and Notice of Sale. Defendant's Motion to Dismis
or in the alternative for Summary Judgrnent establish the foreclosure sale was properly notice
in accord with applicable law and is therefore valid. Accordingly, for all the foregoing reasons
Defendant prays that the Court grant its Motion for Summary Judgrnent.
Respectfully submitted:
. . E
lStin-= lUtru- mtz, sq.
(J
AttOafe
Y
for Deftridant
( - /
811 South"Sixtli Street _. ,/
Las Vegas;,NV 89101
Telepnone: (702) 685-0329 Ext 3748
Dated this 4 June 2009
NV08-2636
'.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA
AFFIRMA nON
Pursuant to NRS 239B.030
The Undersigned does hereby affirm that the proceeding document, DEFENDANTS'
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS , INC. AND QUALITY LOAN SERVIC
CORPORATION'S MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FO
SUMMARY JUDGMENT filed in case number: CV08-0 1709
Date:
X Document does not contain the social security number of any person
-OR-
Document contains the social security number of a person as required by :
A Specific State or Federal Law, to wit:
(State specific state or federal law)
-or-
For the administration of a public program
-or-
For an application for federal or state grant
-or-
Confidential Family Court Information Sheet
(NRS 125.130, NRS 125.230 and NRS 125 055)
Attorney for Defendants Residential
Credit Solutions, Inc. & Ouality
Loan Service Corporation
Nv08-2636
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20

CERT
McCarthy & Holthus, LLP
Las Vegas, NY 89101
Phone (702) 685-0329 Ext. 3748
Fax (866) 339-5691

Attorney for DEFENDANTS' Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. & Quality Loan. Service
Corporation
SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND FOR
WASHOE COUNTY
JAMES S. CARPENTIER; and JOAN E. )
CARPENTIER, )
Plaintiffs )
vs. )
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION DBA ) Case No.: CV09-01709
AAMES HOME LOAN, a California )
corporation; WINDSOR MANAGEMENT Department No: 4
CO. , a California corporation; )
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC.,) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Defendants )
I hereby certify that on the 4
tn
day of June a true and correct copy of
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC., AND QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION'S MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOIl
SUMMARY JUDGMENT was forwarded by US Mail with postage prepaid to the addresse
listed below:
21 James M. Walsh Michael W. Brimley, Esq.
Peel Brimley LLP
Walsh, Baker & Rosevear
22 9468 Double R Blvd. Suite A
Reno, Nevada 89521
23 Attorney for Plaintiff
24
25
3333 E. Serene Ave, Suite 200
Henderson, Nevada 89074
for Lenders, Inc.
I f:ij!i/ e60v0=--
An 'Employee of McCarthy & Holthus, LLP
Nv082636
OJ "':EGL
iiiiiiiiiiiijiLOGI'([ .... >
_t::Im !DC:
= 11(10)('01-
= rec..LO =;;;
=CO-0
_OJ ...........
=::gI.J...01
-" " =O(/'JQ

_0l1E _
_ 1([0'1
=ucro
-Q -
-- -'"
-'"
__ a

= w ......
-.
woe
=(J) ....
_ Gil- 0
_I'-z ..... u
=T""WO
-- Gc.. ... Q)
10:: L. 0
_ CJa: ...... ..c
=OU .... III ..
-- > .... 111>
U"C:::CIJ

EXHIBIT 1

AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
STATE OF California )
COUNlY OF San Diego}
Date:
T.S.No.:
Loan No.:
Mailing:

EXHIBIT "1"
312112008
NV08-141434BL
0003770195
Ten Day
The declarant, whose signature appears below, states that (s)he is over the age of eighteen (\8) years; is
employed in San Diego County by QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION, located at 2141 5th
Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 and that on 3/2112008, (s)he personally served the Notice of Default, of
which the annexed is a true copy, by causing to be deposited in the United States Mail a copy of such
Notice of Default in a sealed envelope, certified or registered mail and first class, with postage prepaid,
such envelope being addressed to the person(s) named at the addresses below.
Affiant John Lopez
JAMES CARPENTIER
2873 SUNNY SLOPE DRIVE
SPARKS, NY 89434
First Class and Cert. No. 71039628594101452892
JAMES CARPENTIER
SPARKS, NY 89434
CITY OF SPARKS A TIN: REVENUE
P.O. BOX 857
SPARKS, NY 894320857
CITY OF SPARKS
REVENUE
P.O. BOX 857
SPARKS, NY 894320857
First Class and Cerl. No. 7103962859410145293
JOAN E. CARPENTIER
SPARKS, NV 89431
EXHIBIT "1"

JAMES S. CARPENTIER
2873 SUNNY SLOPE ORJVE
SPARKS, NY 89431
JAMES S. CARPENTIER
2873 SUNNYSLOPE ORJVE
SPARKS, NV 89434
First Class and Cerl. No. 7103962859410145301I
MARY ANN CARR
POBOX 815
GLENN ELLEN, CA 95442
JAMES S. CARPERNTIER
SPARKS, NV 89434
JAMES S, CARPERNTIER
SPARKS, NV 89434
JOAN E. CARPENTIER
SPARKS, NY 89434
JOAN E. CARPENTIER
SPARKS, NY 89434
JOAN E. CARPENTIER
SPARKS, NY 89434

Quality Loan Service Corp.
21415th Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
619-645-7711
Date: 3/2012008
T.S. Number: NV-08-141434-BL
Loan Number: 0003770195
DEBT VALIDATION NOTICE
I. The enclosed document relates to a debt owed to:
Residential Credit Solutions

2. You may send us a written request for the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the
current creditor, and we will obtain and mail the information within thirty (30) days after we receive your
written request.
3. As of 3/1012008 the total delinquency owed was $8,719.30, because of interest, late charges, and other
charges that may vary from day to day this amount will increase until the delinquency has been fully paid.
Before forwarding payment please contact the above at the address or phone number listed in order to
receive the current amount owed.
4. As of 3/20/2008, the amount required to pay the entire debt in full was the unpaid principal balance of
$169,590.51, plus interest from 9/112007, late charges, negative escrow and attorney andlor trustee's fees
and costs that may have been incurred. The amount will increase daily until the debt has been paid in full.
For further information please write to the above listed address or call 619-645-7711.
5. You may dispute the validity of this debt, or any portion thereof, by contacting our office within thirty
(30) days after receiving this notice. In that event, we will obtain and mail to you written verification of
the debt. Otherwise, we will assume that the debt is valid.
WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT, AND ANY INFORMATION
WE OBTAIN WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

this page intentionally left blank

Important Notice Regarding
Alternatives to Foreclosure
THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES TO FORECLOSURE, BUT YOU MUST TAKE
IMMEDIATE ACTION.
Hay altemativas para lIevar acabo la ejecucion de hipoteca (foreclosure). Su prestador esta altamente
interesado en discutir las opciones que Ie podra ayudar evitar la ejecucion de su hipoteca (foreclosure),
pero necesita Hamar a nuestra oficina inmediatamente para poder ayudarle con cualquier pregunta que
tenga al respecto. Por favor lIame a Quality Loan Service Corporation, el numero de telefono es (866) 645
7711. Tenemos personas que hablan espanol y capacitadas para brindarle ayuda con su prestamo.
Your lender is very interested in discussing options that may help you avoid foreclosure, BUT YOU
MUST TAKE IMMEDIATE ACfION AND CALL TODAY. Your lender may require certain
financial information and may require access to the property to determine the property's value prior to
qualifying you for these programs.
If you would like information regarding the options available, please The Home Retention Department at
(866) 6457711 ext.l706 so we can put you in touch with your lender's Loss Mitigation Department.
If you would like to obtain an exact figure as to the amounts needed to cure the default or pay the loan in
full, forward your request for reinstatement figures andlor payoff quotes to:
2141 5
th
Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
Fax (619) 645-7716
or call:
Payoff and Reinstatement Department - (866) 645-7711
Extension 3704
You may wish to consult a creditcounseling agency to assist you. The Department of Housing and Urban
Development (RUD) can provide you with the name and address of the local RUD approved counseling
agency by calling their toll-free hotline at (800) 569-4287.
Notwithstanding the fact that your property is in foreclosure, you may offer your
property for sale provided the sale is concluded prior to the conclusion of the
foreclosure. Be sure to notify Quality Loan Service or your lender in the event your
property is listed or under contract for sale or the foreclosure may take place
notwithstanding your expected sale.
\
THIS NOTICE IS SENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COLLECTING A DEBT. THIS FIRM IS
ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDER AND OWNER OF THE
NOTE. ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY OR PROVIDED TO THIS FIRM OR THE
CREDITOR WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.


Recording requestsd bY'
When ,"corded mall 10:
Quality Loan ServIco Corp.
2141 51h Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
TS No.: NV-()g141434Bl
Assessors Parcel NO(5) 03009,., 2

DOC #3629741
03112/200803:57:05 PM
fectronic Recording Requested By
TICOR TITLE - RENO
Washoe County Retorder
Kathryn L. Burke - Recorder
Fee: $16.00 RPTI: SO
Page 1 of 3
Order WS60369 Loan No.: 0003770196
O?;oo/7.> "2-
Notice of Breach and Default and of Election to Cause Sale of Real
Property Under Deed of Trust
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: Tha! Qualily Loan Service Corp. is either the original trustee, Ihe dulY
appointed substituted trustee" or acting as agant for the trustee or beneficiary under a Deed of Trust datail
412212oo5
t
execUl13d by JAMI:S S. CARPERNTIER AND JOAN E. CARPENTIER, HUSBAND AND WIFE
AS JOIN TENANTS, as Trustor, to secuns certain obligations In lavor of AAMES FUNDING
CORPORATION DBA AAMES HOME LOAN, as beneficiary, recorded 51412005, as InSTIument No.
3208651, In Book xxx, Page Xl(X of OffICial Records in the Office of the Recorder 01 WASHOE County,
Nevada securing, among other obligatiOns including 1 NOTE(S) FOR THE ORIGINAL sum (II
$110,800.00. that tha bsnaflctallnwre.t undar such Deea 01 Trust and the obligations secured thereby are
presently held by the undersigned; thaI a breech of, and default In, the obligations for which such Deed 01
Trust Is security has occurred'in Ihat payment has not been made of:
Installment of pllnclpaJ and interest plus Impounds and I or advances which became due on 10/1/2007
piUS amounts !hal are due or may become due for the following: late charges, delinquent properly taxes,
Insurance premiums, adoances made on senior liens, taxes and/or Insurance, trustees fees, and any
attorney fees and c-ourl costs arising from at associated wilh bsneficlaries effort to protect Md preserve lis
security must be cured as a condition of reinstatement
That by reason thereof the present Beneficiary under such deed 01 Trust has executed and delivered to
said duly appointed Trustee a written Declaration of Default and Demand for Sal. and has depcsil9d witll
said duly appclnted Trustee such Deed of Trust and all documents evidencing ob\lgaUons secured thereby
and has doclared and does hereby declare all sums secured !hereby Immediately due and payable and
has elecled and does hereby elect to cause the trust property to bs sold to satisfy tha obrogaUons secured
thereby.
NOTICE
You may have the right to cure the de/eun hereon and reinstate the one obllgaUon secured by such Deed
of Trust above dascrlbed. Section NRS 107.080 permtts certain defaulls 10 be cured upon the Payment of
the amounts required by that statutory Secijoo without requiring payment oIlher pct1lon of principal and
Interest which would nOI be due had no default occurred. Wtwe reinstalemenlls poSSible, If the default is
not cured wHoin 35 days following recording and malling of this Notice to Truslor or Truslor's successor In
interest, the rtght of rGinstalemQnt will terminate and !he property may thereafter be sold. The Truslor may
have tho tight to bring a court action to assert the nonexistence 01 a default or any olher defense 01
Trustor to acceleranon and Sale.
Page 1

thLB page intentionally left blank

3629741 Page 2 of 303/12/200803:57:05 PM
TS No.: NV-06-141434-BL
Loan No.: 0003770195
Notice of Default
Page 2
To determIne If reinstatement Is possible and the emount, II any, 10 cure the delault, contact:
Residential Crodlt Solutions
C/O QuaHlY Loan SerVice Corp.
2141 51h Avenue
San Diego, GA 921 01
619-645 7711
If you have any qUestions, you should contact a lawyer or the governmental agen<:y which may
have insured loan. Notwilhstanding the fact thai your property is In foreclosure, you may offer your
properly lor sala provided the sal8 Is concluded prior to !he conclusic>n ot the loraclosuf8,
Daled: 311 0/2008
BENEACIARY
Stale 01 Navada ",,
CouolY of CIa;' I
nstrumenl was: Gck(io
___
Not8!V Public
If you have, previously been discharged thr
hability for this loan in which case !his leU I
h bankruptcy, you may have been released of personal
Intended to exercise the note holders rights against I!le real
proPerty only.
THfS OFACE IS ATTEMPTING CO CT A DEBT AND ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL
As required by law, you ore
submiHOd to credit repon .g
ED FOR THAT PURPOSE,
y no thaI. negallv. =dit report reflecting on yollt oredit record may b.
. you fall to fulfill Ibe leJ'lllB of your credit obligatio""
,
3629741 Page 3 of 303/12/200803:57:05 PM
State oj .. ," )
)
On I bIlloro rna,
lacy 'public,
personally appeared __ ,
who proved to me on the: basis (If
saUsfaolory evidenCe to be the whose sUbScribed to \116
ill$!rumllnl and acknowledged to me that he! executed lht! sama in
his ar elr authorized capaclty{)l!t). and that by hi elr slgnatureJl10 01'1 the
ln$ ant the parsonlt), or the enlily upon behalf of the person)lif aIllGd,
exoolJted Ihe Instrument.
I eartHy under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws ollha Stale of CalifornIa thai
the foragoing pamgraph ;slrus and 00"..,01.
WffnllSS my hand at olflclaf s9al.
Signature 1 (SeaQ
tJt ){ait!!

NV-D'if -14I
L
(!}/--f3>L-
L ~
"',-
woe
=m ...... u::J
_191- 0
_f'-.Z_U
=..-wo
--I9Q. ... (II
~ llk:LO
_ CDa ..... .r,
= O O C I C l ~
--:> ..... n:I>
U""03L

EXHIBIT 3
.. .

EXH BIT "3"
When reoonIecI mail 10:
Qua1it)' Loan ServIce Corp.
2141 S1II Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
'I1Ic lDIdasipd baeby afIirms dial 111"", is lID
Social Security number conIBlned In this docmnebt.
TS # I'IV-08-J41434-BL Loan # 0003770195
NOTICE OF TRUSTEE'S SALE
YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDERA DEED OF mUSl DATED 411812005. UNLESS YOU TAKE cnON
TOPROTECfYOUR PROPERTY,IT)lAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IFYOU NEED AN
EXPLANAnON OFTHE.NATIJRE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD C
A LAWYER.
A public auction sale 10 the hlgbest bidder for cash, casbiel's theck dnrwn on a stale or natio1Ial bank,
by_ or federal credit lIIlion, or a check cbawn by a stale or fedetal savings and loan as.oocIatlon, or sa .
association, or savings baDk specified in Section 510210 1IIe Financial code and EIUIhorized to do business .
state, will be held by duly appointed trustee. 11le sale will be made, bill witlIout covenant or warranty. expnlssed
iD!plied, leg8iding title,)IO$Sl:SSion, or to pay the l'I!lIIaiDing principal SUl)l ofdle note(s) 5eCIjred
the Deed of1iost, wDh interest and iato charges thereon, as provided in the note(s). advance$, under the
Deed of Trust, interest thereon, tees, charges and expenses of the Trustee for the totaJ /iDi0Uil! (at the time
iniIiaI pubUeation of1he Notice ofSalo) reasonably estim....., to be set fuith below. The /iDi0Uil! may be on
the day of sale.
BENEFlClARY MAY ELECJ' TO BID LESS THAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE.
Trustm(s):
JAMES S. CARPDNTIER AND JOAN E. CARPENTIER, HUSBAND AND WIFE
JOlNT TENANTS
51412005 as InstnIInent No. 3208651 in book xu, page xu of Official Records in the 0
Retorder at'WASHOE Cwnty, Nevada;
Dare of Sale: 71!11lOO8 at 11:00 AM
PIaoe of Sale: At the Virginia street eatraDce to the County Courthouse, Virginia Street at Court S
Reno,NV.
Amount ofllllpBid balauce and other charges: S18l,074.S2
The purported property address 2873 SUNNY SLOPE DRIVE
is: SPARKS, !'IV 89434
~ PareeI No. 030-4I91-1l
This property is sold 88-iS, lender is DOBbIe to validate the coudition, defi:etJ or disc;1osun: issues of said and
buya- w i ~ the disc;losure requircmenIs nuder NRS 113.130 by purcbasing at tbIs sale and signing the ipt of
sale. The undersigned TrustCIe _Iaims lIllY liability tor any incom:clDess of1he property address or other tommon
desigDation, if any, shown hemn. If DO SIreot address or other wmmon desiguatlon is shown, directions to c
location ofdlc property may be oblained by sending a written request to tile beneficimy within 10 days of date of -
tl!st publiadiim oftbis Notice of Sale.
If the Trume Is uoable to amvey title tor 8DY reason, the sw:ceaful bidder's lOle and esdnsiVe y sImIl
be the return OfDIIIll1es paid to tbe Trustee, alld tbe SueeessfuI bidder sIuIII baY. DO further """,une.
XHIBIT "3"
Date: fi/13/lOO8
StIde of California)
ComIty of San Diego)
QualIty Loan Se"iee Corp.
2141 5tb Avenue
San Diego, CA 91101
,
619-645-7711 For NON SALE Information only
Sale Line: 714-159-7850 or LogIn to: Wtfw.ftdeUtyasap.enm
1'8 # :
RdnJtatement Line: 619-615-7711 xJ704
NancyVl
On 6113flOOB heron: me, ymmieJ. DawsoD_a Notary Weik_
proved to me on the basis of saIisfactOJy ""idence to be the whose D s an: subsCJibed to th witbin
iDsIrumeot and aclmow1edted to me in . eirau!horized' d
that by hisI\pIdIe!r Oil the iDstrumertI the pen or the entity upon bebaIf ofwbich the
acted, instrument
I certifY urufer PENALlY OF PERJURy WId the laws c:.fthe Stale of Califnmja !bat the fmegoing is
IrWI and COIJ'e(;l "

",wlmve previously been di ed through bankrup1cy, you may have been n:leased of personaIliabil"
in which case /his letter is tended to exercise the oote bolder's rights against !be n:aI property only.
nns Nm:1CEISSENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COLLECI'lNG A DEBT. nus FIRM I
A Ml'TJNG TO COLLECI' A DEBT ON BEHALF' 0)' THE HOLDER AN]) OWNER OF NOTE.
ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY OR PROVIDED TO THIS FIRM OR THE CREl>ITOR BE
USED FOR TIlAT PURl'OSE.
As required by law, you an: hereby notified that a negative credit report reflecting on your =<lit record
submitted to a tn:ditreport a&mcy if you IiIiI to fiIIfiIl tbeternlS of your =<lit obligations.
JOAN E. CARPENTIER
2873 SUNNYSLOPE DRIVE
SPARKS, NV 89434
CITY OF SPARKS ATTN: REVENUE
P.O. BOX 857
SPARKS, NY 89432-0857
CITY OF SPARKS
REVENUE
P.O. BOX 857
SPARKS, NY 89432-0857
JAMES S. CARPENTIER
2873 SUNNY SLOPE DRJVE
SPARKS, NY 89431
JOAN E. CARPENTIER
2873 SVNNYSLOPE DRJVE
SPARKS, NV 89434
JAMES S. CARPENTIER
2873 SUNNYSLOPE DRJVE
SPARKS, NY 89434
MARY ANN CARR
PO BOX 815
GLENN ELLEN, CA 95442
JOAN E. CARPENTIER
2873 SUNNY SLOPE DRJVE
SPARKS, NV 89431
,
,
Important Notice Regarding
Alternatives to Foreclosure
THERE ARE ALTERNATIVES TO FORECLOSURE. BUT YOU MUST TAKE
IMMEDIATE ACTION.
Hay altemativas para lIevar acabo la ejecucion de hipoteca (foreclosure). Su prestador esta altamente
interesado en discutir las opciones que Ie podra ayudar evitar la ejecucion de su hipoteca (foreclosure),
pero necesita Hamar a nuestra oficina inmediatamente para poder ayudarle con cualquier pregunta que
tenga al respeeto. Por favor lIame a Quality Loan Service Corporation, el numero de telefono es (866) 645-
7711. Tenemos personas que hablan espanol y capacitadas para brindarle ayuda con su prestamo.
Your lender is very interested in discussing options that may help you avoid foreclosure, BUT YOU
MUST TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION AND CALL TODAY. Your lender may require certain
financial infonnation and may require access to the property to detennine the property's value prior to
qualifYing you for these programs.
If you would like infonnation regarding the options available, please The Home Retention Department at
(866) 645-7711 ext.l706 so we can put you in touch with your lender's Loss Mitigation Department.
If you would like to obtain an exact figure as to the amounts needed to cure the default or pay the loan in
full, forward your request for reinstatement figures andlor payoff quotes to:
2141 5
th
Avenue
San Diego, CA 9210 I
Fax (619) 645-7716
or call:
Payoff and Reinstatement Department - (866) 645-7711
Extension 3704
You may wish to consult a credit-counseling agency to assist you. The Department of Housing and Urban
Development (BUD) can provide you with the name and address of the local HUD approved counseling
agency by calling their toll-free hotline at (800) 569-4287.
Notwithstanding the fact that your property is in foreclosure, you may offer your
property for sale provided the sale is concluded prior to the conclusion of the
foreclosure. Be sure to notity Quality Loan Service or your lender in the event your
property is listed or under contract for sale or the foreclosure may take place
notwithstanding your expected sale.
ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDER AND OWNER OF THE
NOTE. ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY OR PROVIDED TO THIS FIRM OR THE

When recorded mail to:
2141 5th Avenue
The undersigned hereby affirms that there is no
Social Security number contained in this document.
TS # NV-08-141434-BL Loan # 0003770195

SPACE ABOVE THIS UNE FOR RECORDER'S USE
YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 4/18/l005. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACfION
TO PROTECf YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN
EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACf
A LAWYER.
A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, cashier's check drawn on a state or national bank, check drawn
by state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association, or savings
association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 to the Financial code and authorized to do business in this
state, will be held by duly appointed trustee. The sale will be made, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or
implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remaining principal sum of the note(s) secured by
the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges thereon, as provided in the note(s), advances, under the terms ofthe
Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges and expenses ofthe Trustee for the total amount (at the time ofthe
initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forth below. The amount may be greater on
the day of sale.
BENEFICIARY MAY ELECT TO BID LESS THAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE.
Trustor(s):
Recorded:
Date of Sale:
Place of Sale:
JAMES S. CARPERNTIER AND JOAN E. CARPENTIER, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS
JOINT TENANTS
5/4/l005 as Instrument No. 3208651 in book xxx, page xxx of Official Records in the office of the
Recorder of W ASHO E County, Nevada;
7/9/2008 at 11 :00 AM
At the Virginia Street entrance to the County Courthouse, Virginia Street at Court Street,
Reno, NV.
Amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $182,074.52
The purported property address 2873 SUNNY SLOPE DRIVE
is: SPARKS, NV 89434
Assessors Parcel No. 030-091-12
This property is sold as-is, lender is unable to validate the condition, defects or disclosure issues of said property
and buyer waives the disclosure requirements under NRS 113.130 by purchasing at this sale and signing the receipt
of sale. The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the property address or other
common designation, if any. shown herein. If no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to
the location ofthe property may be obtained by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days ofthe
date of first publication of this Notice of Sale.
If the Trustee is unable to convey title for any reason, the successful bidder's sole and exclusive remedy shall
be the return of monies paid to the Trustee, and the successful bidder shall have no further recourse.
I
Date: 611312008 Quality Loan Service Corp.
2141 Sth AveDue
State of California)
County of San Diego)
Son Diego, CA 92101
619-64S-7711 For NON SALE information only
Sale Line: 714-259-78S0 or Login to: www.fidelityasap.com
TS # : NV-08-J41434-BL
ReiDstatement Line: 6J9-64S-7711 x3704
Bounlet Louvan,
On 611312008 before me, a Notary Public, personally appeared
---;-c,.---,,-----;-77-:---:------::-:--.- who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the
person(s) whose narne(s) islare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that helshelthey
executed the same in hislherltheir authorized capacity(ies), and that by hislherltheir signature(s) on the instrument
the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws ofthe State ofCaHfornia that the foregoing paragraph is
true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature _________________ (Seal)
If you have previously been discharged through bankruptcy, you may have been released of personal liability for
this loan in which case this letter is intended to exercise the note holder's rights against the real property only.
ATTEMPTING TO COLLECf A DEBT ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDER AND OWNER OF THE NOTE.
ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY OR PROVIDED TO THIS FIRM OR THE CREDITOR WILL BE
. USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
As required by law, you are hereby notified that a negative credit report reflecting on your credit record may be
submitted to a credit report agency if you fail to fulfill the terms of your credit obligations.

EXHIBIT "5"
2775475 QLOAN
Ts Num: NV08141434BL
Property Info: 2873 SUNNY SlOPE DRIVE SPARKS NV 89434
Sale Date: 7/9/2008 11:00:00AM in Reno
1st Pub Date: 06/13/2008
Post On: 06/13/2008
APN: 030-()9H2
Trustor: JAMES S. CARPERNllER AND
JOAN E. CARPENllER, HUSBAND
AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS
at At the Virginia Street entrance ID the
County Courtllouse, Virginia Street at Court
Street, Reno, NY.
Post By:
Certificate Of Posting
[!I Pub
[!I Post
[!I Sale
o Bid At
ONOD
o Other
Rdetity National Agenc:y Sales &. Po$tIng c:ertlfles an agent of the compall'( posted a copy of 0 Notice of Trustee's Sale 0 Notice of DefaUlt
on fa -/'5 -a? , in the manner under Ovll Code, on the property described in said notice.
Posted on front door of: 0 Single family Dwelling 0 Condominium 0 Commercial Bldg OOther ________ _
Posted In a public place in the dty of the sale location on _______ _
The public posting for Nevada occurred at:
I certify the foregOing is true and correct:

Date?' - /.7 ."y
emR!:1D C!!Odition
1 OcoJpanty OOtolpied OUroDJpled OUnkllown OVaGlnt Land
2 Octupant Contact DYes DNa
3 Improvements OSFD OCorolO o CGmmerdal Bldg 0 Apt Bldg
q
Slorles 01 02 OJ 0
5 Structure o Wood 0St\Jax)
OBrid< o Other
6 Roof o Shake o Composillon Ollie o Metal
7 Giuilge . DYes DNa
DAttadled
O'SpatOS
Ocarpert
B Property Comparllble DAboYe o Average o Below
to Others In Area
9 Area o Residential o Commerdal o Rural o Mixed
10 Vandalism Risk DlDw
DHillh .OEllPlaln
11 Number of I'osIJngs
12 For sale Sign Dyes ONe
By
Comments
Posting ExceptionS
Please call Manny upon PosHng Comp!eHon at (949) 622-3856
California - 00 not post pr10r to dated date on NOS.
PosUng CertifICate - 816/2008 - 3.1
o Other
o Open

Affidavit of Publication
STATE OF NEVADA,
County of Washoe - SS.
WILMA O'DELL
sworn, deposes and says thai she is the
Record Clerk ofth. SPARKS TRIBUNE, a daily
Newspaper, published in Sparks, Washoe County,
Nevada; that she has charge of and knows the adver-
tising appearing in said newspaper, and the
NOTICE OF TRUSTEE SALE
-------------------------_._-----
TS # NV-08-141434-BL

-------
-_. __ ._---_ ...
June 13'h ,2008
-.--.. .. -----.--.-.---.-.. -----.-
and was published in each of the following issues
thereafter
----------------. __ ._---_._-
_. __ ._ .. _ .. 2008
the date of rl,e lasl publication being in the issue of
June 27'h , 2008
-----------_ .. _-------------.-----
Subscribed and sworn to before me this, the
_____ __ of June, 2008
__ .
Notary Public in and for the
State ofNev.da,
I .. -:7 KeNitE:,-:-;;;:;W'j
! i '-: Notary PIlbIic Stare of Navada i
I ' . . App:tinImonI- n - CoIItIr I
I
'... No:CJ4.88800.2.EltpImMayIS.:/012 '
.. _." ... , . ,_.-..... ___ ". ___ =-.1

; NOm OF-TRUSTEE'S SALE
I TS # NV..Q8-141434-BL Loan"
I 0003nOI95YOUAREOIOEFAULT.
, UNOERAOEEOOF.TRUSTOATeO I
l
4l1812oo5, UNLESS YOU TAKE
ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR
I PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT ,
I APUBLlCSALE.IFYOUNEEOAN I
EXPlANATION OF THE NATURE I
! OF THE PROCEEOING AGAINST
YOU, YOU SHOULD 'CONTACT I
, A C.AWYER. A puDllc .-- I
I to 1M highest bidder fOf I=BSn. I
I cashier'. meek drawn on.8 state I
I 01 MUons! bank, d'Iec:t drawn by ,
sta18 or fedeml credit unmn. or a I
I chedl drawn by 8 stale or
I saYinga and loan or J
I savings 891oei8110n. or saving. \
I tMl,n1t ,peeifiod in SecIIon 5102 10 I
the Rnanclal <Ode oM - I
to do business In thl. 8late. will I
I
be ""'" by duly appolnled 1nIStOe. ,
The sale Vt'iII be made, but without I
covenant or WBR'8nty, expresud
I
or implied. regarding tttle. pos- I
sesaion. or encumtwances, 10 pay
,tne remaining prtneIpal sum of the
l! noto(a) "cured by the Deed of
I TN". wfth Intel'88tand Iato"charges
lhoIoon,as,...,.,adIn Ih._(B),
advances, uncIeT the the I
Ofied of TNat. interet' thereon.
fees. ct1argoll Bnd e;cpems8s ,of}
the TN.tee for. the total amount
(at lite _ of Iho in .... pubtlcabon
of ... No1k;e of SaIo). _bly
estimated to be set forth below. t
The ainount may be greaf8l' on (he 1
l
'daY "'sa". BENEFICIARY MAY ,
ELECT TO BID THAN THE ,
TOTAL AMOUNTDUE. Trustor(a):
JAMES S. CARPERNTIER AND.
JOAN E. CARPENTIER. HUSBANO :
i' AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS.
... Recorded: 514J2005 Ell If1:strun1ent .
,
of 0tl\cIaI Records In the oflloe; of',
lite -.. of WASHOE County,' .
, Nevada: oate of Sale: 7f912Q08
I at 11:0!!.AM PIaCO 01 Sal.: AI lite I
' Virginia Street entr8lnc;e to the
I County CourthOuse, Virginia Street
\
at Coun Street, Reno, NY, Amount J
01 unpaid balance and alher charg- I
8S: $182,074.6-2 The purported 'I
I ..-. a ...... is: 2873 SUNNY I
I SLOPE oRIVE SPARKS, NY 89434 I
r AsSe....irs Pal"C8l No, 12 "
f
' 'Tnls Pl'Operty is sold 8sil, Ie,n:c'a
r
J
b unable to validate tI1a oondition, ,
defedI or disctosure issues of said 'j
:,
EXHIBIT "6".
, CIOSUre'requements under NRSl
I 113.130 by 'pun:ltaslng at !his .. ,. I
I end sigl'lng tfte receipt,of Tne
1 undersigned lrustee disclaIms any 1
I rtabUi1Y fOr any in""" ....... of lite I
I
property adcIl'$I8 01 othet aJ!MXIn I
deslgnetion. if any, Shewn h!'!'8I
n
, If I
r no street address or O1f1erCDft1!'l"'O"
, deaignaUon ta shOWn, 10
t tria lOcation of me property may, I
, be obIaIned by aencllng B.wrtttet'l "
requesilD the benefk;iary wilhllt 10 .\
r
days 01' It1e of publicBHon I
ofthilNOOeeofSale.1f1heTNstee '
is unable to convey. tille for any I
reason. the 8LJecelifui bidder'.
sole and e.llclusfve remedy shall I
I be Ihe return 01' montes pa1d 10 tt18
T..-, .... IIte .. _-
1
r snail 1'18'1e no further r8.cours8,
Date: GJ13I2DD8 QualUy
I
Corp. 2141 6th: Avenue
,san DIegO. CA9210181...,.s.7711
For NON SALE Inlqtmallan onfy
Safe Uno: 114-2511-18500. Logln
to: www.fldeUtyasep.com rs , : ,
NV..(l&-141434-BL Re,,,atatement t
Un.: 61M45-7711 ><3104 e.ou"'"
loIMIO,w .... na .. ,.....,....,.- .
discharged througl'l bankruptcy, \
you may have been released of '
personal liability for this loan In'
which case thIS lettar is intende<l '
to exen;:ISe tj1e note I'tgIrtS
, against ttle real property only.
'THIS NOTICE IS SENT FOR THE
PURPOSE OF COLLECTING A',
DEBT. THIS FIRM ISATTEMP11NG
TO COLLECTADEBTONIlEHAl.F
OF THE HOLOERAIiD OWNER OF
, THE NOTE. ANY INFORMATION ..
, OBTAINED BY OR PROVIOED TO ,
,THIS FIR .. " OR THE CREOITOR
WilL BE USED FOR THAT
'PURPOSE, As required by law. '
, you are hereby notified that a nsga-. t
dVOc:rodit_-""your \
erecIlt record may be to
\
8 erod" _ agency W you ",H 10
fulfililho torrnB of your """. obIiIJI!-
lions ASN'llTI7541504l11312OO8.
08I2M00s.OO/21/2008 . I
- - -- -- ---
\
1
tnl.lEG
iiiiiiiiiiii tn Q) a: (f)
_"m "
-\<110'1 ....
. lSlQ.tn

=CSlLLm
-0 "

_mWN
I iiiiiiiiiiii OlE-
_ Ia:m
-ua:o
iiiiiiiiiiiio -
__ <0
- _H'
CO
- >-
"'
- -
-t..'" _ Ct::J .....
_ wac
55 g
= r-z ..... u
__ ",0
=ISIQ. .. Q)
_ IIXt..O
= wa-,.l:
_eo",,,,
'=::0 "n)
0-,03
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Original
;
FILED
AFFT
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Phone (702) 685-0329 Ext. 3748
Fax (866) 339-5691
09 JUN AM 10: 59
RS
BY
Attorney for DEFENDANTS' Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. & Quality Loan Servic
Corporation
IN THE SECOND JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA IN AND
FOR WASHOE COUNTY
JAMES S. CARPENTIER; and JOAN E.)
CARPENTIER, )
Plaintiffs )
vs. )
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION DBA)
AAMES HOME LOAN, a
corporation; WINDSOR MANAGEMENT)
CO. , a California corporation;
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS,
a TEXAS corporation; QUALITY LOAN)
SERVICE CORPORATION, a California)
Defendants )
I, Dave Owen, declare as follows:
Case No.: CVOi-01709
Department No: 4
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF MOTION
TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE
FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
I. I am over the age of eighteen, and I have personal knowledge of the matters set fort
herein. If called upon to testify thereto, I could and would competently testify do so.
2. At all times relevant herein, I have been employed by Defendant, Quality Loan Servic
21 Corporation ("QLS"). I am authorized to make this affidavit in support of the Motion to Dismiss
22 or in the alternative for Summary Judgment.
23
3. I am currently employed by QLS as the Chief Operating Officer.
24
4. At all relevant times, I was a custodian of QLS's records as they pertain to th
25 foreclosure of the loan secured by the real property commonly known as 2873 Sunny Slope
Nv08-2636
,
1
2
3

Drive, Sparks, NV 89434 (the "Property").
5. Defendant QLS is the Trustee for the holder of Promissory Note and Deed of Trus
recorded 5/4/05, originally issued by Aames Funding Corporation dba Aames Home Loan.
4 6. I have examined QLS's file relating to the foreclosure of the Deed of Trust in detai
5 (hereinafter the "Carpentier File"). The Carpentier File is kept in the ordinary course of QLS'
6 business. I am familiar with the QLS' method of maintaining foreclosure files from the tim
7 QLS received the foreclosure referral until the present. Entries documenting all interactions 0
8 the loan are to be made in the file whenever one QLS' personnel has an interaction related to th
9 loan. Entries documenting all interactions on the loan are to be made at, or near, the time of th
10 interaction. These entries must be faithfully and accurately recorded so that any person who rna
11 be participating in the matter can review the file to ascertain the status of the matter. The file fo
12 this matter appears to have been consistently maintained in accordance with this policy.
13 7. I have personally worked on QLS' records, and files, and as to the following facts,
14 know them to be true of my own knowledge or have gained knowledge of them from th
15 business records of QLS which were made at or near the time of the acts, conditions, or events t
16 which they relate, and which are maintained in the ordinary course of business by QLS by
17 person who had personal knowledge of the event being recorded and had, or has, a business dut
18 to record accurately such event. The business records are available for inspection and copies c
19 be submitted to the Court ifthe Court so desires.
20 8. Exhibit" I" to the Notice of Lodgment is a true and correct copy of the recorded Notic
21 of Breach and Affidavit of Mailing of Notice of Breach which was prepared recorded and maile
22 in accordance with QLS's usual practices.
23 9. Exhibit "2" to the Notice of Lodgment is a true and correct copy of the envelope
24 containing the Notices of Default which were returned as either undeliverable or certified mai
25 that was not signed for.
Nv08-2636

1 10.
Exhibit "3" to the Notice of Lodgment is a true and correct copy of the recorded Notic
2
ofSa1e which was prepared in accordance with QLS' usual practice.
3 11.
Exhibit "4" to the Notice of Lodgment is a true and correct copy of the Affidavit 0
4
Mailing Notice of Sale via regular and certified mail which was prepared in accordance wi
5
QLS's usual practices.
6 12.
7
Posting evidencing the posting of the Notice of Sale.
8 13.
9
Publishing evidencing the publication of the Notice of Sale.
10 14.
Exhibit "7" to the Notice of Lodgment are true and correct copies of the envelope
11 containing the mailed Notices of Sale that were returned as either undeliverable or certified mai
12 that was not signed for.
13 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Nevada that th
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
foregoing is true and correct.
Dated this I of June 2009
See o ..
State of California
County of San Diego __
Dave Owen
Chief Operating Officer
On , 2009 before me the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said State
personally appeared before me Dave Owen, personally known to me (or proved to me on th
basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who name is subscribe to the within instrumen
and acknowledge to me that they executed the same in their authorized capacity and that thei
signature on the instrument the person executed the instrunlent. Witness my hand and officia
seal.
Nv08-2636

california All-Purpose Acknowledgment
Sate of california
} County of San Diego
On CoIl 109 before me, Brittany Logan-Ruble, Notary Public, personally appeared
DOD) d O\l.t' .0 who proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their
authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the
person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENAL TV OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of california that the
foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and offidal seal.
,
{Seal}
....................................................................................................................................
Description of Attached Document: ____________________ _
Number of Pages: __________ Document Date: __________ _
capacity (ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer's Name: ____________________ _
Signer Is Representing: _________________ _
1
2
3
4
'5
'6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

AFFIRMATION
Pursuant to NRS 2398.030
The Undersigned does hereby affirm that the proceeding document, AFFIDAVIT I
SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMAR
JUDGMENT filed in case number: CV08-01709
Date:
X Document does not contain the social security number of any person
-OR-
Document contains the social security number of a person as required by :
A Specific State or Federal Law, to wit:
-or-
For the administration of a public program
-or-
For an application for federal or state grant
-or-
Confidential Family Court Information
(NRS 125.130, NRS 125.230 and NRS 1258055)

'------.:Attomey for-Defendants Residential
Credit Solutions, Inc. & Ouality
Loan Service Corporation
Nv08-2636
F I L E D
Electronically
11-25-2008:04:56:10 PM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CODE: 1835
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: (775) 853-0883
JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Defendants.
__________________________________
CASE NO. CV08-01709
DEPT NO. 4
NRCP 16 JOINT CASE CONFERENCE REPORT
On Thursday, October 23,2008, the parties, acting through their respective counsel, met and
conducted the case conference in accordance with Rule 16.1(b) of the Nevada Rules of Civil Procedure.
Eric B. Zimbelman, Esq. appeared on behalf of Defendants Aames Funding Corporation dba Aames
Home Lone and Windsor Management Co., Kristin Schuler-Hintz, Esq. appeared on behalf of
Defendants Residential Credit Solutions, Inc and Quality Loans Service Corporation, and James M.
Walsh, Esq. appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier. The parties
hereby submit their Joint Case Conference Report.
1
1 1.
NATURE OF ACTION PROCEEDINGS PRIOR TO REPORT AND CLAIM S FOR RELIE
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
OR DEFENSE(S):
10
11
12
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A. Nature of Action
B.
1. This dispute exists between parties regarding a foreclosure.
Proceedings Prior to Report
1. Plaintiffs' Complaint was filed on June 26,2008.
2. Plaintiffs' Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order was filed 0
June 27, 2008.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
The Nevada Resident Agents for Defendants Aames Funding Corporation db
Aames Home Loan Company and Windsor Management Company were serve
with the Summons, Complaint and Ex-Parte Application for Temporar
Restraining Order on July 3, 2008.
An Order to Show Cause and Temporary Restraining Order was filed July 8
2008.
Plaintiffs' Notice of Filing Bond was filed on July 8, 2008.
The California Resident Agent for Windsor Management Co was served with th
SUlllffions, Complaint and Ex-Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order,
Order to Show Cause and Temporary Restraining Order, and Notice of Filin
Bond on July 8, 2008.
The Texas Resident Agent for Defendant Residential Credit Solutions, Inc wa
served with the Summons, Complaint and Ex-Parte Application for Tempora
Restraining Order, Order to Show Cause and Temporary Restraining Order, an
Notice of Filing Bond on July 9,2008.
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
The Nevada Resident Agent for Quality Loan Service Corporation was serve
with the Summons, Complaint and Ex-Parte Application for Tempor
Restraining Order on July 9, 2008.
The California Resident Agent for Quality Loan Service Corporation was serve
with the Summons, Complaint and Ex-Parte Application for Tempor
Restraining Order, Order to Show Cause and Temporary Restraining Order, an
Notice of Filing Bond on July 11, 2008.
Defendants Aames Funding Corporation dba Aames Home Loan Company an
Windsor Management Company's Notice of Appearance was filed on July 15,
2008.
Defendants Aames Funding Corporation dba Aames Home Loan Company an
Windsor Management Company's Answer was filed on July 22,2008.
The Order Granting Preliminary Injunction was filed August 19, 2008.
The Exemption from Arbitration was filed August 20, 2008.
Plaintiffs' Notice of Entry of Order granting Preliminary Injunction was file
August 28, 2008.
15. The Pretrial Order was filed September 19, 2008.
16.
17.
18.
Plaintiffs' Notice of Intent to Take Default was filed September 25, 2008.
Defendants quality Loan Service corporation and Residential Credit Solutions
Inc's Initial Appearance Fee Disclosure was filed September 29, 2008.
Defendants quality Loan Service corporation and Residential Credit Solutions
Inc's Answer was filed September 29,2008.
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2.
19. Plaintiffs' Notice of NRCP 16 Early Case Conference Report and Demand fo
Production was filed October 1, 2008.
20. Plaintiffs' Notice to Set Trial was filed October 1,2008.
21. Plaintiffs' Amended Notice of NRCP 16 Early Case Conference Report an
Demand for Production was filed October 10, 2008.
22. Plaintiffs' Amended Notice to Set Trial was filed October 10,2008.
23. The initial case conference was held on March 2,2005.
C. Claim(s) for Relief and Defense(s):
1. Plaintiffs' Complaint seeks relief for two causes of action. (1) Unfair Lendin
Practices; and (2) Loss of Interest in Real Property by Foreclosure.
2. Defendants Aames Funding Corporation dba Aames Home Loan and Windso
Management Co's Answer and Affirmative Defenses on file herein sets fort
nineteen separate Affirmative Defenses.
3. Defendants Quality Loans Service Corporation and Residential Credit Solutions
Inc's Answer and Affirmative Defenses on file herein sets forth fifteen separat
Affirmative Defenses.
PROPOSED PLAN AND SCHEDULE OF ADDITIONAL DISCOVERY
The parties intend to conduct additional discovery in this matter. Such discovery will include,
but not be limited to, interrogatories, requests for production, requests for admission, and the possibl
depositions of individuals named herein and experts retained by the parties, as well as any oth
individuals obtained through such additional discovery. The parties estimate that such additiona
discovery should be completed no later than forty-five (45) days prior to the date set for trial of thi
matter.
4
1 3. LIST OF NAMES EXCHANGED
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A.
By Plaintiffs:
1.
James S. Carpentier
c/o Walsh, Baker & Rosevear, PC
9468 Double R Boulevard, Suite A
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: 775-853-0883
Mr. Carpentier is expected to testifY as to his knowledge ofthe allegations set forth in the
pleadings.
2. Joan E. Carpentier
Reno, Nevada 89521
Telephone: 775-853-0883
Mrs. Carpentier is expected to testifY as to her knowledge of the allegations set forth in the
pleadings.
3.
Aames Funding Corporation dba Aames Home Loan
Person Most Knowledgeable
c/o PEEL BRIMLEY LLP
Telephone: 702-685-0329
The Person Most Knowledgeable is expected to testifY as to hislher knowledge of the allegations
set forth in the pleadings.
4. Windsor Management Co.
clo PEEL BRIMLEY LLP
Telephone: 702-685-0329
The Person Most Knowledgeable is expected to testifY as to hislher knowledge of the allegations
5
;,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5.
Residential Credit Solutions, Inc
c/o MCCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP
Telephone: 702-685-0329
The Person Most Knowledgeable is expected to testify as to hislher knowledge of the allegations
6.
Quality Loans Service Corporation
c/o MCCARTHY & HOLTHUS, LLP
Telephone: 702-685-0329
The Person Most Knowledgeable is expected to testify as to hislher knowledge of the allegations
B. By Defendants Aames Funding & Windsor Management.
1. Present of former employees of Aames and Windsor.
Last known addresses and phone numbers will be supplemented.
Accredited may call present or former employees of Aames, Windsor, Accredited and/o
affiliated companies, including but not limited to the following to testify regarding their involvement'
the home loans to James S. Carpentier, communications with Mr. Carpentier, and other related matters.
2.
a. Judy Dalr1
b. Jason Asher
c. Chrisha Gonnerman
d. Arlinda Tinajero
e. Sharonda Mascheri
James S. and Joan E. Carpentier
Reno, Nevada 89521
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Mr. & MrS. Carpentier may be called to testify as to hislher knowledge of the facts an
circumstances surrounding this action.
3.
Fidelity National Title
17911 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 200
Irvine, California 92614
This person may be called to testify as to their knowledge of the facts and circumstance
surrounding this action.
4. Person Most Knowledgeable
National Financial Systems, Inc.
600 W. John Street
Hicksville, New York 11902
5. Mark H. Mathewson
M.H. Mathewson & Associates
PO Box 2045
Carson City, Nevada 89702
Mr. Mathewson appraised the Carpentier's property and may testify regarding the same an
other matters.
TranStar National Title
3041 E. Flamingo, Suite A
7.
Trans Union
PO Box 4000
Chester, Pennsylvania 19018
This person may be called to testify as to credit reporting regarding Mr.& Mrs. Carpentier an
knowledge of the facts and circumstances surrounding this action.
7
;i
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Washington Mutual Bank, P A
Pay-Off Unit
11200 W. Parkland Avenue
Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53224
This person may be called to testify as to pay-off amounts regarding Mr. & Mrs. Carpentier'
loan and knowledge of the facts and circumstances surrounding this action.
9. Reservation of rights. Defendants Windsor and Accredited reserve the right t
call any witness identified by any other party.
C. By Defendants Residential Credit & Ouality Loans Service
1. None.
4. LIST OF DOCUMENTS RE UESTED PROVIDED AT OR AS A RESULT OF CAS
CONFERENCE
A. Documents Requested
1. By Plaintiffs:
a. Produce all documents reasonably available to you which you contemplat
to be used in support of the allegations or denials of any pleading filed b
you, including rebuttal and impeachment documents.
b. All other documents discoverable within the scope ofNRCP 26(b) that ten
to prove or disprove any of the allegations contained in any pleading file
by you, or in any pleading filed by the Plaintiffs, including rebuttal an
impeachment documents.
c. Produce and complete contents of any insurance agreement under whic
any person carrying on an insurance business may be liable to satisfy pa
or all of a judgment which may be entered in this action, or to indemnify 0
reimburse you for payments made to satisfY such a judgment. If
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
B.
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
reservation of rights is being asserted under any such policy of insurance
please produce all documents setting forth such reservation.
d. Produce copies of investigation conducted on Defendants' behal
concerning the incident which is the subject of Plaintiffs' Complaint, t
include copies of photographs, reports of the incident, written or recorde
statements taken from any individual concerning the incident, and an
other materials generated during the course of any such investigation.
2. By Defendants Aames Funding & Windsor Management:
a. None.
3. By Defendants Residential Credit & Quality Loans Service
a. None.
Documents Provided at or as a Result of Case Conference
1. By Plaintiffs:
a. Residential Credit Solutions (RCS) Brochure, Bates Nos. JJCI-JJC2
b. RCS Letter to Carpentier re Loan Modification Agreement, Bates No.
JJC3
c. Notice of No Oral Agreements, Bates No. JJC4
d. Errors and Omissions Compliance Agreement, Bates No. JJC5
e. Notice to Cosigner, Bates No. JJC6
f. Loan Modification Agreement, Bates Nos. JJC7-JJCIO
g. Uniform Loan Application, Bates Nos. JJCII-JJC14
h. Uniform Underwriting and Transmittal Summary, Bates Nos. JJC15-
JJC16
9
.'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1.
J.
k.
1.
m.
n.
o.
p.
q.
Specific Closing Instructions, Bates Nos. JJC17-JJC!8
Estimate of Closing Costs, Bates No. JJC19
Payment Letter to Borrower, Bates No. JJC20
Lender Closing Instructions, Bates No. JJC2l
Settlement Statement, Bates No. JJC22
Fax to Aames Home Loan from Carpentier re Good Faith Estimate, Bates
No. JJC23-JJC25
Good Faith Estimate Package, Bates Nos. JJC26-JJC55
Deed of Trust, Recorded May 4,2005, Document No. 3208651, Bates
Nos. JJC56-JJC75
Borrower Copy Set for Refinance, Bates Nos. JJC76-JJC140
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Notice of Right to Cancel, Bates Nos. JJC77-JJC80
Settlement Statement, Bates No. JJC81
Affidavit as to Debts, Liens, Possession and Taxes, Bates No.
JJC82
Disbursement Confirmation, Bates No. JJC83
Customer Identification Form, Bates No. JJC84
Settlement Statement, Estimated HUD, Bates Nos. JJC85-JJC86
Lender Closing Instructions, Bates Nos. JJC87-JJC88
Specific Closing Instructions, Bates Nos. JJC89-JJC90
9. Good Faiili Estinlate, Bates No. JJC9!
10. Payment Letter to Borrower, Bates No. JJC92
11. 30-Day Letter, Bates No. JJC93
10
1
12.
Signature/Name Affidavit, Bates No. JJC94
2
13.
Adjustable Rate Note, Bates Nos. JJC95-JJC98
3
14.
Variable Rate Mortgage Program Disclosure, Bates Nos. JJC99-
4
5
JJClOO
6 15.
Deed of Trust, Bates Nos. JJC101-JJC115
7
16.
Adjustable Rate Rider, Bates Nos. JJCl16-JJCl18
8
17.
Non-Borrowing Customer Form, Bates No. JJCl19
9
18.
Federal Truth-In Lending Disclosure Statement, Bates No. JJC120
10
11
19.
Escrow Impound Account Acknowledgement, Bates No. JJC121
12 20.
Error and Omissions/Compliance Agreement, Bates No. JJC122
13
21. Occupancy Agreement, Bates No. JJC123
14
22. Appraisal Disclosure, Bates No. JJC124
15
23.
Request for Taxpayer Identification, Tax Return and Transcript of
16
17
Tax Return, Bates Nos. JJC125-JJC132
18
24.
Borrower's Certification and Authorization, Bates No. JJC133
19
25. Correction Agreement, Bates No. JJC134
20
26. Credit Score Notice, Bates No. JJC135
21
22
27. Disclosure Notices, Bates No. JJC136
23
28.
Flood Insurance Acknowledgement, Bates No. JJC137
24
29.
Special Disclosures Concerning Prepayment Penalties, Bates No.
25
JJC138
26
30.
RESPA Servicing Disclosure, Bates No. JJC139
27
28
31.
Initial Escrow Account Disclosure Statement, Bates No. JJC140
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5.
6.
r. Hand Written Note from Carpentier, Bates No. JJC14l
s. Notice of Assignment, Sale or Transfer of Servicing Rights, Bates Nos.
JJC142-JJC143
t. Notice of Breach and Default and of Election to Cause Sale of Real
Property Under Deed of Trust, Bates Nos. JJC144-JJC146
u. Notice of Trustee's Sale, Bates Nos. JJC147-JJC148
v. James Carpentier W-2 for 2005, Bates No. JJC149
w. James Carpentier Workman's Compensation Payment, Bates No. JJC150
2. By Defendants Aames Funding & Windsor Management:
a. Documents Bate Stamped ACC-CAROl- ACC-CAR2l5.
3. By Defendants Residential Credit & Ouality Loans Service
a. None.
DISCOVERY CUT-OFF
Discovery must be completed by October 2,2009,45 days prior to trial.
FILING OF MOTIONS
Motions to amend pleadings or to add parties, unless by court order, must be made by July 6
2009, 90 days prior to the closing of discovery.
7. INITIAL AND EXPERT DISCLOSURES
Initial disclosures and expert disclosures must be made by July 6, 2009, 90 days prior to th
closing of discovery. All rebuttal disclosures must be made by, August 5, 2009, 30 days after the initia
disclosure of expert witnesses.
8. FILING DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS
12
1
Dispositive Motions must be served, filed and submitted by, October 19, 2009, 30 days prior t
2
date set for trial. Dispositive Motions must be filed by September 17, 2009.
3
9. ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL
4
5
The estimated time for trial is three (3) days.
6 10. JURY DEMAND
7
A jury demand has not been filed.
8
The undersigned do hereby affirm that the NRCP 16 JOINT CASE CONFERENCE REPORT,
9
filed in Case No. CV08-01709, does not contain the social security mjipber of any person.
10 DATED this of November, 200 . DATED this day of November, 2008.
11
12
13
14
/s
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
es M. Walsh, Esq.
evada Bar No. 796
9468 Double R Blvd, Ste A
Reno, Nevada S9523
Telephone: 775-853-0883
Facsimile: 775-853-0860
Dated this d day of November, 2008.
&.-Jl:1tAL THUS, LLP
Las Veg ,
Te one: 702-685-0329 ext. 3748
Facsimile: 866-339-5691
YLLP 1-
W
Telephone: 702-990-7272
Facsimile: 702-990-7273
13

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Christopher M. Hunter, Esq. Nevada SBN 8127
9510 West Sahara, Suite 110
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Phone (702) 685-0329 Ext. 3748
Fax (866) 339-5691

Attorney for DEFENDANTS
Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. & Quality Loan Service Corporation

DISTRICT COURT
CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA

J AMES S. CARPENTIER; and J OAN E.
CARPENTIER,

Plaintiffs
vs.

CO. , a California corporation;
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC.,
a TEXAS corporation; QUALITY LOAN
SERVICE CORPORATION, a California
Corporation; and DOES I XX, inclusive,

)

Defendants

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Case No.: CV09-01709

Department No: 4

DEFENDANTS RESIDENTIAL CREDIT
SOLUTIONS , INC. AND QUALITY
LOAN SERVICE CORPORATIONS
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

COMES NOW Defendants, Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. (RCS), and Quality Loan
Service Corporation (QLS) (collectively Defendants), by and through its counsel of record,
Christopher M. Hunter, Esq., of McCarthy & Holthus, LLP, and moves the Court to enter
summary judgment in favor of Defendants.
F I L E D
Electronically
06-23-2010:11:56:43 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
This Motion is brought pursuant to NRCP 56(b) based upon the assertion that there is no
justiciable issue of fact. Pursuant to D.C.R. Rule 13 any Response and/or Opposition to this
motion must be filed with the court and served within 10 days after service hereof. Any Reply
must be filed with the Court and served within 10 days after service of any response or
opposition. Failure to file a timely opposition may result in the granting of the instant motion
without hearing.
This Motion is based upon this Notice, the attached Memorandum of Points and
Authorities, and upon all pleadings and documents herein, as well as any argument that may be
presented at the hearing of this, or any other motions/matters; the Court is requested to take
judicial notice as appropriate.
Dated: 6/23/2010

/s/ Christopher M. Hunter
Christopher M. Hunter, Esq.

MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITES
FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Plaintiffs claim arose from a loan and deed of trust securing real property located in
Washoe County, Nevada. Defendants assert that the following facts are material to the
disposition of this motion and are not genuinely in issue:
1. This action concerns real property in Washoe County, Nevada known as 2873 Sunny
Slope Dr., Sparks, Nevada (Subject Property). The Subject Property was financed through the
execution of a note and deed of trust by Plaintiffs promising to repay the sum of $170,800 in
monthly installments to Aames Funding Corporation DBA Aames Home Loan. The deed of
trust was recorded on May 4, 2005 in the official records of Washoe County as document
number 3208651. A copy of the deed of trust is attached as Exhibit 1. Subsequently, on March
10, 2008, Aames Funding Corporation DBA Aames Home Loan assigned the deed of trust to

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for Aames Mortgage Investment Trust 2005-
2. The assignment was recorded on May 9, 2008 as document number 3648603. A copy of the
assignment is attached as Exhibit 2. At all times, RCS was the servicer of the loan.
2. Thereafter, Plaintiffs defaulted on the above referenced loan. On April 18, 2008, a
substitution of trustee, dated March 10, 2008, was recorded as document number 3641716. The
substitution was signed by Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for Aames
Mortgage Investment Trust 2005-2 and appointed QLS as the foreclosure trustee. A copy of this
document is attached as Exhibit 3. Quality then commenced a foreclosure by recording a notice
of default and election to sell on March 12, 2008 as document number 3629741. A copy of the
notice of default is attached as Exhibit 4. Quality next recorded a notice of sale on J une 19, 2008
as document number 3661497. A copy is attached as Exhibit 5.
3. Plaintiffs filed this action on J uly 8, 2008. The foreclosure was never completed.
Defendants previously filed a Motion to Dismiss or in the alternative Motion for Summary
J udgment. Before this Motion could be heard Plaintiffs attorney withdrew from the case and a
notice of bankruptcy filing and automatic stay was filed by Aames Funding Corporation DBA
Aames Home Loan staying further action in this case. Defendants then moved for an order
lifting the stay and on J une 18, 2010 an Order was entered in the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the District of Delaware lifting the stay. A copy of the Order is attached as Exhibit 6.
All exhibits referenced herein are attached to this Motion. Quality respectfully requests
judicial notice of the deed of trust, as well as the other exhibits. Under Federal Rule of Evidence
201, a court may judicially notice matters of public record. Mack v. S. Bay Beer Distrib., 798
F.2d 1279, 1282 (9th Cir. 1986). All exhibits hereto should be judicially noticed because they are
a public record in the Washoe County Recorder's office.
4. Plaintiffs have not raised any material facts which would preclude entry of summary
judgment in favor of Defendants.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

LEGAL ARGUMENT
Summary J udgment is appropriate and is authorized by NRCP 56 when no genuine issue
remains for trial.
1
Summary J udgment is available to resolve issue of law where the facts are not
in dispute.
2

Nevada Rule of Civil Procedure 56 (b) allows a defending party to move the Court for
Summary J udgment at any time.
3
Summary J udgment is appropriate when the moving Party is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law, and there are no genuine issues remaining for trial.
Shepard v. Harrison, 100 Nev. 178 (1984). The purpose of Summary J udgment is to avoid
unnecessary trials when they would serve no useful purpose, because there is no real dispute
about the facts of the case. Short v. Hotel Riviera, Inc., 79 Nev. 94 (1963). The Summary
J udgment procedure is not to decide any issue of fact which may be presented, but to discover if
any real issue of fact exists. Dougherty v. Wabash Life Ins. Co., 87 Nev. 32 (1971). The
function of the Summary J udgment proceeding is not to test the legal sufficiency of the
complaint to state a claim. Force v. Peccole, 74 Nev. 64, (1958). Rather, it is to pierce the
pleadings and to test whether, under the uncontroverted facts, one party is entitled to judgment
as a matter of law. Nev.R.Civ.P. 56(c). The moving party bears the initial burden of establishing
the nonexistence of any genuine issue of material fact. Pacific Pools Constr. Co. v. McClains
Concrete, Inc. 101 Nev. 557 (1985).
Once the moving party has met its burden, an adverse party may not rest upon the mere
allegations or denials of the adverse partys pleadings, but the adverse partys response, by

1
Shepar d v. Har r i son 100 Nev. 178, 678 P. 2d 670 ( 1984) ; Paci f i c Pool Const r .
Co. v. McCl ai n s Concr et e, I nc. 101 Nev. 557, 706 P. 2d. 849 ( 1985) .
2
Mol i no v. Asher 96 Nev. 814, 618 P. 2d 878 ( 1980) .
3
Cummi ngs v. Ci t y of Las Vegas Mun. Cor p. 88 Nev. 479, 499 P. 2d. 650 ( 1972) .

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
affidavits or as otherwise provided in this rule, must set forth specific facts demonstrating the
existence of a genuine issue for trial. Nev.R.Civ.P.56(e). When this rule speaks of a "genuine"
issue of material fact, it does so with the adversary system in mind. The word "genuine" has
moral overtones; it does not mean a fabricated issue. Aldabe v. Adams, 81 Nev. 280, 402 P.2d 34
(1965). In addition, the adverse party must come forward with documentation admissible in
evidence in the form of specific facts to show the existence of a genuine issue of material fact;
otherwise the court is required to enter judgment according to the law. Nev.R.Civ.P.56(e);
Posadas v. City of Reno, 109 Nev. 448, 452 (1991). Conclusory statements along with general
allegations do not create an issue of material fact. Michaels v. Sudeck, 107 Nev.332 (1991). Not
only must the party opposing the motion set forth specific evidence, that evidence must be
admissible as well. Posadas v. City of Reno, 109 Nev. 448, 452 (1991). The opposing party is
not entitled to build a case on the gossamer threads of whimsy, speculation and conjecture.
Collins v. Union Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 99 Nev. 284, 662 P.2d 610 (1983).

PLAINTIFFS FAIL TO STATE ANY VIABLE CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST
MOVING DEFENDANTS AND AS SUCH SUMMARY JUDGMENT IS APPOPRIATE.
A. The First Claim for Unfair Lending Practices Cannot be Stated Against Answering
Defendants
Plaintiffs first claim apparently asserts three causes of action: negligence, unfair
lending practices under NRS 598D. Plaintiffs Complaint does mention a possible claim for
negligence but only that each of the Defendants designated herein as DOE is negligent or
responsible in some manner for the events herein and does not allege that RCS or QLS were
negligent.
4
In fact, virtually all of the allegations are made against Aames and concern matter
occurring at the time the loan was originated. Plaintiffs Complaint contains no allegations of
unfair lending practices by QLS. No particular misrepresentation by RCS is alleged with

4
Cplt. 2.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
specificity or otherwise. Plaintiffs only allege against RCS that when they contacted Aames and
RCS to refinance, Defendants AAMES and/or RESIDENTAL offered to provide them with
false or fraudulent W2 Forms in order to meet financial requirements. CARPENTIER declined
to participate in loan fraud.
5
The Complaint fails to allege the who, what, where, and when,
and how as to any affirmative conduct by RCS.
B. NRS 598D and Deceptive Trade Practices
a. NRS 598D is inapplicable to this loan
The general rule is that is that statutes are prospective only; unless it clearly, strongly,
and imperatively appears from the act itself that the legislature intended the statute to be
retrospective in its operation. See, e.g, State Ex Rel. Progress v. Court, 53 Nev. 386, 2 P.2d
129 (1931).
6
No such retroactive intent appears in the amendments to NRS 598D.100(1)(b).
Nor does any retroactive intent appear in the plain language of the statute, itself. It is a long
recognized tenet of statutory construction that "when the language of a statute is plain and
unambiguous, a court should give that language its ordinary meaning and not go beyond it."
7

The language of NRS 598D.100(1)(b) states as follows:
It is an unfair lending practice for a lender to: . (b) Knowingly or
intentionally make a home loan, other than a reverse mortgage, to a
borrower, including, without limitation, a low-document home loan, no-
document home loan or stated-document home loan, without determining,
using any commercially reasonable means or mechanism, that the borrower
has the ability to repay the home loan..

Said language requiring using a commercially reasonable means of verifying repayment
was added in 2007 and made effective October 2007. It is impossible for any lender originating
a loan prior to have violated NRS 598D.100(1)(b) as the statutory requirement did not exist until
then. As such NRS 598D.100 (1)(b) is inapplicable to the case at bar. NRS 598D is inapplicable

5
Cplt. 17.
6
Quoting from, Eggleston v. Costello (In re Estate of Thomas), 116 Nev. 492 (2000)
7
City of Henderson v. Kilgore, 131 P.3d 11 (2006) quoting from City Council of Reno v. Reno Newspapers 105
Nev. 886, 891 (1989)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
because the statute relates to matters occurring at or before the origination of a loan. Here, the
loan was originated in April, 2005, long before the legislature adopted the current form of NRS
598D. NRS 598D is simply inapplicable.
b. There is no successor liability under NRS 598D
Plaintiffs have also failed to provide this Court with any basis to conclude that NRS
598D allows for successor liability. NRS 598D.100 clearly states that "it is an unfair lending
practice for a lender to . . . knowingly or intentionally make a home loan to a borrower . . . "
NRS 598D. 100(b) (2003) (emphases added). Here, the Complaint shows that Aames was the
original lender, and thus NRS 598D.100 is not applicable to Defendants. Furthermore, there is no
legal authority to conclude that NRS 598D.100 allows for successor liability, similar to TILA
claims. As a result, Plaintiffs have no basis to allege a claim based on NRS 598D.100 against
Defendants.
c. Plaintiffs claims under NRS 598D.100 are time barred
NRS 598D.110 provides that a lender is liable for treble damages for willfully engaging
in unfair lending practices. NRS 598D.110. The title of this section specifically states "criminal
and civil penalties". NRS 11.190(4)(b) imposes a two-year statute of limitations for "[a]n action
upon a statute for a penalty or forfeiture, where the action is given to a person or the state, or
both, except when the statute imposing it prescribes a different limitation." NRS 11.190(4)(b);
Edwards v. Emperor 's Garden Restaurant, 122 Nev. 317, 327-28, 130 P.3d 1280, 1286-87
(2006).
In the case at bar, it is undisputed that Plaintiffs claim against Defendants was not filed
until J uly, 2008, which is more than two years after the loan was originated in April, 2005.
Dismissal of Plaintiffs claims will be appropriate, as the facts alleged by Plaintiffs establish that
the applicable statute of limitations for this type of action bar recovery. Bank of Nevada v.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Friedman, 82 Nev. 417, 422, 420 P.2d 1, 4 (1966) ("When the complaint shows on its face that
the cause of action is barred, the burden falls upon the plaintiff to satisfy the court that the bar
does not exist.").
The Second Claim for Temporary Restraining Order, Preliminary Injunction, and
Permanent Injunction Cannot be Stated Against Answering Defendants
Plaintiffs second claim does not state a cause of action; it only asserts that
CARPENTIER is entitled to a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction and
permanent injunction precluding Defendants from conducting a foreclosure sale of the
PROPERTY.
8
The complaint must be dismissed because injunctive relief is not an independent
claim. Injunctive relief is a remedy, not a cause of action. See, e.g., In re Wal-Mart Wage &
Hour Employment Practices Litig., 490 F. Supp. 2d 1091, 1130 (D. Nev. 2007) (claim for
injunctive relief is not a separate cause of action); see also Mamo v. BP P.L.C., No. 05-1323,
2006 WL 269056, at *3 (E.D. Va. J an. 30, 2006) (same); Noah v. Enesco Corp., 911 F. Supp.
305, 307 (N.D. Ill. 1995) (injunctive relief is a remedy, not an independent cause of action).
Since the first cause of action fails to state a viable claim, the remaining claim for injunctive
relief likewise fails.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, for all the foregoing reasons, Defendants pray that the Court grant the
Motion for Summary J udgment.
Respectfully submitted:

Dated: 6/23/2010

/s/ Christopher M. Hunter

8
Cplt. 27.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
LIST OF EXHIBITS

1. DEED OF TRUST
2. ASSIGNMENT OF DEED OF TRUST
3. SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE
4. NOTICE OF DEFAULT
5. NOTICE OF SALE
6. ORDER LIFTING SALE

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
.'
AFFIRMATION
Pursuant to NRS 2398.030
The undersigned does hereby affirm that the preceding document, ____ _
(Title of Document)
filed in case number: ________________________ _
D
0
Date:
Affirmation
Document does not contain the social security number of any person
-OR-
Document contains the social security number of a person as required by:
o A specific state or federal law, to wit:
-or-
o For the administration of a public program
-or-
o For an application for a federal or state grant
-or-
O Confidential Family Court Information Sheet
(NRS 125.130, NRS 125.230 and NRS 125B.055)
(Signature)
(Print Name)
(Attorney for)
Revised December 15, 2006
x
June 23, 2010 /s/Christopher M. Hunter
Christopher M. Hunter, Esq. NSBN 8127

Residential Credit Solutions & Quality
Loan Servic Corporation
Defendants' Residential Credit Solutions,Inc. and Quality Loan Service
Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING

I hereby certify that on the 23rd day of J une, 2010, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing DEFENDANTS RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC. AND
QUALITYLOAN SERVICE CORPORATIONS MOTION FOR SUMMARY J UDGMENT
was forwarded by United States Mail, postage prepaid to the addresses listed below.
3333 E. Serene Ave., Suite 200
Henderson, NV 89074

J ames and J oan Carpentier
Sparks, NV 89434

/s/Ellen McAbee_____________________
An Employee of McCarthy & Holthus, LLP

EXHIBIT 2

(PART 2 OF 6)
F I L E D
Electronically
06-23-2010:11:56:43 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
lJ
------- ----
Copy n<ls not been compared
with the Original [Jocument - WCR
__ _
When recorded mall to:
Residential Credit Solutions
PO Box 78954
Phoenix. AZ. 85062-8954
at ()() n 5 a .-!G) G-
TS # NV-08-141434-BL
# 3648603
05/09/2008 03:45 : 43 PM
R"quul"d By
TICOR TITLE OF NEVADA INC
Washoe Counly Recorder
Kalhryn L. Burke - Recorder
Fee: $14.00 RPTT: $0.00
Page 1 of 1
CONFORMED COpy
Space above this line for recorders use
Order # W860369 Loan # 0003770195
Investor No.-llo03770195
Assignment of Deed of Trust
For value received, the undersigned corporation hereby grants, assigns, and transfers to
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY In Its capacity as Indenture trustee for the
Noteholders of AAMES MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUST 2005-2, a Delaware statutory trust
all beneficial interest under that certain Deed of Trust dated 411812005 executed by JAMES S.
CARPERNTIER AND JOAN E. CARPENTIER, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS, as
Trustor(s) to WINDSOR MANAGEMENT CO, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, as Trustee and recorded
as Instrument No. 3208651, on 51412005, in Book xxx, Page xxx of Official Records, in the office of the
County Recorder of WASHOE County, NV together with the Promissory Note secured by said Deed of
Trust and also all rights accrued or to accrue under said Deed olTrust.
FUNDING CORPORATION DBAAAMES HOME
Dated: 3110120088:31 AM
Stateof C"- \;yv
/ .) 55
Countyof L.--t
1
J )
On J--2-i>,j before me,
undersigned Notary Public, personatly appeared 1<,.,,, {<. ,..- "'0'>'- ' personalty kn to me (or
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) Islare subscribed to the
within instrument and ecknol'Aedged to me that helshelthey executed the same In hlslherlthelr authorizad
capacity(ies). and that by hiS/herltheir slgnature(s) on the Instrument the person(s). or the entity upon behalf of which
the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal
(Seal)
MElANIA ARAUJO
CorrmJssIon" 1676625
Notary Pub1Ic - CaMom1a
loa County
EXHIBIT "2"

EXHIBIT 3

(PART 3 OF 6)
F I L E D
Electronically
06-23-2010:11:56:43 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
Racadlno requa,ted by:
When r&Corded maW 10
Qualrty loan Service Corp.
2141 51h Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
619-645--7711
T5 # NV-08-141434-Bl Order II W660369
Substitution of Trust ee
DOC #3641716
04/181200804:00:07 PM
Electronic Raco/drng ReQuested By
TICOR TITLE - RENO
Washoe County Recorder
Kalhryn L Burke - Recorder
Fee: $15.00 RPTI: $0
Page 1 0(2
Space ,b0Y8 this 5ne lOr r1ICOfders UM
loan 1# 0003770195
Investor No. 0003770195
WHEREAS, JAMES S. CARPERNTIER AND JOAN E. CARPENTIER, HUSBAND AND
WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS was the onglnal Trustor, WINDSOR MANAGEMENT CO, A
CALIFORNIA CORPORATION was the original Trustee, and AAMES FUNDING
CORPORA liON DBA AAMES HOME LOAN was the original Beneficiary under that certain
Deed of Trust dated 4/1812005 and recorded on 51412005 as Instrument No. 3208651, in book
)(xx, page xxx of Official Records of WASHOE County, NV; and
WHEREAS, the undersigned is the present Beneficiary under said Deed of Trust, and
WHEREAS, the undersigned deSires to substitute a new Trustee under said Deed of
Trust In place and stead of said original Trustee, or Successor Trustee, thereunder, in the
manner provided for in said Deed of Trust.
NOW, THEREFORE, the undorslgned hereby substitutes QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION,as TnJstee under said Deed of Trust.
Whenever the context hereof so requires, the masculine gender Includes the feminine and/or
neuter, and the singular number includes the plural.
Page 1
EXHIBIT "3"
3641716 Page 2 of 2 0411812008 04:00:07 PM
of Trustee NV
TS # NV-08141434-BL
Page 2
Daled: 311012006
State of ('"I"\\u... ) 55
County of
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY In Its
capacity as Indenture trustee for the Noteholders of
MMES MORTGAGE INVESTMENT TRUST 2005-2, a
o ra statutory trust
}J,o..(s\.o.. (1 the undEll'llignad Notary Public.
personally known to ma (or proved to me on Ihe basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person{s) whose
name(s) islare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me thai helshellhey executed the
seme In hislherltheir authorized capaclly(les). and that by hlslher/Utelr slgnature(s) on the Instrument Ihe
person(s), or the entity upon behan of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal. (Seal)

EXHIBIT 4

(PART 4 OF 6)
F I L E D
Electronically
06-23-2010:11:56:43 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
Recording requested by:
When recorded mall 10:
Quality loan Service Corp.
2141 51h Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
TS No.: NV-oS-141434-BL
Assessors Parcel No(s) 030-091-12
DOC #3629741
03/ 12/ 200803:57:05 PM
Electronic Recording Requested By
TICOR TITLE - RENO
Fee: 116.00 RPTI: 10
Page 1 of 3
r !Ibm '''' .. !or RIIC'GIdtr't 1M
Order # W860369 Loan No.: 0003770195
08=/752-..
Property Under Deed of Trust
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: That Quality Loan Service Corp. Is either the original trustee, the duly
appointed substltuted trusteel-or acting as agent for the lrustee or beneficiary under a Deed 01 Trust dated
.,ecuted by JAM.S S. CARPERNTtER AND JOAN E. CARPENTtER, HUSBANO AND WtFE
AS JOIN I TENANTS, as Trustor, to secure certain obligations In favor of AAMES FUNDING
CORPORATION DBA AAMES HOME LOAN, as benellclary, recorded 51412005, 88 Instrument No.
3206651, In Book XKX, Page xxx of Official Records In the Office of the Recorder 01 WASHOE
Nevada securing, among other obtigatlons including 1 NOTE(S) FOR THE ORIGINAL sum OJ
$170,800,00, that the beneficial Interest under such Deea of Trust and the ob/lgalioflli I&cured thereby are
presently held by the undersigned; that a breach of, and default In, the obllgatfons lor which such Deed 01
Trust Is security has occurrecfln that payment has not been made of:
Installment of principal and Interest pl us Impounds and I or advances which became due on 10/112007
plus amounts that are due or may b9c0me due for the following: Jate charges, delinquent property taxes,
Insurance premiums, advances made on sonlor liens, taxes 9.ndIor Insurance, trustees fees, and any
attomey fees and court costs arising from or associated with beneficiaries elfort to protect and proserve Iti
security must be cured as a condiUon 01 reinstatement.
Thai by reason thereol the present Benellclary under such deed or Trust has executed and delivered to
said duly appointed Trustee a written Declaration of Default and Demand for Sale and has deposited with
said duty appointed Trustee such Deed of Trust and documents evidencIng obligations secured thereby
and has declared and does hereby declare all sums secured thereby Immediately due and payable and
has elected and does hereby elect to cause !he trust property to be sold to satlsfy the obligations secured
thereby.
NOTICE
You may have the right to cure the default hereon and reinstate the one obligation secured by such Deed
of Trust above described. SecUon NRS 107.080 permi ts certain defaults to be cured \..POn the Payment of
the amounts requlled by that statutory section without requiring payment 01 that portion 01 principal and
Intorost which would not be due had no default occurred. Where reinstatement Is possible, If the default II
nol cured within 35 days following recording and mailing of this Notice to Trustor Of Trusler's succeSSO( In
Interest, the rIght of reinstatement will terminate and the property may therealler be sold. The Trustor mav
have the right to bring a court action 10 assert the nonexistence of a default or any other defense of
Trustor to acceleration and Sate.
Pagel
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT 2
EXHIBIT "4"
xxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxx
3629741 Page 2 of 303/12/200803:57:05 PM
TS No.: NV-06-141434-Bl
Loan No.: 0003770195
NoUca of DefauU
Page 2
To determine If reinstatement Is possible and the amount,lI any, to cure the default, contact:
Residential Credit Solullons
C/O Quality Loan Service Corp.
2141 5th Avenue
San Diego, CA92101
619645-n11
If you have any you should contact a lawyer or the govemmental agency which may
have Insured your loan. NotwUhstandlng the lacl thaI your property Is in foreclosure, you may offer your
property fOf sale provided the sale Is concluded prior to the conclusion of Ihe foreclosure.
08100: 3110/2008
... BENEACIARY
BY: ':
LS): T;+k
Stale 01 Nevada ) as.
County 01 Clark J
NoII'Y Public
If you have prevk>usly been discharged thro
liability lor this loan In which case this lett
property only.
bankruptcy, you may have been released of personal
Intended to exercise the nola holder's rights agalnsllhe real
THIS OFFICE IS ATTEMPTING CO ECT A DEBT AND ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL
As required by law, you are he
submlued to a credit repon .ge
ED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
y no thai a negative credit report reflecting on your credit record may be
. you fall 10 fulfilllhe terms or your credit obligations,
3629741 Page 3 of 303/12/200803:57:05 PM
State of .1l11 )
COunty of )
On -/
before me, olary.Public,

personally appeared
who proved to me on the basis 01
satlsfaclory evidence to be the person(IQ whose namis ra subscribed to the
Wl:r2lnstrument and acknowledged to me that he! y executed the same In
hi ar elr authortzed capaclty(iStI), and thai by hi r elr slgnatu!sjJO' on the
Ins ent the person.f(), or the entity upon behalf of the
executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws 01 the State of Caifomla that
the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
(Seal)

EXHIBIT 5

(PART 5 OF 6)
F I L E D
Electronically
06-23-2010:11:56:43 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court

2141 5th Avenue
San Diego, CA 9210 1
The undersigned hereby affinns that there is no
0'1; co \/ f::>,:), 'T?5(,
TS # NV-08-141434-BL Loan # 0003770195
DOC I 3661497
06/19/2008 12:15:40 PH
Requesled By
Fee: $15.00 RPTT: $0.00
Page 1 of 2
IIII III
SPACB ADOVE THlS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
NOTICE OF TRUSTEE'S SA
YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 4/18/2005. U LES YOU TAKE ACTION
TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALK F Y U NEED AN
EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING GAINST YOU, OU OULD CONTACT
A LAWYER.
A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, cashier's check dra a state or national b
by state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings an ssociation, 0 savings
association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 e Fin . code and authorized
state, will be held by duly appointed trustee. The sa will be made, but 'thout covenant or w ty, ex ressed or
implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbran es, to ay the ammg incipal sum of the not s) se red by
the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges t er , as provid . the no (s), advances, under e t s of the
Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges d xp nses of the Trustee or the total amount (at the ti of the
initial publication of the Notice of Sale) re e timated to be set fo belo. The amount may be greater on
the day of sale.
BENEFICIARY MAY ELECT TO BID LESS TOTAL o NT DUE.
Trustor(s):
JAMES S. ANDJOA
JOiNTTE NTS
IER, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS
Recorded: 5/4/2005 sIns o. 3208 1 in book xx , fOfficial Records in the office of the
Record of ASHOE Co ty, Ne da;
Date of Sale:
Pia of Sale: the ounty Courthouse, Virginia Street at Court Street,
Reno, V.
Amo of unpaid balan and 0 er charges: $18 ,07452
T purported property ad 3 SUN SL PE DRIVE
IS: SPARKS, NV 434
This property is sold as-is, lender is unable to validate the condition, defects or disclosure issues of said property and
buyer waives the disclosure requ rents under NRS 113.130 by purchasing at this sale and signing the receipt of
sale. The undersigned Trustee iscl ms any liability for any incorrectness of the property address or other common
designation, if any, shown her n. 1 no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the
location of the property may e ob ined by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of -
t publication of this Not" e of ale.
If the Trus a Ie to nvey title for any reason, the successful bidder's sole and exclusive remedy shall
e return of monies aid to the Trustee, and the snccessful bidder shall have no further recourse.
EXHIBIT "5"
3661497 Page 2 of 206/19/200812:15:40 PM
j ,
,
Date: 6/13/2008 Quality Loan Service Corp.
2141 5th Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
619-645-7711 For NON SALE information only
Sale Line: 714-259-7850 or Login to: www.fidelityasap.com
TS # : NV-08-141434-BL
Reinstatement Line: 619-645-7711 x3704
NancyW
Rutile,'
I certifY under PENALTY OF PERJURY
true and correct.
I ws of the State
that the foregoing paragraph is
(Seal)
)
.... [j':"A .. W .. S .. ON ........
Commission # 1628086
z .... .,! Notary Public - COllfomlo
,.. . San 0:390 county -
" MyComm. Expires Jon 6.
2010
1
pt y, you may have been released of personal liability for this
he te holder's rigbts against the real property only,
THIS NOTICE IS NT FO PU OSE OF COLLECTING A DEBT. THIS FIRM IS
AT EMPTING TO COLLE A DEBT 0 EHALF OF THE HOLDER AND OWNER OF THE NOTE.
ANY INFORMA TlON OBTAINE R PROVIDED TO THIS FIRM OR THE CREDITOR WILL BE
USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
As required by law, you are her y tified that a negative credit report reflecting on your credit record may be
submitted to a credit report age cy i you fail to fulfill the terms of your credit obligations.

EXHIBIT 6

(PART 6 OF 6)
F I L E D
Electronically
06-23-2010:11:56:43 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
In re:
ACCREDITED HOME LENDERS
HOLDING CO., et al.,
Debtors.
)
)
)
)
)
)
Chapter II
Case No. 09-11516 (MFW)
Jointly Administered
12e: IJI'i3
ORDER
AND NOW this \ ( , ~ day of ,2010, having considered the Motion to
Terminate Automatic Stay in Rem Only and For Abandonment of Property (the "Motion") filed
by Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., and Quality Loans Service Corporation's (the "Movants"),
this Court finds that Movants are entitled to the relief requested in the Motion and that notice
given of the Motion was sufficient, and hereby ORDERS and DECREES that
A) The Deed of Trust dated April 18, 2005 and recorded on May 4, 2005,
encumbering real property located at 2873 Sunny Slope Drive, Sparks Nevada 89434 (parcel No.
030 091 12), and which was executed by James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier in favor of
Aames Funding Corporation, is not property of the Debtors' bankruptcy estate pursuant to II
U.S.C. 541;
B) The automatic stay as to the aforesaid property is terminated in rem only, and any
interest that the Debtors may hold in the Carpentier Property is hereby abandoned.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
THE HONO LE MARY F. WALRATH
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
Docket;ff; \ ~
c __ --:2--1 U
Date:.) J_
EXHIBIT "6"

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
In re:
ACCREDITED HOME LENDERS
HOLDING CO., et al.,
Debtors.
)
)
)
)
)
)
Chapter II
Case No. 09-11516 (MFW)
Jointly Administered
12e: IJI'i3
ORDER
AND NOW this \ ( , ~ day of ,2010, having considered the Motion to
Terminate Automatic Stay in Rem Only and For Abandonment of Property (the "Motion") filed
by Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., and Quality Loans Service Corporation's (the "Movants"),
this Court finds that Movants are entitled to the relief requested in the Motion and that notice
given of the Motion was sufficient, and hereby ORDERS and DECREES that
A) The Deed of Trust dated April 18, 2005 and recorded on May 4, 2005,
encumbering real property located at 2873 Sunny Slope Drive, Sparks Nevada 89434 (parcel No.
030 091 12), and which was executed by James S. Carpentier and Joan E. Carpentier in favor of
Aames Funding Corporation, is not property of the Debtors' bankruptcy estate pursuant to II
U.S.C. 541;
B) The automatic stay as to the aforesaid property is terminated in rem only, and any
interest that the Debtors may hold in the Carpentier Property is hereby abandoned.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
THE HONO LE MARY F. WALRATH
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE
Docket;ff; \ ~
c __ --:2--1 U
Date:.) J_
EXHIBIT "6"
J
6
7
8
9

10 JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Plaintiffs,
vs.
Defendants.
______________ ---'1
CASE NO. CV08-01709
DEPT NO. 7
ORDER SETTING STATUS HEARING
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs, JAMES S. CARPENTIER and JOAN E.
CARPENTIER, Pro Per, and counsel for Defendants, Aames Home Lenders, Inc., Windsor Managemen
Co., Residential Credit Solutions, represented by Eric B. Zimbelman, Esq., with Peel Brimley LLP, and
Quality Loan Service, represented by Kristin Schuler-Hintz, Esq., with McCarthy & Holthus, LLP,
appear in Washoe County District Court, Department Seven, for a Status Hearing on Friday, February
13,2009, set to commence at 3:30 p.m.
DATED this 3tJ'P' day of January, 2009.
PATRICK FLANAGAN
i s t r i c ~ Judge
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I hereby certify that I am an employee of the Second Judicial District
Court of the State of Nevada, County of Washoe; that on this .80'r4vday of January, 2009, I deposited
in the County mailing system for postage and mailing with the United States Postal Service in Reno,
Nevada, a true copy of the attached document addressed to:
Peel Brimley LLP
Henderson, NV 89074-7273
Attorney for Defendant Aames Home Lenders, Inc.
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Sparks, NV 89434
In Pro Per

U ICI S tan
2

CASE NO. CV08-01709 J . CARPENTIER et al. vs. AAMES FUNDING CORP et al.

DATE, J UDGE
OFFICERS OF
COURT PRESENT APPEARANCES-HEARING ________________
3/19/09
HONORABLE
PATRICK
FLANAGAN
DEPT. NO. 7
K. Oates
(Clerk)
S. Koetting
(Reporter)

STATUS HEARING
Plaintiff J oan Carpentier was present in Court, acting In Proper Persona.
Eric Zimbelman, Esq., and Kristin Schuler-Hintz were present in Court via telephone, on
behalf of Defendants.
1:06 p.m. Court convened with Court, counsel and Plaintiff present.
The Plaintiff addressed and advised the Court that she has contacted the State Bar for a
referral to an attorney, and was told she would have difficulty getting an attorney for this
matter, and further, the Plaintiff advised she spoke to Bob Hager, Esq., and he is
reviewing her case.
The Court advised that the trial will proceed as scheduled, and required nothing further
at this time.
1:14 p.m. Court stood in recess.
F I L E D
Electronically
03-26-2009:11:03:06 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
F I L E D
Electronically
07-15-2010:11:21:00 AM
Howard W. Conyers
Clerk of the Court
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CARPENTIER,
Plaintiff,
vs.
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION dba
COMPANY, a California corporation;
INC., a Texas corporation; QUALITY
LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION, a
California corporation; and DOES I - XX,
inclusive,
Defendants.
Case No.:
Dept. No.:
____________________________
ORDER
CV08-01709
7
On June 23, 2010, Defendants, RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC., a Texas
corporation; and QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION, a California corporation,
(hereinafter Defendants RCS and QLS) filed a Motion for Summary Judgment.
Plaintiffs, JAMES S. CARPENTIER and JOAN E. CARPENTIER; and Defendants,
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION dba AAMES HOME LOAN, and WINDSOR
MANAGEMENT COMPANY, failed to file an Opposition or any responsive pleading.
On July 12,2010, Defendants RCS and QLS submitted their Motion for decision.
III
1 District Court Rule 13 (3) provides, "Failure ofthe opposing party to serve and file his
2 written opposition may be construed as an admission that the motion is meritorious and a consen
3 to granting the same." Thus, in this case, the court construes Plaintiffs', JAMES S.
4 CARPENTIER and JOAN E. CARPENTIER, and Defendants', AAMES FUNDING
5 CORPORATION and WINDSOR MANAGEMENT COMPANY'S failure to oppose
6 Defendants' RCS and QLS's Motionfor Summary Judgment as admission that the Motion is
7 meritorious.
8 Accordingly and good cause appearing, the court GRANTS RESIDENTIAL CREDIT
9 SOLUTIONS, INC., and QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION'S Motionfor
10 Summary Judgment.
11 DATED this 11111 day of July, 2010.
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I hereby certify that I am an employee of the Second Judicial
District Court of the State of Nevada, County of Washoe; that on this J ~ f I day of July, 2010, I
electronically filed the following with the Clerk of the Court by using the ECF system which will
send a notice of electronic filing to the following:
Kristin A. Schuler-Hintz, Esq. for RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC., and
QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION;
I deposited in the County mailing system for postage and mailing with the United States
Postal Service in Reno, Nevada, a true copy of the attached document addressed to:
Henderson, NV 89074
J ames and Joan Carpentier
Sparks, NV 89434
3
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
Nevada is one of the Western States of the US that are Non-Judicial States. In these
states, foreclosures are governed by State Civil Code. These homeoners have it the
toughest being in a non-!udicial state, "enders need not #rove anything, some might say,
but it seems #retty clear they at least N$$% T& S$N% T'$ (&TI&N )&*
SU((+*, JU%-($NT T& S&($&N$ &T'$* T'+N +N +TT&*N$, W'&
'+% .*$/I&US", 0$$N -*+NT$% +N &*%$* +""&WIN- 'IS
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN THE ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT 1
2
%ocument Code3
4ach Coughlin, $s5.
N/ 0ar No3 6789
17:: $. 6
th
St. ;:
*eno, N/ <6=>1
Tele3 88=-::6-?898
)a@3 676-??8-87>:
.ro #er +##ellant
4achCoughlinAhotmail.com
+ttorney for Joni and James Car#entier
J+($S C+*.$NTI$*, $T +",
.laintiff
v.
++($S )UN%IN- C&*. $T+",
%efendant

Case No3 C/><->18>6
%e#t No3 8
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
IN T'$ S$C&N% JU%ICI+" %IST*ICT C&U*T &) T'$
ST+T$ &) N$/+%+ IN +N% )&*
T'$ C&UNT, &) W+S'&$
F I L E D
Electronically
12-31-2011:04:45:40 PM
Craig Franden
Clerk of the Court
WIT'%*+W+" )*&( T'IS (+TT$* B+N% %& "IC$WIS$ )&* T'$ +%%*$SS
"IST$% IN T'$ C*$%IT&* (+T*ID IN T'$ %$"+W+*$ 0+NC*U.TC,
T'+T ST+,$% T'IS (+TT$* )&* &/$* &N$ ,$+*E, T'+T T'$, N$$% T&
.UT T'$ C&**$CT C+S$ NU(0$* +N% C&U*T IN T'$ C+.TI&N )&*
SUC' ."$+%IN-S, $TC., $TC W'I"$ S&($ (+, C*ITICI4$ T'$
UN%$*SI-N$% W&*C IN T'$ )I"IN-, CITIN- T& )&*(+TTIN- ISSU$S,
$TC., N& &T'$* +TT&*N$, W&*CIN- &N T'IS C+S$, +..+*$NT",,
%ISC&/$*$% T'$ )+CTU+" ISSU$S *$"+T$% T& %$)ICI$NCI$S IN T'$
N&TIC$FS$*/IC$F%U$ .*&C$SS ISSU$ W*&U-'T 0, T'$ )+I"U*S &)
&..&SIN- C&UNS$" T& +..*&.*I+T$", +%%*$SS T'$I* .*&&)S &)
S$*/IC$F.UT T'$ C&**$CT IN)&*(+TI&N IN T'$ C+S$ C+.TI&NF"IST
T'$ C&**$CT +%%*$SS IN T'$ %$"+W+*$ 0C C*$%IT&* (+T*ID....
C&($ N&W, .laintiffs J+($S S. C+*.$NTI$* and J&+N $.
C+*.$NTI$*, by and through their attorney, 4ach Coughlin, $s5, and asGs this
court to #ut on ice the Trustee Sale allegedly set for )ebruary =
th
, :>11 via an
in!unction. &n July 1=, :>11 a Notice of $ntry of &rder as entered in the courtHs
docGet shoing an &rder granting *$SI%$NTI+" C*$%IT S&"UTI&NS INC,
+N% IU+"IT, "&+N S$*/IC$ C&*.&*+TI&NHS (&TI&N )&* SU((+*,
JU%-($NT. Counsel Coughlin admits at the outset that this motion is somehat
thron together in a rush, due largely to an allegedly rongful summary eviction
from the undersignedHs la office, based on a No Cause $viction notice and
involving a commercial lease, even though N*S 7>.:=9 bars the use of summary
eviction #roceedings in such circumstances, and here, even if the *eno Justice
Court found Coughlin as a residential tenant, it denied Coughlin the stay, hich
ould seem one of the automatic variety, accorded to residential tenants ith a
monthly rental value under 21,>>> #ursuant to N*S 7>.9<=. To com#ound the
JUDGMENT :
obstacles, o##osing counsel in that eviction matter *ev:>11->>18>< is a##ly hat
the undersigned feels is an unlaful rent distraint u#on clientHs files and #ersonal
#ro#erty, including materials and e5ui#ment essential to CoughlinHs #ractice of la.
To that e@tent, Coughlin has herein cited to )ederal authority for basic things, such as
the standard for a (otion for *econsideration Band barely, if any tolling authority to
get #ast the :> day re5uirement of W%C* 19B8E and *ule 1: is included herein,
hoever, Coughlin commits to curing such deficiencies in short order and to maGe
great efforts not to #re!udice o##osing counsel ith unsu##orted argument or
allegations hilst still Jealously #rotecting his clients rights. This is easier said than
done given the the inordinately ve@atious conduct the undersigned has been sub!ected
to lately incident to a rongful eviction stemming from a Commercial "ease here
non-#ayment of rent as not alleged, yet a Summary $viction .roceeding tooG #lace
anyay, and to to# it off, a rent escro de#osit as forced u#on the undersigned to
the tune of 2:,:8? in the middle of the Summary $viction .roceeding, in direct
violation of N*S 7>.:=9B?E, and JC*C. <9. I in #re#aring this filing and in relation
to the date of the TrusteeHs sale, set for %ecember :1, :>11 Bo##osing counsel
Schuler-'intJ did send an email to the undersigned late in the night of %ecember 1<,
:>11, asserting that the Trustee Sale has been #ost#oned again to early )ebruary,
:>1:, and, not to im#ugn (s. Schuler-'intJ credibility, nor that of (r. 4imbleman,
but there does seem to be authority to suggest that Trustee Sales and the attendant
scheduling changes, es#ecially those not reduced to a ritten sti#ulation, are a very
hard thing to #in don and that verbal or email assertions by the Trustee or banGs
re#resentatives or counsel are largely not something one can legally rely u#onE. This
is the second time the undersigned has sent o##osing counsel some eleventh hour
JUDGMENT 9
corres#ondence, only to me told, basically, Koh, the sale as moved a cou#le days
agoL des#ite the fact that neither the undersigned or either of his clients Bthe timing of
hose divorce dovetailed 5uite nicely ith this foreclosure matterE as $/$*
informed of either of these #ost#onements of the scheduled TrusteeHs Sales and here
the undersigned has no reason to believe that these sales are being #ost#oned for any
reason other than the undersignedHs s5uaGing, and here o##osing counsel has
continually failed to #rovide any #roof that these #ost#onements occurred #rior to
said s5uaGing Bthe undersigned does recogniJe that it is #ossible that such
#ost#onements are a matter of the #ublic record and that such a hunch by the
undersigned might be !ust #lain rongE. 'oever, a collection of materials and
notices from the Washoe County *ecorderHs *ecords available online hich indicate
that they Trustee Sale that as a##arently scheduled for %ecember :1, :>11 as not
recorded, and some of the notices and recordings in this matter seem sus#ect ith
res#ect to the date they ere filed versus the date of service indicated on them, etc.,
etc., much liGe the #leadings in the instant case.
The undersigned hereby re5uires the trustee to verify a com#rehensive list of
issues related to the legal nature of the foreclosure #roceedings enacted by the lender,
hich as a by#roduct, Car#entier as homeoner still retains full onershi# of the
#ro#erty and lives there. The Trustee assumes the liability in auctioning the #ro#erty,
and should not foreclose on the #ro#erty if there is a #otential violation #ointed out
to them #rior to the +uction Sale %ate as they could face sanctions and ultimately
lose their license. To that end, the undersigned seeGs a definite e@tension of time to
verify these matters Band the overcome the deleterious effect rought on the
undersigned life and la #ractice by the rongful eviction and alleged a##lication of
JUDGMENT 7
an unlaful rent distraint and other bad faith conduct by the defendant and his
counsel in *eno Justice Court case *ev:>11->>18><. While Trustees are incredibly
busy and generating huge #rofits and often continually #ost#one the sale date to
#rovide themselves ade5uate time to research and res#ond to the issues raised by the
undersigned to #rotect themselves, such has not been reduced to a ritten sti#ulation,
as such this filing is necessary.
$@hibit 9 s#eaGs to some of the enormous obstacles the undersigned has faced
in litigating this matter, including the e@tremely bad faith conduct of the o##osing
attorneyHs and landlord in the Summary $viction from the undersignedHs commercial
tenancy, his home la office in *JC *ev:>11->>18><.
However, as Mr !"#$e%#a& 'rov"(e(, )*e A'r"% +,,- .a&/r0')12 3"%"&4
"& De%aware $2 !"#$e%#a&5s 1%"e&) %"s)e(, "& )*e Cre(")or Ma)r"6, a 7Cre(")or
No)"1e Na#e8 o3 9a%s*, .a/er, : Rosevear, )*e Car'e&)"ers )*e& 3or#er
a))or&e2, as Ja#es 9a%s*5s Mo)"o& )o 9")*(raw as Co0&se% *a( $ee& 4ra&)e(
$2 )*"s 1o0r) O& Ja&0ar2 ++, +,,-, w")* 9a%s* 3"%"&4 a No)"1e o3 E&)r2 o3 )*a)
Or(er o& Ja&0ar2 +;, +,,-, "& '%e&)2 o3 )"#e 3or !"#$e%#a&5s 1%"e&) )o 0'(a)e
)*e 7Cre(")or No)"1e Na#e8 a&( a((ress )o re3%e1) )*e 3a1) )*a) 9a%s* was &o)
a))or&e2 o3 re1or( 3ro )*e Car'e&)"ers a&2#ore, a&( )*a) )*ose &o)"1es s*o0%(
*ave $ee& se&) ("re1)%2 )o )*e Car'e&)"ers
Indeed, (r. 4imbelmanHs C$*TI)IC+T$ &) S$*/IC$ .ursuant to N*C. =BbE, for his
(ay 16, :>>6 filing of N&TIC$ &) 0+NC*U.TC, )I"IN- +N% +UT&(+TIC ST+,
reads3 KI certify that I am an em#loyee of .$$" 0*I("$, "". and that on this 16th day of
(ay, :>>6 I caused the above and foregoing document entitled N&TIC$ &)
0+NC*U.TC, )I"IN- +N% +UT&(+TIC ST+, to be served as follos3 @ by #lacing
same to be de#osited for mailing in the United States (ail, in a sealed envelo#e u#on hich
JUDGMENT =
first class #ostage as #re#aid in "as /egas, NevadaM andFor @ to be sent via facsimileM to
the #artyBiesE andFor attorneyBsE listed belo at the address andFor facsimile number
indicated belo3
Ja#es M 9a%s*, Es<
9a%s*, .a/er : Rosevear, PC
-=;> Do0$%e R .%v( S0")e A
Re&o, Neva(a >-?+@
A))or&e2s 3or Ja#es S Car'e&)"er a&( Joa& E Car'e&)"er
F0r)*er, Ms S1*0%erAH"&)B 3a"%e( )o res'o&( a''ro'r"a)e%2 )o )*e Or(er Gra&)"&4
9a%s*5s 9")*(rawa% as A))or&e2 o3 Re1or(, a&( )*e s0$se<0e&) No)"1e o3 E&)r2 o3
)*a) Or(er o& Ja&0ar2 +;, +,,- H"&)B5 Mo)"o& )o D"s#"ss or "& )*e A%)er&a)"ve For
S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) %"s)e( 9a%s* 3or )*e Proo3 o3 Serv"1e as we%%C 7 I *ere$2 1er)"32
)*a) o& )*e =)* (a2 o3 J0&e a )r0e a&( 1orre1) 1o'2 o3 DEFENDANT5s
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC, AND DUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION5S MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT was 3orwar(e( $2 US Ma"% w")* 'os)a4e 're'a"( )o )*e
a((resses %"s)e( $e%owC
Ja#es M 9a%s*
9a%s*, .a/er : Rosevear
-=;> Do0$%e R .%v( S0")e A
Re&o, Neva(a >-?+@ A))or&e2 3or P%a"&)"33
F0r)*er, )*e 1a')"o& o& Ms H"&)B Mo)"o& "&("1a)es )*e 1ase "s "& De'ar)#e&) =,
(es'")e )*e 3a1) )*a) '# Fe$r0ar2 @@, +,,-, a Case Ass"4&#e&) No)"3"1a)"o& E&)r2 was
e&)ere( "& )*e (o1/e) 3or )*"s 1ase CV,>A,@E,-, "&("1a)"&4 )*"s CASE REASSIGNED
TO DEPARTMENT E FROM DEPARTMENT = PER ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
T*e&, 3or so#e reaso& )*a) "s &o) <0")e 1%ear, (es'")e *"s 1o 1o0&se% S1*0%erAH"&)B
*av"&4 3"%e( a Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) o& J0&e =
)*
, +,,- "& )*e Se1o&( J0("1"a%
D"s)r"1) Co0r) 3or 9as*oe Co0&)2 "& )*"s a1)"o&, CV,>A,@E,-, C*r"s)o'er H0&)er,
Es< F"%e( a so#ew*a) s"#"%ar Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) "& CV,-A,@E,-, F$o%(
e#'*as"s a((e(G "& a Mo)"o& w*"1* $ears a 3ro&) 'a4e *ea("&4, a$ove )*e 1a')"o&,
JUDGMENT ?
)*a) rea(sC
7DISTRICT COURT
CLARH COUNTY, NEVADA8
F0r)*er, )*e 1a')"o& o& Mr H0&)er5s J0&e +I
r(
, +,@,, Mo)"o& For S0##ar2
J0(4#e&) "&("1a)es )*e 1ase "s "& De'ar)#e&) =, (es'")e )*e 3a1) )*a) Fe$r0ar2 @@,
+,,-, a Case Ass"4&#e&) No)"3"1a)"o& E&)r2 was e&)ere( "& )*e (o1/e) 3or )*"s 1ase
CV,>A,@E,- F#01* %ess )*e 304")"ve or 3"1)")"o0s 1ase CV,-A,@E,- )*a) Mr H0&)er
%"s)e( "& )*e Ca')"o&, "& a C%ar/ Co0&)2 D"s)r"1) Co0r) 1ase 3"%e( "& 9as*oe Co0&)2G,
"&("1a)"&4 )*"s CASE REASSIGNED TO DEPARTMENT E FROM DEPARTMENT
= PER ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER So, )*e Car'e&)"ers were $0r(e&e( w")* $o)*
a))or&e2s se&("&4 "#'or)a&) '%ea("&4s )o o&e w*o was &o %o&4er A))or&e2 o3 Re1or(
3or )*e Car'e&)"ers, (es'")e a No)"1e o3 E&)r2 o3 )*a) Or(er Gra&)"&4 9")*(rawa% o3
Ja#es 9a%s*, Es<, "& a((")"o& )o Mr H0&)er '0))"&4 )*e wro&4 1o0r) a&( )*e wro&4
1ase &0#$er o& a Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) )*a) wo0%( *ave &o&e)*e%ess
I; A4a"&, "& *"s A040s) ?, +,,- Cer)"3"1a)e o3 Serv"1e 3or *"s Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2
J0(4#e&), Mr H0&)er '0)s "& )*e 1a')"o& )*e wro&4 1ase &0#$er a&( )*e wro&4
De'ar)#e&) &0#$er, %"s)"&4 CV,-A,@E,- a&( De'ar)#e&) = w*ere CV,>A,@E,- a&(
De'ar)#e&) E s*o0%( $e F0r)*er, )*e J0&e -, +,,- No)"1e o3 Lo(4e#e&) was se&) )o
o&%2 !"#$e%#a& F0r)*er "& *er Cer)"3"1a)e o3 Serv"1e 3or )*a) No)"1e o3 Lo(4e#e&),
3"%e( se'ara)e%2 o& A040s) ?, +,,-, Ms H"&)B '0)s "& )*e 1a')"o& )*e wro&4 1ase
&0#$er a&( )*e wro&4 De'ar)#e&) &0#$er, %"s)"&4 CV,-A,@E,- a&( De'ar)#e&) =
w*ere CV,>A,@E,- a&( De'ar)#e&) E s*o0%( $e I&)eres)"&4%2, E6*"$") ; )o H0&)er5s
J0&e +I, +,@, Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&), w*"%e 1o&)a"&"&4 )*e )e6) o3 )*e
De%aware Co0r)5s Or(er re#ov"&4 )*e s)a2, (oes&5) 1o&)a"& )*e De%aware .a&/r0')12
Co0r)5s Proo3 o3 Serv"1e 3or )*a) Or(er 0'o& )*e Car'e&)"ers
Ne6), o& J0%2 @+
)*
, +,@, REDUEST FOR SU.MISSION OF DEFENDANTSJ
JUDGMENT 8
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS , INC AND DUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATIONJS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, H0&)er a4a"& '0)s
De'ar)#e&) = "& )*e 1ase 1a')"o& w*ere De'ar)#e&) E s*o0%( $e
I> F"&a%%2, o& J0%2 @?, +,@@ )*"s Co0r) 4ra&)e( D"s)r"1) Co0r) R0%e @I FIG 'rov"(es,
KFa"%0re o3 )*e o''os"&4 'ar)2 )o serve a&( 3"%e *"s wr"))e& o''os")"o& #a2 $e
1o&s)r0e( as a& a(#"ss"o& )*a) )*e #o)"o& "s #er")or"o0s a&( a 1o&se&) )o 4ra&)"&4 )*e
sa#eK T*0s, "& )*"s 1ase, )*e 1o0r) 1o&s)r0es P%a"&)"33s5, JAMES S CARPENTIER
a&( JOAN E CARPENTIER, a&( De3e&(a&)s5, AAMES FUNDING
CORPORATION a&( 9INDSOR MANAGEMENT COMPANY5S 3a"%0re )o o''ose
De3e&(a&)s5 RCS a&( DLS5s Mo)"o&/or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) as a(#"ss"o& )*a) )*e
Mo)"o& "s #er")or"o0s8
T*e J0%2 @?, +,@, No)"1e o3 E&)r2 o3 Or(er "&1orre1)%2 %"s) De'ar)#e&) = "&s)ea( o3
De'ar)#e&) E "& )*e 1a')"o&
T*e 9as*oe Co0&)2 Re1or(er5s we$ s")e (oes &o) %"s) a No)"1e o3 Tr0s)ee
Sa%e 3or )*e a%%e4e( Tr0s)ee sa%e )*a) was se) )o )a/e '%a1e o& De1e#$er +@
s)
,
+,,@
FACTS
1. +t all times mentioned herein, .laintiffs James S. Car#entier and Joan $.
Car#entier, hereinafter collectively referred to as KC+*.$NTI$*,L are husband and
ife residing in the County of Washoe, State of Nevada.
:. %efendants, %&$S I through DD are fictitious namesM that .laintiffs are
ignorant of the true names of the individuals, cor#orations, co-#artnershi#s, and
associations so designated by said fictitious names, and hen the true names are
discovered, .laintiffs ill seeG leave to amend this Com#laint and #roceedings
herein to substitute the true name of said %efendants. .laintiffs believe that each of
the %efendants designated herein as %&$ is negligent or res#onsible in some manner
for the events herein referred to and negligently, carelessly, recGlessly and in a
JUDGMENT <
manner that as grossly negligent and illful and anton, caused damages
#ro@imately thereby to the .laintiffs as herein alleged.
9. +t all times mentioned herein, C+*.$NTI$* is the oner of certain real
#ro#erty commonly Gnon as :<89 Sunny Slo#e %rive, S#arGs Nevada <6797,
Washoe County +ssessors .arcel Number >9>->61-1:, hereinafter referred to as the
K.*&.$*T,,L and more #articularly described as follo3
"&T ? &) "$WIS '&($S-S.+*CS N&. =-+, +CC&*%IN- T& T'$ (+.
T'$*$&), )I"$% IN T'$ &))IC$ &) T'$ C&UNT, *$C&*%$* &)
W+S'&$ C&UNT,, ST+T$ &) N$/+%+ &N JU",16, 168?, +S )I"$ N&.
718916 +N% +S T*+CT (+. N&. 1=<8.
7. &n or about (ay 7, :>>=, C+*.$NTI$* had an e@isting mortgage
against the .*&.$*T, in the a##ro@imate #rinci#al amount of 21=>,>>>.>>
=. &n or about (ay 7, :>>=, C+*.$NTI$* as in default and in financial
trouble ith regard to the e@isting first %eed of Trust in that James S. Car#entier
became in!ured, as unable to orG, as receiving only orGmanNs com#ensation
#ayments, and Joan $. Car#entier at that time as unem#loyed.
?. &n or about (ay 7, :>>=, C+*.$NTI$* as unable to meet their
current obligations under the first Note and %eed of Trust.
8. C+*.$NTI$* received a mail solicitation to refinance their #ro#erty
from %efendant +ames )unding Cor#oration dba +ames 'ome "oan, hereinafter
referred to as K++($S.L
<. C+*.$NTI$* contacted %efendant ++($S, ++($S did re#resent to
them that ++($S could cure their financial troubles by refinancing the e@isting first
obligation on the .*&.$*,, that they ould 5ualify for such a loan, and that they
ould generate sufficient funds to meet their obligations even though Joan $.
Car#entier as unem#loyed and James S. Car#entier received only disability income.
JUDGMENT 6
6. In furtherance of the refinance, %efendant ++($S as re5uired to maGe
a loan a##lication. Said loan a##lication as filled out by the re#resentatives by
%efendant ++($S and intentionally misstated the income of C+*.$NTI$* to be
in e@cess of 2?,>>>.>> #er month.
1>. The true fact as C+*.$NTI$* received only 2:7>>.>> #er month, and
the true fact as Gnon to %efendant ++($S.
11. %efendant ++($S made a loan to C+*.$NTI$* in the amount of
218>,<>>.>>.
1:. The loan made by %efendant ++($S as an ad!ustable rate hich
ould re5uire #ayments in e@cess of 217>>.>> #er month.
19. +t the time of maGing the loan and filling out the loan a##lication by
%efendant ++($S, %efendant ++($S made the loan ithout determining or using
any commercially reasonable means or mechanism to determine C+*.$NTI$*Ns
ability to re#ay the loan and in fact Gne or should have Gnon that C+*.$NTI$*
did not have the ability to re#ay the loan.
17. The 218>,<>>.>> loan closed on or about (ay 7, :>>=, and, on or about
that date, C+*.$NTI$* did maGe, e@ecute and deliver a %eed of Trust securing
re#ayment of the ne loan. Said %eed of Trust having been given to %efendant
Windsor (anagement Co., a California cor#oration, as Trustee by James S.
Car#entier and Joan $. Car#entier, husband and ife as !oint tenants, as Trustors in
favor of %efendant +ames )unding Cor#oration dba +ames 'ome "oan, as
0eneficiary. Said %eed of Trust as recorded (ay 7, :>>= as %ocument No.
9:><?=1, &fficial *ecords of Washoe County.
1=. Since the recordation of said %eed of Trust, C+*.$NTI$* has been
unable to maGe all #ayments called for under the terms and conditions of the %eed of
Trust and .romissory Note hich it secures and have made Gnon their inability to
#ay to %efendant ++($S.
JUDGMENT 1>
1?. %efendant ++($S has assigned the right to collect under the terms and
conditions of the .romissory Note and the %eed of Trust to %efendant *esidential
Credit Solutions, Inc., hereinafter referred to as K*$SI%$NTI+",L as of (ay 91,
:>>8.
18. C+*.$NTI$* has contacted %efendants ++($S and *$SI%$NTI+"
in an attem#t to again refinance but informed %efendants ++($S and
*$SI%$NTI+" of their inability to 5ualify, and %efendants ++($S andFor
*$SI%$NTI+" offered to #rovide them ith false and fraudulent W: )orms in order
to meet financial re5uirements. C+*.$NTI$* declined to #artici#ate in this loan
fraud.
1<. +s a direct result of C+*.$NTI$*Ns inability to maGe #ayments called
for under the refinanced loan, Iuality "oan Service Cor# on behalf of %efendant
*$SI%$NTI+" and on further behalf of %efendant ++($S did record a Notice of
0reach and %efault and of $lection to Cause Sale of *eal .ro#erty Under %eed of
Trust on (arch 1:, :>>< as %ocument No. 9?:6871, &fficial *ecords of Washoe
County.
16. Subse5uent to the recordation of the Notice of 0reach and %efault,
%efendant ++($S has recorded a Notice of TrusteeNs Sale scheduling sale on the
.*&.$*T, for July 6, :>>< at the hour of 113>>am at the County Court 'ouse
located at /irginia Street and Court Street in the City of *eno. The Notice of
TrusteeNs Sale as recorded June 16, :>>< as %ocument No. 9??1768, &fficial
*ecords of Washoe County.
:>. The actions of %efendant ++($S in failing to maGe a determination of
C+*.$NTI$*Ns ability to re#ay the loan and inducing them to enter into said loan
constitutes an unfair lending #ractice #ursuant to the #rovisions of N*S =6<%.1>>.
:1. C+*.$NTI$* has been damaged as a direct and #ro@imate result of
unfair lending #ractices of %efendants ++($S and *$SI%$NTI+", and
JUDGMENT 11
C+*.$NTI$* is entitled to damages and treble damages #ursuant to the #rovisions
of N*S =6<%.11>.
::. C+*.$NTI$* is entitled to their attorney fees #ursuant to the #rovisions
of N*S =6<%.11>B:EBbE.
:9. C+*.$NTI$* is further entitled to an offset against all sums oed under
the .romissory Note secured by the %eed of Trust as herein alleged #ursuant to the
#rovisions of N*S =6<%.11>B9E.
:7. C+*.$NTI$* is further entitled to have this court cure any e@isting
default of the home loan and cancel the #ending foreclosure and TrusteeNs Sale
#ursuant to the #rovisions of N*S =6<%.11>B9E.
:=. 1.laintiffs incor#orate herein by this reference all #a#ers and #leadings on
file in this action.
:?. +s a direct and #ro@imate result of the actions of %efendants ++($S
and *$SI%$NTI+", C+*.$NTI$* is in danger of loosing their interest in uni5ue
real #ro#erty by virtue of the foreclosure sale.
:8. C+*.$NTI$* is entitled to a tem#orary restraining order, #reliminary
in!unction and #ermanent in!unction #recluding %efendants from conducting a
foreclosure sale of the .*&.$*T,.
:<. C+*.$NTI$* lacGs ade5uate remedy of la due to the uni5ue character
of their interest in real estate.
:6. C+*.$NTI$* received a Notice of Sale indicating that their lender ould
sell their home at auction on &ctober :1, :>11, folloing their default in their
mortgage #ayments. The home remains occu#ied by the title oner. The Notice of
Sale did not give Joni or James Car#entier the re5uisite notice of the date of the
foreclosure sale. .ursuant to N*S 1>8.><>, the foreclosure trustee must record a
Notice of Sale and give notice of the time and #lace of the sale by B1E #ersonally
JUDGMENT 1:
serving or mailing the notice by registered or certified mail to homeoner and others
Oentitled to noticeOM B:E #osting the notice in a #ublic #lace here the #ro#erty is
located for :> successive daysM B9E #ublishing a co#y of the notice 9 times Bonce a
eeG for three eeGsEM +N% B7E #osting the notice on the #ro#erty 1= days before the
sale date. The Notice of Sale as recorded on &ctober 9 ith a sale date of &ctober
:1. This is only an 1< day notice #eriod. This fails to com#ly ith at least section B:E
above, and #erha#s section B7E should they fail to #ost the notice on the #ro#erty on
or before &ctober ?, de#ending u#on hether section B7E re5uires that action to occur
ithin 6> days or to occur only after the #assing of 6> days.
9>. The substitution of Iuality "oan Servicing as the foreclosure trustee as not
recorded. Under the %eed of Trust *ecorded on +#ril 1<, :>>=, Windsor
(anagement Co. as named as the Trustee. No document could be found ith the
*ecorderHs &ffice indicating any entity substituted Iuality "oan Servicing as the
foreclosure trustee under the %eed of Trust.
91. %efendantHs have substantially de#arted from the notice, manner of service,
and #rocess re5uirements of various la, including, but not limited to N*S 1>8.><>.
When in5uiry as made ith %efendantHs as to the basis, reasoning, and !ustifications
for the de#artures, .laintiffHs ere told that Kits your ord against oursL and
otherise res#onded to in a hostile, aggressive, and dece#tive manner. (ore
discovery is in order in this regard.
I+ However, as Mr !"#$e%#a& 'rov"(e(, )*e A'r"% +,,- .a&/r0')12 3"%"&4 "&
De%aware $2 !"#$e%#a&5s 1%"e&) %"s)e(, "& )*e Cre(")or Ma)r"6, a 7Cre(")or No)"1e
Na#e8 o3 9a%s*, .a/er, : Rosevear, )*e Car'e&)"ers )*e& 3or#er a))or&e2, as Ja#es
9a%s*5s Mo)"o& )o 9")*(raw as Co0&se% *a( $ee& 4ra&)e( $2 )*"s 1o0r) O& Ja&0ar2
++, +,,-, w")* 9a%s* 3"%"&4 a No)"1e o3 E&)r2 o3 )*a) Or(er o& Ja&0ar2 +;, +,,-, "&
'%e&)2 o3 )"#e 3or !"#$e%#a&5s 1%"e&) )o 0'(a)e )*e 7Cre(")or No)"1e Na#e8 a&(
a((ress )o re3%e1) )*e 3a1) )*a) 9a%s* was &o) a))or&e2 o3 re1or( 3ro )*e Car'e&)"ers
JUDGMENT 19
a&2#ore, a&( )*a) )*ose &o)"1es s*o0%( *ave $ee& se&) ("re1)%2 )o )*e Car'e&)"ers
II I&(ee(, Mr !"#$e%#a&5s CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE P0rs0a&) )o NRCP
?F$G, 3or *"s Ma2 @-, +,,- 3"%"&4 o3 NOTICE OF .ANHRUPTCY FILING AND
AUTOMATIC STAY rea(sC 7I 1er)"32 )*a) I a# a& e#'%o2ee o3 PEEL .RIMLEY
LLP a&( )*a) o& )*"s @-)* (a2 o3 Ma2, +,,- I 1a0se( )*e a$ove a&( 3ore4o"&4
(o10#e&) e&)")%e( NOTICE OF .ANHRUPTCY FILING AND AUTOMATIC STAY
)o $e serve( as 3o%%owsC 6 $2 '%a1"&4 sa#e )o $e (e'os")e( 3or #a"%"&4 "& )*e U&")e(
S)a)es Ma"%, "& a sea%e( e&ve%o'e 0'o& w*"1* 3"rs) 1%ass 'os)a4e was 're'a"( "& Las
Ve4as, Neva(a; a&(/or 6 )o $e se&) v"a 3a1s"#"%e; )o )*e 'ar)2F"esG a&(/or a))or&e2FsG
%"s)e( $e%ow a) )*e a((ress a&(/or 3a1s"#"%e &0#$er "&("1a)e( $e%owC
Ja#es M 9a%s*, Es<
9a%s*, .a/er : Rosevear, PC
-=;> Do0$%e R .%v( S0")e A
Re&o, Neva(a >-?+@
A))or&e2s 3or Ja#es S Car'e&)"er a&( Joa& E Car'e&)"er
I= F0r)*er, Ms S1*0%erAH"&)B 3a"%e( )o res'o&( a''ro'r"a)e%2 )o )*e Or(er
Gra&)"&4 9a%s*5s 9")*(rawa% as A))or&e2 o3 Re1or(, a&( )*e s0$se<0e&) No)"1e o3
E&)r2 o3 )*a) Or(er o& Ja&0ar2 +;, +,,- H"&)B5 Mo)"o& )o D"s#"ss or "& )*e
A%)er&a)"ve For S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) %"s)e( 9a%s* 3or )*e Proo3 o3 Serv"1e as we%%C 7 I
*ere$2 1er)"32 )*a) o& )*e =)* (a2 o3 J0&e a )r0e a&( 1orre1) 1o'2 o3 DEFENDANT5s
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, INC, AND DUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION5S MOTION TO DISMISS OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT was 3orwar(e( $2 US Ma"% w")* 'os)a4e 're'a"( )o )*e
a((resses %"s)e( $e%owC
Ja#es M 9a%s*
9a%s*, .a/er : Rosevear
-=;> Do0$%e R .%v( S0")e A
Re&o, Neva(a >-?+@ A))or&e2 3or P%a"&)"33
F0r)*er, )*e 1a')"o& o& Ms H"&)B Mo)"o& "&("1a)es )*e 1ase "s "& De'ar)#e&) =,
(es'")e )*e 3a1) )*a) '# Fe$r0ar2 @@, +,,-, a Case Ass"4&#e&) No)"3"1a)"o& E&)r2 was
e&)ere( "& )*e (o1/e) 3or )*"s 1ase CV,>A,@E,-, "&("1a)"&4 )*"s CASE REASSIGNED
JUDGMENT 17
TO DEPARTMENT E FROM DEPARTMENT = PER ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
I? T*e&, 3or so#e reaso& )*a) "s &o) <0")e 1%ear, (es'")e *"s 1o 1o0&se% S1*0%erA
H"&)B *av"&4 3"%e( a Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) o& J0&e =
)*
, +,,- "& )*e Se1o&(
J0("1"a% D"s)r"1) Co0r) 3or 9as*oe Co0&)2 "& )*"s a1)"o&, CV,>A,@E,-, C*r"s)o'er
H0&)er, Es< F"%e( a so#ew*a) s"#"%ar Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) "& CV,-A
,@E,-, F$o%( e#'*as"s a((e(G "& a Mo)"o& w*"1* $ears a 3ro&) 'a4e *ea("&4, a$ove )*e
1a')"o&, )*a) rea(sC
7DISTRICT COURT
CLARH COUNTY, NEVADA8
F0r)*er, )*e 1a')"o& o& Mr H0&)er5s J0&e +I
r(
, +,@,, Mo)"o& For S0##ar2
J0(4#e&) "&("1a)es )*e 1ase "s "& De'ar)#e&) =, (es'")e )*e 3a1) )*a) Fe$r0ar2 @@,
+,,-, a Case Ass"4&#e&) No)"3"1a)"o& E&)r2 was e&)ere( "& )*e (o1/e) 3or )*"s 1ase
CV,>A,@E,- F#01* %ess )*e 304")"ve or 3"1)")"o0s 1ase CV,-A,@E,- )*a) Mr H0&)er
%"s)e( "& )*e Ca')"o&, "& a C%ar/ Co0&)2 D"s)r"1) Co0r) 1ase 3"%e( "& 9as*oe Co0&)2G,
"&("1a)"&4 )*"s CASE REASSIGNED TO DEPARTMENT E FROM DEPARTMENT
= PER ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER So, )*e Car'e&)"ers were $0r(e&e( w")* $o)*
a))or&e2s se&("&4 "#'or)a&) '%ea("&4s )o o&e w*o was &o %o&4er A))or&e2 o3 Re1or(
3or )*e Car'e&)"ers, (es'")e a No)"1e o3 E&)r2 o3 )*a) Or(er Gra&)"&4 9")*(rawa% o3
Ja#es 9a%s*, Es<, "& a((")"o& )o Mr H0&)er '0))"&4 )*e wro&4 1o0r) a&( )*e wro&4
1ase &0#$er o& a Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) )*a) wo0%( *ave &o&e)*e%ess
I; A4a"&, "& *"s A040s) ?, +,,- Cer)"3"1a)e o3 Serv"1e 3or *"s Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2
J0(4#e&), Mr H0&)er '0)s "& )*e 1a')"o& )*e wro&4 1ase &0#$er a&( )*e wro&4
De'ar)#e&) &0#$er, %"s)"&4 CV,-A,@E,- a&( De'ar)#e&) = w*ere CV,>A,@E,- a&(
De'ar)#e&) E s*o0%( $e F0r)*er, )*e J0&e -, +,,- No)"1e o3 Lo(4e#e&) was se&) )o
o&%2 !"#$e%#a& F0r)*er "& *er Cer)"3"1a)e o3 Serv"1e 3or )*a) No)"1e o3 Lo(4e#e&),
3"%e( se'ara)e%2 o& A040s) ?, +,,-, Ms H"&)B '0)s "& )*e 1a')"o& )*e wro&4 1ase
JUDGMENT 1=
&0#$er a&( )*e wro&4 De'ar)#e&) &0#$er, %"s)"&4 CV,-A,@E,- a&( De'ar)#e&) =
w*ere CV,>A,@E,- a&( De'ar)#e&) E s*o0%( $e I&)eres)"&4%2, E6*"$") ; )o H0&)er5s
J0&e +I, +,@, Mo)"o& 3or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&), w*"%e 1o&)a"&"&4 )*e )e6) o3 )*e
De%aware Co0r)5s Or(er re#ov"&4 )*e s)a2, (oes&5) 1o&)a"& )*e De%aware .a&/r0')12
Co0r)5s Proo3 o3 Serv"1e 3or )*a) Or(er 0'o& )*e Car'e&)"ers
IE Ne6), o& J0%2 @+
)*
, +,@, REDUEST FOR SU.MISSION OF DEFENDANTSJ
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS , INC AND DUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATIONJS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, H0&)er a4a"& '0)s
De'ar)#e&) = "& )*e 1ase 1a')"o& w*ere De'ar)#e&) E s*o0%( $e
I> F"&a%%2, o& J0%2 @?, +,@@ )*"s Co0r) 4ra&)e( D"s)r"1) Co0r) R0%e @I FIG 'rov"(es,
KFa"%0re o3 )*e o''os"&4 'ar)2 )o serve a&( 3"%e *"s wr"))e& o''os")"o& #a2 $e
1o&s)r0e( as a& a(#"ss"o& )*a) )*e #o)"o& "s #er")or"o0s a&( a 1o&se&) )o 4ra&)"&4 )*e
sa#eK T*0s, "& )*"s 1ase, )*e 1o0r) 1o&s)r0es P%a"&)"33s5, JAMES S CARPENTIER
a&( JOAN E CARPENTIER, a&( De3e&(a&)s5, AAMES FUNDING
CORPORATION a&( 9INDSOR MANAGEMENT COMPANY5S 3a"%0re )o o''ose
De3e&(a&)s5 RCS a&( DLS5s Mo)"o&/or S0##ar2 J0(4#e&) as a(#"ss"o& )*a) )*e
Mo)"o& "s #er")or"o0s8
I- T*e J0%2 @?, +,@, No)"1e o3 E&)r2 o3 Or(er "&1orre1)%2 %"s) De'ar)#e&) = "&s)ea( o3
De'ar)#e&) E "& )*e 1a')"o&
=, T*e 9as*oe Co0&)2 Re1or(er5s we$ s")e (oes &o) %"s) a No)"1e o3
Tr0s)ee Sa%e 3or )*e a%%e4e( Tr0s)ee sa%e )*a) was se) )o )a/e '%a1e o& De1e#$er +@
s)
,
+,,@
II LA9 AND ARGUMENT
I. The &rder -ranting Summary Judgment $ntered +gainst .laintiff Should be
Set +side or /acated %ue to it being /oid )or "acG of Jurisdiction -iven the
Numberous %eficiencies in Service of $ssential .leadings and Notices U#on the
.laintiffs, $@cusable Neglect, )raud on The Court, an Intervening %ecision of the
Nevada Su#reme Court, To of them, from July 8, :>11, and The &verly "ong
.assing of Time 0eteen No and the -ranting of the Summary Judgment &rder.
The e@cusable neglect argument is 5uite strong given 'itnJ and 4imblemanHs
JUDGMENT 1?
continual failure to a##ro#riately address their .roofHs of Service an or #ut the correct
case number or Court in the Ca#tion for im#ortant filings Bsuch as the (otion for
Summary JudgmentE. (ight be a voidness basis for Setting +side the &rder +s
Well, lacG of !urisdiction here im#ortant #leadings, such as the (otion for
Summary Judgment ere not a##ro#riately served or noticed, no 1<> limitations
#eriod under N*C. ?>BbEB7E void basis for setting aside, further tolling arguments
and facts are #resent in this matter ith res#ect to the N*C. ?>BbEB1-9E basis due to
the alleged failure of #revious attorney (ahan Bho a##arently never filed a notice of
a##earance des#ite getting a Nissan Dterra signed over to her, though, according to
Jim Car#entier, she did have her mother accom#any (r. Car#entier to former
attoreny WalshHs office to have it e@#lained to Car#entier that his case as a lost
cause by the attorney ho had ithdran from Car#entierHs case already. (ahan
a##arently failed to s#ot the deficiencies in serviceFnotice, addressing mailings to one
ho as no longer attorney of recordFlisting an inccorect address in the creditor
matri@, rong case numberFrong court in ca#tion, etc., etc. that the undersigned
s#otted. )urther, (r. Car#entier a##arenty had some dealings ith another attorney,
a Shan .atterson, ho allegedly counseled (r. Car#entier, only to Kcall a friend of
his in the industryL for some in#ut, '&W$/$*, T'$ )*I$N% IN T'$ IN%UST*,
JUST S& '+..$N$% T& 0$ &..&SIN- C&UNS$" &N (*. C+*.$NTI$*HS
C+S$, C*ISTIN SC'U"$*-'INT4, hereu#on the KdiscoveryL of that
circumstance Band after, a##arently, a good deal of #erha#s #rivleged information
as relayed to o##osing counselE, (r. .atterson informed (r. Car#entier that he as
needed to a#ologiJe to (r. Car#entier as he Kas afraid he had aaGened a slee#ing
giantL in light of his, a##arently, inadvertently contacting o##osing counsel in an
attem#t to seeG advice from a Kfriend in the industryL, hereu#on (r. .attersonHs
contacting (s. 'intJ a##arently resulted in immediate aggressive action by 'intJ
against Car#entierHs interest in this matter Bostensibly the &ctober :>11 Trustee Sale
as set in #lace, ith a causal correlation evident ith res#ect to (r. .attersonHs call
JUDGMENT 18
to o##osing counsel 'intJ. (aybe the Car#entierHs have some of these things rong,
and attorneyHs .atterson and (ahan deserve an o##ortunity to rebut any allegation of
conduct that ould #rovide a N*C. ?>BbE basis for setting aside the &rder -ranting
Summary Judgment in this matter. )urther, the &rder granting Summary Judgment is
void given the lacG of !urisdiction #ossessed by this Court here so many essential
deficiencies e@ists in this matter related to the most #ertinent filings and notices
#ossible. There is, a##arently, some indication that the &rder -ranting Summary
Judgment is too old, and that 'intJ, et al, have taGen far too long to act on it, and
therefore it is legally unenforceable. )urther, a N*C. ?>BbE basis for setting aside
the &rder may e@ist ith res#ect to all the fraudulent activity that #ermeates this
industry, #articularly ith res#ect to lenders seeGing to bring actions here the lacG
standing, cannot #roduct the note, etc, etc.
What follos are useful selections from something called the K)oreclosure %efense
'andbooGL3
K.erfection of Chain of Title
In January :>11 , the (assachusetts Su#reme Court issued a decision in U.S.
0+NC N+TI&N+" +SS&CI+TI&N /S. +ntonio I0+N$4 in hich all the
Justices unanimously agreed. In order for the banG to be able to foreclose,
they must sho a #erfection of chain of title, both in the %eed of
TrustF(ortgage and the .romissory note. It as also ruled that a blanG
assignment as not acce#table #roof of #erfection of title for the #romissory
note.
This is 'U-$. ,ou should be referring to this case and motion the court to
taGe Omandatory !udicial noticeO for the ruling decision in your case if you are
considering doing any sort of litigation, hether as a defendant in a Judicial
State or as a .laintiff in a Non-Judicial State.
'ere are the im#ortant #oints you need to understand from this Su#reme Court
decision 3
1E + %efective Title cannot be fi@ed .
The (assachusetts Su#reme Court ruled that the banG has to demonstrate
#erfection of title at the time the Notice of %efault is issued .
JUDGMENT 1<
+ defective title is liGe bad food . &nce food has gone bad , you can never fi@ it.
The same goes ith the %eed of TrustF(ortgage. The OlenderO cannot retro sign
or Oreverse engineerO the Chain of Title after the fact. 0ut most of the time this is
the case hen it is handled by a foreclosure mill. They have robo-signers hose
!ob is to sign bogus assignments and reverse engineer titles.
It is your !ob to challenge this #oint hen your lender #resents su##osed O#roofH
before the court. &ftentimes, they ill bring in a #hotoco#y of the %eed of Trust
made years ago at the time you closed on your loan . The #hotoco#y does not
and cannot attest to ho the current real and beneficiary #arty in interest
is.
:E The 0anG must sho a #erfection of the Chain of Title for the %eed of
TrustF(ortgage
This means that any assignments of the .romissory note must also be reflected
at the county recorderHs office Band not ith ($*S- I ill talG about ($*S in a
bitE.
If an assignment of the .romissory Note is not recorded on the County *ecords,
then #erfection is not achieved.
What this means is, if you can #rove that your note has been securitiJed or sold
to another #arty aay from your original lender, and that they did not record this
assignment at the County *ecorderHs &ffice, then bifurcation occurred . This
leads to a defect In the chain of title, maGing the %eed of TrusU(ortgage
unenforceable.
9E The 0anG must sho a #erfection of the Chain of Title for the .romissory
Note
If e have a situation here you closed ith 0anG + and 0anG + sold the note to
0anG 0, ho then sold the note to a *$(IC BsecuritiJed the noteE, then it as
ruled that there must be a chain of endorsement follo ing Uniform Commercial
Code P 6-:>?. Ty#ically, this is done in the form of a stam# on the bacG of the
#romissory note from 0anG + to 0anG 0 as O.ay to the &rder of 0anG 0 Without
*ecourseO.
Title must sho this chain of O.ay to the &rder ofH on the bacG of the note, !ust
liGe it ould on a checG, all the ay to the last #erson trying to collect on the
note. If the banG cannot sho this chain of title ending in a #oint as the #erson on
JUDGMENT 16
the title, it does not have #erfection of title and is not eligible to collect.
In order to collect and enforce the note under UCC P 6-9>1 , the #arty enforcing
the note must demonstrate that it has the #osition of 'older in %ue Course or
having authority from the 'older. )ailing that, the banG is committing theft.
7E 0lanG +ssignments are Not +cce#table
It is ST+N%+*% 0+NC .*+CTIC$ to maGe blanG assignments to avoid the
#roblem of having to maintain #ro#er chain of title on the #romissory note. In
#revious situations, the courts have alloed blanG assignment and #ossession to
be acce#table forms of #roof of claim.
With the (assachusetts Su#reme Court ruling , th is is no longer true. 0lanG
assignments are no longer acce#table forms of #roof of .erfection.
"et me re#eat th is if you missed it.
If your note has been securitiJed, then the banG that is handling the securitiJation
+"W+,S creates a 0lanG +ssignment to be used in the event a foreclosure
action is initiated and #roof of title needs to be #roduced . +ll they do is to give the
blanG assignment #romissory note to the #arty ishing to foreclose and voila Q
With your nefound Gnoledge, you no Gno ho to build an ob!ection to this
#ractice.
If you refer to #oint 1E, the banG cannot reverse engineer these assignments.
&nce the instrument is defective, it is forever defective. .ro#er assignment must
be done in con!unction and at the time of the deed , not retros#ectively....
Illegal Trustee Argument
There have been two instances in which a Federal Court Judge issued a
statewide injunction freezing all foreclosures against homeowners against Bank
of America and Recontrust !ne was in "tah in late #$%$& and more recentl'& in
Januar' #$%% in (evada& because in both instances& Recontrust is not registered
to do business in that state
If a com)an' wants to do business in a state& it needs to register within that state
as an entit' This wa'& if someone within that state wants to sue them& the' can
look u) who the owners are& and where the' live& so the' can be )ro)erl' served
with a summons
In almost all instances& these foreclosure mills are not registered to do business
in the state the' are attem)ting to foreclose in
*an' homeowners have used this defense to at least forestall foreclosure It is
JUDGMENT :>
not enough to sto) a forectosure& but it is another claim the homeowner can
make in a +uiet Title Action defense making the argument that the Trustee is a
,non-entit' ,.
The Reconve'ance Argument
This strateg' comes from an attorne' in California who is doing this with his own
house
If 'ou look at 'our /eed of Trust or *ortgage& 'ou will invariabl' see language
that covers the clause of ,reconve'ance, The language t')icall' goes like this0
,#1 Reconve'ance ")on )a'ment of al2 sums secured b' this 3ecurit'
Instrument& 4ender shall re5uest Trustee to reconve' the 6ro)ert' and
shall surrender this 3ecurit' Instrument and all notes evidencing debt
secured b' this securit' agreement to trustee n
7hen 'ou have a situation where0
a8 The note can be )roven that it was securitized& then it can be )roven that
the lender has& in fact& been )aid in full
b8 The note has been sold from Bank A& to Bank B& and then to Bank C& who
is tr'ing to foreclose
In an' event& this strateg' involves bringing a civil action against the !riginator9
Bank A& re5uiring them to do their job in a breach of contract civil action
:ou see& a /eed of Trust secures the )romissor' note It is the /eed of Trust
that gives the 4ender the ,)ower of sale, clause to foreclose If the original lender
is forced to issue a reconve'ance& then the /eed of Trust has colla)sed
This is a ver' effective& 'et eas'& method some )eo)le have used to sto)
foreclosure& reason being that0
a8 The originator is often out of business and cannot res)ond to the civil
action& thus the homeowner wins b' default
b8 The !riginator had alread' sold the note with ,no recourse, This means
the R;*IC or the servicer can (;<;R go back to the originator
c8 If the !riginator loses the civil action b' default& nothing bad ha))ens to
them
d8 If the !riginator wins the civil action& nothing good ha))ens to them
=ere>s the kicker If the !riginator is still in business and the' lose the civil action
in court& then there are ver' s)ecific dire conse5uences that results If the' lose&
then it can be )roven that ever' loan the' have ever originated that has lost their
home is the result of their gross negligence to )erform their dut' This means
ever' homeowner who has lost his or her home can sue the !riginator
JUDGMENT :1
It is for this reason that the !riginator often doesn>t show u)& or settles when
confronted with this strateg'
If 'ou are interested in learning more about this strateg'& we have a sam)le kit
that will guide 'ou through the )rocess on our site at0
htt)022wwwconsumerdefense)rogramscom 4ook under the 6roducts tab for the
,+uick Reconve'ance *ethod /
The /ebt <alidation 4etter
4et>s anal'ze the Fair /ebt Collections 6ractices Act& and s)ecificall' the )ortion
governing the validation of debt "nder "3C Title %? 3ection %@A#Bg8& 'ou are
entitled to ask a debt collector for the verification of the debt ")on dis)ute of the
debt& all collection activities must cease until the debt collector can validate the
debt 3adl'& the consumer has onl' 1$ da's to dis)ute the debt or else the'
admit to the debt
If 'ou have received a (otice of /efault B(!/8 from 'our ,lender&, 'ou will see
that there is language s)ecificall' that sa's ,If 'ou do not dis)ute this debt within
1$ da's& then 'ou admit to owing this debt, Co on Co grab 'our letter and take
a good look
If 'ou have not received a (otice of /efault letter Bor if 'ou have received it within
1$ da's8& 'ou can still send a (otice of /ebt validation letter to 'our ,lender, to
dis)ute the debt I have included a sam)le (!/ /is)ute letter on
htt)022wwwconsumerdefense)rogramscom
=owever& this does not mean 'ou waive 'our rights to challenge 'our lender if
'ou are more than 1$ da's )ast default :ou can still do it :ou can write 'our
lender and 'our Trustee Bin a non-Judicial 3tate8 demanding that the' )roduce
)roof of claim under the F/C6A under "3C Title %? 3ection %@A#Bg8 :our
,lender, is re5uired to res)ond within 1$ da's Failure to do so results in a
violation of the F/C6A& which carries a )enalt' of u) to D%$$$ )er violation B'ou
sim)l' have to sue them to collect8 The F/C6A also has s)ecial damage
)rovisions for class actions %? "3C E%@A#k Recover' of statutor' damages
for the class is limited to %F of the debt collector>s net worth or D?$$&$$$&
whichever is less
:ou will know when the debt collector doesn>t have the note when a res)onse is
sent back giving the Borrower either a ,7e don>t recognize 'our re5uesf or
stating the information is ,6ro)rietar', /on>t let them get awa' with that The
F/C6A rules are clearG In most cases& the 4enderl3ervicer will send 'ou
an'thing but the items re5uested *ost of the time& debt collectors will send the
JUDGMENT ::
following0
H 3ome )a)ers )rinted from a com)uter& not sure what the' are
H (othing certified Bnotarized8 and es)eciall' not dated recentl'
H (othing showing the name and signature of the original lender or )ast
note holder
H (othing )roving the notification of a transfer
H 3im)le co)ies of some kind of billing statement etc
All of which are unacce)tablel The 4enders& 3ervicers and /ebt Collectors
AB3!4"T;4: know what the legal re5uirements are The' will challenge
an'one who dis)utes a debt to see if 'ou know the law This is wh' it is so
im)ortant for 'ou to know the law as wellG
"nder the "niform Commercial Code 3ection 1-#$I& the name and the
signature of both the beneficiar' and the original creditor must be disclosed in the
same document E 1-#$I Bd8 The signature of the borrower must be included as
well into the assignment or transfer9 unless a clause in the deed of
trust2mortgage waives that Bmost deeds of trust disclose this at clause J#$8
title to the debt obligation& whether through a )urchase& assignment& or
other transfer& and who ac5uires more than one mortgage loan in an'
twelve-month )eriod For )ur)oses of this section& a servicer of a
mortgage loan shall not be treated as the owner of the obligation if the
servicer holds title to the loan or it is assigned to the servicer solel' for
the administrative convenience of the servicer in servicing the
obligation
:ou will also note that the sco)e does not cover the servicer if the servicer was
assigned the note for administrative convenience in servicing the obligation
This means& the servicer is not treated as and does not have the rights of a
lender Bor owner of the obligation8
As I discussed eartier& even if the servicer was to bu' the note back after it has
been securitized& reattachment of the loan2note to the /eed of TrustI*ortgage is
im)ossible
:ou Cannot *ake Carrots from Carrot Juice
!nce a loan has been written off& it is discharged !nce a loan has been
securitized& reattachment is im)ossible
Reattachment is im)ossible for the following reasons0
%8 6ermanent conversion
The )romissor' note had been converted into a stock as a )ennanent fiKture
JUDGMENT :9
Its nature is forever changed It is now and forever a stock It is treated as a
stock and governed as a stock under the 3;C
3ince the /eed of Trust secures the )romissor' note& once the )romissor'
note is destro'ed& the /eed of Trust secures nothing Therefore& the Trust is
invalid
#8 Asset has been written off
!nce an asset is written off& the debt is discharged& since the owner of the
asset has received com)ensation for the discharge in the form of taK credits
from the IR3 The debt has been settled
The servicer ads as a debt co"ector of an unsecured note The servicer is
deceiving the court& the count'& and the borrower when it tries to re-attach the
note to the /eed of Trust as if nothing has ha))ened Irs called adhesion
The funn' thing about the law is& it is legal until or unless the other )art'
objects 3ince this scam is so devious& it is be'ond the com)rehension of
most )eo)le including that of law'ers and judges It takes someone who has
studied accounting& securities and law to unravel this dece)tion *ost )eo)le
in the legal )rofession onl' take the arguments on face value
18 Broken chain of assignment
"nder the "niform Commercial Code B"CC8& the )romissor' note is a one of
a kind instrument All assignments Bmuch like endorsements on the back of a
check8 have to be done as a )ermanent fiKture onto the original )romissor'
note The original )romissor' note has the onl' legall' binding chain of title
7ithout a )ro)er chain of title& the instrument is fault'
-
Rarel' can a lender ,)roduce the note&, because b' law& the original note has
to be destro'ed RememberL The note and the stock cannot eKist at the
same time !ftentimes& the lender would come into court with a )hotoco)' of
the original note made 'ears ago
Another )o)ular method of deceit lenders )refer is to use the 3tate Civil Code
in non-judicial states to state that ,there is no law re5uiring a lender to
)roduce the note or an' other )roof of claim, T=;: /!(>T =A<; IT and
CA((!T 6R!/"C; IT
!ftentimes& the lender would do blank assignments of the !riginal )romissor'
note into the R;*IC Then& when the' need the note to )erform the
foreclosure& the' will magicall' )roduce a blank assignment Again& this is not
legal and is bringing fraudulent documents before the courts and the count'
JUDGMENT :7
records
4efs be ver' clear here !nce a loan has been securitized& the note is no
more An'thing the lender brings to court as evidence is )rima facie evidence
of fraud The attorne' for the lender is either an accessor' to fraud through
ignorance or willful intent ;ither wa'& as an informed borrower& it is 'our job
to bring this dece)tion to light so these law'ers can be sanctioned
3o& 'our lender would close 'our loan& sell it to R;*IC and get )aid
!nce 'our loan goes into default& the loan is written off The loan is then bought
b' the same lender in the o)en secondar' market as a dead2unsecured note To
be able to )ull this stunt off& ever' lender involved in this scheme is re5uired to
act in collusion
!nce the servicer bu's the dead note& the' then claim to be the true holder in
due course of a written off asset The' then )resent to the world that the' are
who the' claim The' rel' on the homeownerlborrower to be ignorant of this
dece)tion and clean u)& allowing them to take )ossession of a house for )ennies
on the dollar
This is the eKtent of the fraud done to the American )ublic ever' 3ingle da'
As a homeowner defending 'our rights& it is im)erative 'ou understand the
nature of this fraud so 'ou can use these arguments to defend 'our home
As a legal )rofessional& it is im)erative that 'ou understand these arguments so
'ou can raise the )ro)er objections and interrogatories when re)resenting 'our
clients in a foreclosure defense
6ractical *atters
In this cha)ter& we go through s)ecific )ractical things 'ou can do right awa' to
challenge 'our lender
At its heart& there are four classes of )eo)le that are affected b' foreclosures
% 3omeone who is about to lose his or her home in a (on-Judicial 3tate
BCalifornia& (evada& Arizona& !regon& 7ashington& etc8
# 3omeone who is about to lose his or her home in a Judicial 3tate B(ew
:ork& (ew Jerse'& !hio& Florida& etc8
1 3omeone who has alread' lost his or her home
I 3omeone who is hanging b' their teeth& who is u)side down or can no
longer )a' their mortgage& tr'ing to get a loan modification& or someone in
good standing
;ach class of )erson has different o)tions and )rocedures available to them
This cha)ter will outline in brief some of these o)tions !f course& this is just a
JUDGMENT :=
book and is no substitute for com)etent legal advice& so )lease consult counsel
before doing an'thing that could affect 'our home
(on-Judicial 3tate =omeowners
*ost 7estern 3tates of the "3 are (on-Judicial 3tates In these states&
forecfosures are governed b' 3tate Civil Code
These homeowners have it the toughest Being in a non-judicial state& 4enders
need not )rove an'thing The' can sim)l' notif' the homeowner of the default&
then after a certain number of da's& as defined under 3tate Civil Code& the
)ro)ert' then )roceeds to a Trustee sale at a )ublic auction
The onl' o)tion available to 'ou if 'ou are a (on-Judicial 3tate resident is for 'ou
to file a civil action against 'our lender to com)el them to )rovide )roof of claim&
and therefore standing
The other o)tion is to declare bankru)tc' Balso known as BIM8 In bankru)tc'&
generall' s)eaking& 'ou have two o)tions& Cha)ter N Bno asset BIM8 or a Cha)ter
%1 Basset BIM8 7hat some homeowners do is to declare Cha)ter N and list their
)ro)ert' as an unsecured asset and wait for the lender to object This then )uts
the burden of )roof on the lender If 'our loan was dosed with 4ender A and is
being foreclosed on b' 4ender B or C there must be Bb' law8 a valid chain of
assignment to show that 4ender C is the real and beneficial )art' of interest As
we disaJssed& because of the )roblem of securitization& this is never done This
creates a real )roblem for the 4ender Bwho is frankl' doing this fraudulentl'
an'wa'8
For those with a lot of assets Bsuch as e5uit' in their homes8& the' can do a
Cha)ter %1 "nder a Cha)ter %1 bankru)tc'& 'ou can file an Adversar'
6roceeding where 'ou sue 'our lender to com)el them to )roduce valid )roof of
claim The beaut' with Bankru)tc' Court is that 'ou have the law on 'our side
Rule 1$$% Bd8 of the Federal Code of Bankru)tc' re5uires that 'our lender )rovide
evidence of ,)erfected title,
If 'ou choose to file a civil action against 'our lender& 'ou better have )roof as
we discussed earlier The best )roof 'ou can bring is a securitization audit to
)rove that 'our loan has been securitized Then& work with 'our law'er to build
an argument around the )oints outlined in this book "nfortunatel'& this will set
'ou back at the minimum D?$$$& and more likel' closer to D%$&$$$ to D#?&$$$
Another o)tion 'ou could do is to do a ,5uick reconve'ance method, as
discussed in Cha)ter I This can be ver' effective in sto))ing 'our servicer>s
abilit' to foreclose because it closes out the /eed of Trust2*ortgage This
JUDGMENT :?
method is onl' a))licable when 'ou have clear evidence of movement or
securitization :ou can find out more about this method on our website under the
6roducts tab
Alternativel'& if 'ou cannot afford a law'er& 'ou could tr' to do this 'ourself Creat
)laces to start are 4iving4iescom and sto)foreclosurefraudcom These are
blogs with lots of articles& sam)le )leadings and lots of other resources I used
during m' research
Another o)tion is to join our foreclosure defense membershi) )rogram 7e
realized that there are 3! *A(: homeowners needing hel) That is wh' we
develo)ed a coaching membershi) )rogram with s)ecific information and
resources to hel) homeowners with their foreclosure defense !ur membershi)
)rogram has sam)le )leadings& sam)le res)onses& forms and )rocedures others
have used in their foreclosure defense :ou will also be able to network with
other homeowners local to 'ou meet with them to have coffee& and su))ort
each other For more information about this )rogram& come to our website at0
htt)022wwwconsumerdefense)rogramscom
A good )lace to start& if 'ou are in a (on-Judicial 3tate& is to start writing to 'our
lender to demand that the' )roduce valid )roof of claim :ou can find a cou)le of
sam)le letters on our site This will be a good )lace to get started
Judicial 3tate =omeowners
In a Judicial 3tate& 'our lender has to sue 'ou to get a judgment before the' can
foreclose on 'our house As we discussed earlier& the burden of )roof is on the
)laintiff This means that if 'ou are in a Judicial 3tate& 'ou have the advantage of
re5uiring the lender to )roduce )roof of claim
The )roblem in most cases is that homeowners in Judicial 3tates do not know
the nature of foreclosure fraud The' either don>t show u) or if the' show u)&
don>t know how to argue their )oints& and thus end u) losing their homes
an'wa'
The other )roblem in Judicial 3tates is that because there are so man' cases&
judges end u) forgoing their !ath of !ffice to the )eo)le the' serve Instead of
dis)ensing justice fairl' to all& the' rubber-stam) judgments without a second
glance This is not fair to the homeowners& but if homeowners don>t know their
rights& nor know how to argue their )oints& then sadl'& there>s little justice for
them As the' sa'& 'ou have no rights unless 'ou know what those rights are
3o& the best thing to do if 'ou are a resident of a Judicial 3tate then is to arm
'ourself with education 4earn the nature of loan fraud 4earn the )rocedure of
JUDGMENT :8
rules of court and on how to defend 'ourself in answering a summons and
com)laint
:ou should know b' now that 'our best course of action is to )ush the Federal
Rules of Civil 6rocedure %N& ,an action has to be taken in the name of a real
)art' in interesf> in other words& 'ou are to challenge 'our lender>s 3tanding
and their right to foreclose If the' are not a real and beneficial )art' in interest&
then the' do not have the right to foreclose Allowing them to )roceed with their
foreclosure without 3tanding amounts to nothing more than theft and eKtortion&
both of which are illegal
!ther homeowners in Judicial 3tates choose to take a more )roactive a))roach
Instead of waiting to be sued b' their lender& the' do a forensic audit& gather
evidence of loan securitization and then sue their lender to get a +uiet Title
Action to remove the *ortgage from their )ro)ert'& since no one can come forth
to )roduce valid )roof of claim
For members of our foreclosure defense membershi) )rogram& we have sam)le
tem)lates that homeowners can use to take matters into their own hands
=omeowners 7ho =ave 4ost Their =omes
For those homeowners who have alread' lost their homes& there are two
situations There are those who have lost their homes due to a sale& but are still
sta'ing in their homes and there are those who have been forced to move out
*an' law'ers and )eo)le in the media are advising homeowners who have lost
their homes but are still living in them to sta' in their homes It could take
months sometimes for the lender to come around to actuall' force the
homeowner out
T')icall'& in order for a lender to force a homeowner to move out& the' 7Ill need
to file for an ,unlawful detainer> This takes a while to be granted and this gives
the homeowner additional time 3ta'ing another month or three at home means
another few more months the' do not have to )a' rent elsewhere
Another techni5ue homeowners do is to challenge the lenders standing to
foreclose& even after the fact& to fight the unlawful detainer This is something 'ou
will likel' need to consult with an attorne' about for more information
The 7rongful Foreclosure Action
=omeowners who have alread' lost their homes but believe their loans have
been securitized might want to see if the' can do a 7rongful Foreclosure civil
action against their ,)retender lenders,
=ere are some hints that 'our loans have been securitized0
JUDGMENT :<
- There is a com)an' called *;R3 B*ortgage ;lectronic Registration 3'stems8
involved in the (otice of 3ubstitution of Trustee& or on the original /eed of
Trus"*ortgage Bthis is usuall' on the first # )ages of 'our documents8
- :our loan is with one of the following institutions0 C*AC& Countr'wide =ome
4oans& Bank of America& 7ells Fargo& or Chase
- :ou closed with a small no name bank& and 'ou are now being serviced b' a
more well-known institution like the ones named above
If 'ou can gather sufficient evidence that 'our loan has been securitized& then
'ou might be able to build a case using the arguments )resented in this book to
bring a civil action against 'our lender for a wrongful foreclosure and2or fraud
;ssentiall'& 'ou are accusing 'our lender of committing fraud in that the' did not
have 3tanding to foreclose on 'our )ro)ert'
In a civil action in which 'ou have suffered damages as a result of something the
other )art' has done against 'ou& t')icall' 'ou are entitled to three times the
damages Bthree times the value of 'our loan8 This is t')icall' called ,)unitive
damages, It means there are damages other than documented realO
K+ccordingly, hen this court issues an intervening decision that constitutes a
change in controlling la, courts may de#art from the decided la of the case and
a##ly the ne rule of la.L 'su v. County of ClarG. See, e.g., 'o#Gins v. %yer, 1>7
&hio St.9d 7?1, <:> N.$.:d 9:6, 999 B:>>7E Bholding that an intervening o#inion
issued by the &hio Su#reme Court constituted a change in controlling la
necessitating de#arture from the la of the case doctrineEM %edge v. State, <9: So.:d
<9=, <9? B)la.%ist.Ct.+##.:>>:E Bnoting that a decision by the )lorida Su#reme
Court to enact a ne #rocedural rule constituted a change in controlling laE.
K0ecause e determine that the change in controlling la e@ce#tion to the la of the
case doctrine a##lies, e do not consider hether this court should also formally
ado#t the Ksubstantial ne evidenceL or Kclear error resulting in manifest in!usticeL
e@ce#tions to the la of the case doctrine. R 'oever, e observe that, des#ite the
landonersH contentions, discovery of a relatively minor factual error in our order in
'su I suggesting that the landonersH had obtained a =>-foot height variance for
construction of a billboard on their #ro#erty does not constitute Ksubstantial ne
evidenceL that !ustifies de#arture from the la of the case doctrine. R &ur
JUDGMENT :6
determination in 'su I that the landoners had not demonstrated the futility of
e@hausting their administrative remedies rested on several #ieces of evidence besides
the erroneous Kbillboard variance,L indicating that this Kne evidenceL ould have
little bearing on our #revious decision. R See Suel v. Secretary of 'ealth and 'uman
Services, 16: ).9d 6<1, 6<? B)ed.Cir.1666E Bstating that Kthe ne evidence relied
u#on to override StheT la of the case must be substantial, even conclusive, before it
is a##ro#riate to reo#en a !udgment on hich subse5uent #hases of the case have
been decidedL Bciting 1< Charles +lan Wright, et al., )ederal .ractice and .rocedure
PR778<, at <>> B:d ed.16<1EEE. R We liGeise re!ect the #ro#osition that our decision
in 'su I as based on clear error such that adherence to the decision ould orG a
manifest in!ustice. R See In re City of .hiladel#hia "itigation, 1=< ).9d 811, 8:> B9d
Cir.166<E Bnoting that if a decision is not clearly erroneous, enforcement of that
decision ill not generally orG a manifest in!usticeE.+s this a##eal and our decision
in 'su I are #art of a single continuous suit, e also re!ect the CountyHs assertion that
the doctrine of res !udicata #rohibits this court from revisiting the merits of the
landonersH taGings claim. R See )lorida %e#t. of Trans#. v. Juliano, <>1 So.:d 1>1,
1>= B)la.:>>1E BKWhere successive a##eals are taGen in the same case there is no
5uestion of res !udicata, because the same suit, and not a ne and different one, is
involved. R Under these circumstances, the doctrine of the la of the case a##lies.L
Bcitation omittedEE.L
&n motion and u#on such terms as are !ust, the court may relieve a #arty or a
#artyHs legal re#resentative from a final !udgment, order, or #roceeding for the
folloing reasons3 B1E mistaGe, inadvertence, sur#rise, or e@cusable neglectM B:E
nely discovered evidence hich by due diligence could not have been discovered in
time to move for a ne trial under *ule =6BbEM B9E fraud Bhether heretofore
denominated intrinsic or e@trinsicE, misre#resentation or other misconduct of an
adverse #artyM B7E the !udgment is voidM or, B=E the !udgment has been satisfied,
released, or discharged, or a #rior !udgment u#on hich it is based has been reversed
JUDGMENT 9>
or otherise vacated, or it is no longer e5uitable that an in!unction should have
#ros#ective a##lication. The motion shall be made ithin a reasonable time, and for
reasons B1E, B:E, and B9E not more than ? months after the #roceeding as taGen or the
date that ritten notice of entry of the !udgment or order as served. In some
instances KtollingL may be a##licable to the ? month limitations #eriod.
The Nevada Su#reme Court recently addressed a critical issue involving the
)oreclosure (ediation *ules in the case of "eyva v. National %efault Servicing
Cor#., +##. No. ==:1?, +##eal from the ClarG Co. %istrict Court, +-1>-?>>-?=1,
1:8Nev. UUU, UUU ..9d UUU B+dv. &#. No. 7>, July 8, :>11E. The issue relates to the
obligation of the lender to bring documents to the mediation that reveal ho is the
oner of the deed of trust and mortgage note. The CourtNs ruling in this case ill
immediately arm homeoners ith a serious ea#on against the big banGs and their
servicers. Used in the correct ay, many foreclosures may be sto##ed because of this
recent o#inion.
The State of Nevada )oreclosure (ediation .rogram as created in :>>6. )acing
foreclosure, the homeoner may re5uest mediation through hich a modification to
home loan may be achieved. &nce the homeoner re5uests mediation, no further
action may be taGen to e@ercise the #oer of sale until the com#letion of the
mediation. The Nevada Su#reme Court created the )oreclosure (ediation *ules
BK)(*LE to govern those mediations.
The "eyva case #resented the Nevada Su#reme Court ith an o##ortunity to
inter#ret a critical #ortion of the mediation #rogram re5uirements. N*S 1>8.><?B7E
and )(* = B<E BaE both #rovide3 KIn addition to the documents re5uired by *ule <
herein, the beneficiary Susually the lending banGT must bring to the mediation
#rogram the original or a certified co#y of the deed of trust, the mortgage note and
each assignment of the deed of trust and the mortgage note.L N*S 1>8.><7B=E
#rovides that KSiTf the beneficiary of the deed of trust or the re#resentative fails to
JUDGMENT 91
attend the mediation, fails to #artici#ate in the mediation in good faith or does not
bring to the mediation each document re5uired by section 7 or does not have
authority or access to #erson ith authority re5uired by section 7, the mediator shall
#re#are and submit to the (ediation +dministrator a #etition and recommendation
concerning im#osition of sanctions against the beneficiary of the deed of trust or the
re#resentative, as the court deems a##ro#riate, including, ithout limitation,
re5uiring a loan modification in the manner determined #ro#er by the court.L
The Nevada Su#reme Court faced the issue of hether the lenderNs failure to
bring the re5uired assignments and other documents as re5uired by N*S 1>8.><?B7E
constituted bad faith under N*S 1>8.><?B=E. The anser to the 5uestion is not clear
from the language of the statute or the )(*.
+t the mediation in "eyva, the lender failed to deliver the assignments of the
deed of trust and the mortgage note. 'oever, the mediator did not find that the
lenderNs failure to #rovide the documents or other actions constituted a bad faith.
"eyva disagreed and a##ealed the decision of the mediator to the ClarG County
%istrict Court, Judge %onald (osely. Ultimately, Judge (osely agreed ith the
lender and entered an order finding that Kthere is a lacG of shoing of bad faithVL
"eyva a##ealed the decision of Judge (osely to the Nevada Su#reme Court. The
Nevada Su#reme Court issued its ruling on July 8, :>11 and re!ected the lenderNs
arguments that it had #artici#ated in the mediation in good faith. The Nevada
Su#reme Court determined that since the statute used the ord KshallL in reference to
the obligation to bring certain documents to the mediation, strict com#liance, not
substantial com#liance, as re5uired. The Su#reme Court ent on the rite KThe
legislative intent behind re5uiring a #arty to #roduce the assignments of the deed of
trust and mortgage note is to ensure that hoever is foreclosing Wactually ons the
noteN and has the authority to modify the loan.L
The Su#reme Court did not sto# there. It felt com#elled to then discuss hat
JUDGMENT 9:
constitutes a valid assignment of deeds of trust and mortgage notes. 0y reaching this
issue, the Su#reme Court set the obligations for each lender ith regards to their
obligation to #roduce documents at mediation.
The Su#reme Court then discussed the la regarding the assignment of a deed of
trust. Since an assignment of an interest in land must be in riting, the Su#reme
Court concluded that Kto #rove that (ortgageIt #ro#erly assigned its interest in land
via the deed of trust to Wells )argo, Wells )argo needed to #rovide a signed riting
from (ortageIt demonstrating that transfer of interest.L
The Su#reme Court then analyJed the method by hich the interest in a mortgage
note may be transferred and looGed to NevadaNs Uniform Commercial Code X
Negotiable Instruments. The Su#reme Court rote KStThe obligor on the note has the
right to Gno the identity of the entity that is Kentitled to enforceL the mortgage note
under +rticle 9, see N*S 1>7.99>1, KSoTtherise, the ShomeonerT may #ay funds to
a stranger in the case.L BCitation omitted.E
The Su#reme Court re!ected the arguments of Wells )argo that mere #ossession
of the mortgage note as sufficient. KSWTe conclude that +rticle 9 clearly re5uires
Wells )argo to demonstrate more than mere #ossession of the original note to be able
to enforce a negotiable instrument under the facts of this case.L To meet its
obligation under the Uniform Commercial Code, Wells )argo had to sho both
endorsement of the mortgage note to it by the original lender and #ossession of the
note.
+lternatively, Wells )argo could have also demonstrated a transfer of the note to
it. To demonstrate a transfer, Wells )argo as obligated to #rove that it as given
the mortgage note for the #ur#ose of enforcing it.
The Su#reme Court then concluded that since Wells )argo had failed to #roduced
documents to demonstrate either a valid endorsement or transfer, Wells )argo had
neither demonstrated that it as entitled to foreclose on the #ro#erty nor that it had
JUDGMENT 99
authority to mediate ith regards to the note. The Su#reme Court, relying on its other
o#inion issued the same day, .asillas v. 'S0C 0anG, 1:8Nev. UU, UU ..9d UU, +dv.
&#. 96, July 8, :>11E, ruled that the failure of Wells )argo to bring the re5uired
documents Kis a sanctionable offense under N*S 1>8.><? and the )(*s.L The
Su#reme Court then remanded the case to the district court for determination of the
a##ro#riate sanction.
This o#inion seems to indicate that the Ktoo big to failL banGs have met their
match ith the Nevada Su#reme Court. The ramifications of this o#inion ill maGe
the huge banGs thinG tice before they allo the Nevada Su#reme Court to hear any
other issues concerning their foreclosure #rocesses. This o#inion arms homeoners,
and es#ecially their counsel, and creates an o##ortunity to sto# the banGs and their
servicers from moving forard ith a foreclosure ith less that the full
documentation #roving their onershi# of the mortgage note, and the authority to
foreclose under the terms of the deed of trust.
The true sco#e and im#act of the "eyva and .asilla o#inions on the foreclosure
and mediation #rocess in Washoe County ill not be revealed any time soon. The
banGs ill liGely taGe any ste#s necessary avoid sanction as ell as #revent the
Nevada Su#reme Court issuing any other o#inions regarding the foreclosure #rocess
or the mediation #rogram.
the Su#reme Court of Nevada issued to o#inions on July 8, :>11 hich finally
com#el foreclosing #arties in Nevada to #roduce material documentation as to chain
of title to the Note and %eed of Trust in order to be #ermitted to continue ith a
foreclosure action hen mediation is re5uested. in "eyva v. National %efault
Servicing et al., No. ==:1?, 1:8 Nev. +dvance &#inion 7>, the Su#reme Court held
that strict com#liance is re5uired ith Nevada statutes governing the #roduction of
certain documents including any assignment of the %eed of TrustM that a foreclosing
#artyNs failure to do so Kis a sanctionable offenseM and the district court is #rohibited
JUDGMENT 97
from alloing the foreclosure #rocess to #roceedL. Wells )argo as also the cul#rit
in this case.
Significantly, in discussing the transfer of the Note, the Su#reme Court of
Nevada cited to the recent In *e /eal decision from the 6th Circuit 0anGru#tcy
+##eals .anel Bhich as #reviously discussed on this ebsiteE, holding that the
borroer Khas the right to Gno the identity of the entity that is Wentitled to enforceN
the mortgage note under +rticle 9 Bof the Uniform Commercial CodeE.L The Court
concluded that +rticle 9 Kclearly re5uires Wells )argo to demonstrate more than mere
#ossession of the original note to be able to enforce a negotiable instrumentL. The
court found that there as no endorsement and no assignment, and reversed the
%istrict Court.
The o#inion in "eyva cited to the CourtNs o#inion in .asillas v. 'S0C 0anG as
Trustee, No. =?969, 1:8 Nev. +dvance &#inion 96 Balso decided July 8, :>11E,
hich also reversed the %istrict Court and also cited to /eal , setting forth the
re5uirements for #roduction of evidence of chain of title to the note and %eed of
Trust in a foreclosure.
The multi#le citations to /eal, hich is a )ederal 0anGru#tcy a##ellate court
o#inion, by the state Su#reme Court of Nevada, is more than im#ortant. It
demonstrates that sim#ly because a foreclosure issue is decided by a 0anGru#tcy
court does not mean that it is not a##licable to a non-0anGru#tcy Bor non-)ederalE
foreclosure case. Time and again, hen e argue that an issue in a state foreclosure
case has already been decided by a 0anGru#tcy court in the foreclosure conte@t,
attorneys re#resenting foreclosing KlendersL and servicers argue KWell, Judge, that
as a 0anGru#tcy case, and e are not in 0anGru#tcy CourtL. "eyva and .asillas
have no #ut that argument to bed. If a )ederal 0anGru#tcy decision is good enough
for the Su#reme Court of Nevada in to se#arate o#inions, it should be good enough
for any state court.
JUDGMENT 9=
+ttorney (isconduct (ay Su##ort Setting +side the &rder, )or a -ood )aith
0asis for Changing the "a (ay +uger Toard 'olding &##osing CounselHs )ailur
to Withdra the (otion for Summary Judgment or &therise +lert the Court as to
the "iGely $ffect of /ery .ro@imate Time *elease of to (andatory and Controlling
Nevada Su#reme Court %ecisions Issued &ne WeeG 0efore This CourtHs &rder (ay
*ise to .ositive (isconduct -iven the .rimacy of the Sub!ect (atter of This
"itigation to these, +t That Time, .ro Se "itigants.
In Staschel v. Weaver 0rothers, "td., 6< Nev. ==6, ?== ..:d =1< B16<:E,
the Nevada Su#reme Court held that attorney neglect amounting to misconduct is not
#ro#erly im#uted to the client in determining hether a default !udgment should be
set aside. BOTo characteriJe Sthe attorneyHsT failure to re#resent his client as
Hine@cusable neglectH ould be charitable but hardly candid. 'is dereliction of the
#rofessional obligations oed a##ellant constituted actual misconduct.OE. See
generally, S. 0ernstein, +nnotation, +ttorneyHs Inaction as $@cuse for )ailure to
Timely .rosecute +ction, 1= +.".*.9d ?87 B16?<E. California acGnoledged this
#roblem in the 16?>s, and concluded that inaction and sloth by an attorney should not
be grounds for a circuit court to inflict suffering u#on an innocent client of the
attorney, by dismissing the clientHs case. In %avey v. County of 0utte, ::8
Cal.+##.:d 9<>, 9< Cal.*#tr. ?69 B16?7E, an intermediate court of a##eals e@amined
a situation here the %efendantHs layer filed a lasuit, and then dadled for nearly
to years, only s#oradically doing discovery or filing #leadings. When the
%efendantHs layer failed to sho u# for several scheduled court hearings, the circuit
court dismissed the %efendantHs com#laint due to inactivity. The court recogniJed the
general rule - similar to that in this State that the Ogeneral doctrine charges the client
ith the neglect of his attorney but gives him redress against the latter.O ::8
JUDGMENT 9?
Cal.+##.:d at 961, 9< Cal. *#tr. at 8>>. 'oever, the court ent on to alter this
harsh rule, holding that Othere are e@ce#tional cases in hich the client, relativel free
from #ersonal neglect, ill be relieved of a default or dismissal attributable to the
inaction or #rocrastination of his counsel. O Id. The court found that the %efendantHs
attorneyHs neglect as ine@cusable and e@treme, amounting to #ositive misconduct.
SThe attorneyHsT consistent and long continued inaction as so visibly and inevitably
disastrous, that his client as effectually and unGnoingly de#rived of
re#resentation. 0y his refusal to get on ith the lasuit or get out of it, Sthe
%efendantHs SattorneyT inflicted severe damage on his clientHs case. She had legal
re#resentation only in a nominal and technical sense.
Under these unusual circumstances, here the client as unGnoingly
de#rived of effective re#resentation, she ill not be charged ith res#onsibility for
the misconduct of her nominal counsel of record. ::8 Cal.+##.:d at 961-6:, 9<
Cal.*#tr. at 8>>. The court then stated the rule - Gnon as the O#ositive misconductO
rule - that here an attorneyHs inaction rises to a level of active, #ositive misconduct,
the OattorneyHs authority to bind his client does not #ermit him to im#air or destroy
the clientHs cause of action.O ::8 Cal.+##.:d at 961, 9< Cal. *#tr. at 8>>. The
reasoning for such a rule is obvious3 Clients should not be forced to act as haG liGe
in5uisitors of their counsel, sus#icious of every ste# and 5uicG to sitch layers.
The #rofession Gnos no orse headache than the client ho mistrusts their
attorney. The lay litigant enters a tem#le of mysteries hose ceremonies darG,
com#le@ and unfathomable. .retrial #rocedures are cabalistic rituals of the layers
and !udges ho serve as #riests and high #riests. Gnos nothing of their tactical
significance.
JUDGMENT 98
'e Gnos only that his case remains in limbo hile the #riests and high
#riests chant their lengthy an arcane #retrial rites. 'e does Gno this much3 that
several years fre5uently ela#se beteen the commencement and trial of lasuits.
Since the la im#ose this state of #uJJled #atience on the litigant, it should #ermit
him to si bacG in #eace and confidence ithout sus#icious in5uiries and incessant
checGing on counsel. ::8 Cal.+##.:d at 961-6:, 9< Cal.*#tr. at 8>>-8>1. The
California Su#reme Court ado#ted the #ositive misconduct rule stated in %aYey in
CarroYY v. +bbott "aboratories, Inc., ?=7 ..:d 88= B16<:E. The court stated the
general rule that a client is charged ith the neglect of his counsel, and that the
clientHs usual redress for that neglect is an action for mal#ractice. 'oever, an
e@ce#tion to this general rule has develo#ed. $@ce#ted from this rule are those
instances here the attorneyHs neglect is of that e@treme degree amounting to #ositive
misconduct, and the #erson seeGing relief is relatively free from negligence. The
e@ce#tion is #remised u#on the conce#t the attorneyHs conduct, in effect, obliterates
the e@istence of the attorney-client relationshi#, and for this reason his negligence
should not be im#uted to th client. ?=7 ..:d at 88< Bem#hasis in originalE. The court
ent on to state that OStThe issue, therefore, becomes hether counselHs conduct
amounted to H#ositive misconductH by hich %efendant as Heffectually and
unGnoingly de#rived of re#resentation.HO Id.
In accord, "ords v. Neman, ?<< ..:d :6>, :67-6= B(ont. 16<7E Bholding
that hen case is dismissed due to attorney negligence, Ono great abuse of discretion
need be shon to arrant reversalO because the Ycourt has been hesitant to im#ute
the neglect of an attorney to his clientM and has been loathe to #ermit this neglect to
bar a hearing on the merits.OEM Staschel v. Weaver 0ros. "td., ?== ..:d =1<, =16
BNev. 16<:E BOTo characteriJe Sthe attorneyHsT failure to re#resent his client as
JUDGMENT 9<
Hine@cusable neglectH ould be charitable but hardly candid. 'is dereliction of the
#rofessional obligations oed a##ellant constituted actual misconduct.OE. See
generally, S. 0ernstein, +nnotation, +ttorneyHs Inaction as $@cuse for )ailure to
Timely .rosecute +ction, 1= +.".*.9d ?87 B16?<E. BJames (iYton Covington and
JeraYdine I. Covington v. (ichael John Smith, Walter "ee )orbis, *yder TrucG
*ental, Inc. and %.T.). TrucGing, Inc. BCase 9>897, Su#. Ct of +##eals, West
/irginia July, 11, :>>9E . order andFor !udgement that as clearly erroneous and
contrary to la on the ?>BbE motion hich .laintiffs submitted to this court to set
aside !udgement andFor order of the ?>BbE motion for e@cusable neglect #redicated on
multi#le medical issues and the #recedent setting case of .ioneer Investment Services
v. 0runsicG +ssociates "imited .artnershi# et.al. =>8 U.S. 9<>3 119 S.Ct. 17<6M
1:9 ". $d :d 87M1669 U.S. "$DIS :7>:M ?1 U.S.".W. 7:?9M := )ed *.Serv. 9d
BCallaghanE 7>1M 0anGr. ". *e#. BCC'E .8=, 1=8+M :< Collier 0anGr.Cas. :d B(0E
:?8M:7 0anGr Ct %ec.?9M 69 Cal %aily &# Service :>6?M 69 %+* 98>=M 8 )"+ ".
WeeGly )ed. S 1>1.
The #articular facts and circumstances of the Car#entierHs case deserve closer
consternation, #articularly in light of the fact that "eyva and .asilla actually ere
issued #rior to this CourtHs July 1=, :>11 &rder granting Summary Judgment, the
manifest in!ustice that results from leaving the &rder as it is and alloing the
TrusteeHs Sale to go forard. )urther, .ursuant to N*S 1>8.><>, the re5uisite
statutory :> days notice is, on its face, not #resent in the notice to the Car#entiers.
)urther, the assignments have arguably not been #roduced or attested to in the
manner re5uired by la, and the bald face arrogance of the lenderHs and trusteeHs
street level em#loyees in telling the Car#entierHs that, basically, they are in a fight
ith a big ugly bully and its Kour ord against yoursL one little #uny #athetic so to be
no longer homeoners.
C+*.$NTI$* received a Notice of Sale indicating that their lender
ould sel1 their home at auction on &ctober :1, :>11, folloing their default in their
JUDGMENT 96
mortgage #ayments. The home remains occu#ied by the title oner. The Notice of
Sale did not give Joni or James Car#entier the re5uisite notice of the date of the
foreclosure sale. .ursuant to N*S 1>8.><>, the foreclosure trustee must record a
Notice of Sale and give notice of the time and #lace of the sale by B1E #ersonally
serving or mailing the notice by registered or certified mail to homeoner and others
Oentitled to noticeOM B:E #osting the notice in a #ublic #lace here the #ro#erty is
located for :> successive daysM B9E #ublishing a co#y of the notice 9 times Bonce a
eeG for three eeGsEM +N% B7E #osting the notice on the #ro#erty 1= days before the
sale date. The Notice of Sale as recorded on &ctober 9 ith a sale date of &ctober
:1. This is only an 1< day notice #eriod. This fails to com#ly ith at least section B:E
above, and #erha#s section B7E should they fail to #ost the notice on the #ro#erty on
or before &ctober ?, de#ending u#on hether section B7E re5uires that action to occur
ithin 6> days or to occur only after the #assing of 6> days.
The substitution of Iuality "oan Servicing as the foreclosure trustee as
not recorded. Under the %eed of Trust *ecorded on +#ril 1<, :>>=, Windsor
(anagement Co. as named as the Trustee. No document could be found ith the
*ecorderHs &ffice indicating any entity substituted Iuality "oan Servicing as the
foreclosure trustee under the %eed of Trust.
%efendantHs have substantially de#arted from the notice, manner of service, and
#rocess re5uirements of various la, including, but not limited to N*S 1>8.><>.
When in5uiry as made ith %efendantHs as to the basis, reasoning, and !ustifications
for the de#artures, .laintiffHs ere told that Kits your ord against oursL and
otherise res#onded to in a hostile, aggressive, and dece#tive manner. (ore
discovery is in order in this regard. This #leading is further filed ith an eye toards
asserting a N*C. =6 basis for challenging the July 1=, :>11 order Bsomeho a
tolling argument ill need to be made to overcome the 1> day re5uirement for such a
motion, and the same could be said for maGing a (otion for *econsideration here
more than :> days have #ast since.
JUDGMENT 7>
Co&1%0s"o&
W'$*$)&*$, .laintiffs res#ectfully re5uest this Court order as follos3
1. )or damages in e@cess of 21>,>>>M
:. )or treble damagesM and any sanctions a##ro#riate under any a##licable la,
including the to recent Nevada Su#reme Court decisions of July 8, :>11, .assila and
"eyva.
9. )or tem#orary restraining order, #reliminary in!unction and #ermanent in!unction
barring foreclosure of the %eed of Trust recorded in favor of %efendant ++($S and any
successor in interest.
7. )or tem#orary restraining order, #reliminary in!unction and #ermanent in!unction
barring the contem#lated and scheduled TrusteeHs Sale set for &ctober :1, :>11.
=. )or costs of suit herein incurredM and for attorneys feeM
?. )or such other and further relief as this court may deem #ro#er, including attorneyHs
fees involved in #re#aring this filing.
AFFIRMATION P0rs0a&) )o NRS +I-.,I,
%+T$% this 91
th
day of %ecember, :>113
FsF 4ach Coughlin
4ach Coughlin, $s5.
+ttorney for .laintiffs Joni and James Car#entier
JUDGMENT 71
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, 4ach Coughlin, declare, that on %ecember 91st, :>11, I caused the forgoing
to be deliver to all named %efendantHs in this action, by electronic filing to3
Cristin +. Schuler-'intJ, $s5.
Christo#er 'unter, $s5.
(cCarthy Z 'olthus, "".
6=1> W. Sahara +ve., Suite 11>
"as /egas , N/ <6118
.hone3 8>:-?<=->9:6
)a@3 <??-996-=?61
GhintJAmccarthyholthus.com
+tty for %$)THS *$SI%$NTI+" C*$%IT S&"UTI&NS INC, +N% IU+"IT,
"&+N S$*/IC$ C&*.&*+TI&NHS
+nd via delivering to their attorneyHs of record by efiling Bif he is an efilerE, fa@,
email and de#ositing a true and correct co#y of this document in the US mail on this
date addressed to3
$ric 0. 4imbelman, $s5.
.eel 0rimley, "".
:>17 $. (adison, Suite 1>>
Seattle , W+ 6<1::
.hone3 :>?-88>-9996
)a@3 :>?-88>-976>
eJimbelmanA#eelbrimley.com
+tty for %$)THSWIN%S&* (+N+-$($TN C&. +N% +CC*$%IT$%
'&($ "$N%$*S, INC. +S SUCC$SS&* IN INT$*$ST T& ++($S )UN%IN-
C&*.&*+TI&N %0+ ++($S '&($ "&+N
%+T$% this 91
th
day of %ecember, :>113
FsF 4ach Coughlin
4ach Coughlin, $s5.
+ttorney for .laintiffs Joni and James Car#entier
JUDGMENT 7:
INDEL TO ELHI.ITSC
1. $D'I0IT 13 )&*$C"&SU*$ %$)$NS$ '+N%0&&C. &ne hundred and
fifteen #ages B11= .+-$SE.
:. $D'I0IT :3 C&""$CTI&N &) (+T$*I+"S )*&( W+S'&$ C&UNT,
+CC$SS&*SF*$C&*%$*S &N"IN$ %&CU($NT +CC$SS W$0SIT$
*$"+T$% T& T'$ .*&.$*T, +T ISSU$ IN T'IS C+S$. Tenty eight
#ages B:< .+-$SE.
9. $@hibit 93 s#eaGs to some of the enormous obstacles the undersigned has faced
in litigating this matter, including the e@tremely bad faith conduct of the
o##osing attorneyHs and landlord in the Summary $viction from the
undersignedHs commercial tenancy, his home la office in *JC *ev:>11-
>>18><., includes Judge SferraJJaHs 1:F:1F11 &rder ruling on the (otion to
Contest .ersonal .ro#erty "ien, and the 1:F:?F11 (otion to Set +side that
&rder, etc.3 forty one #ages B71 #agesE.
JUDGMENT 79
EXHIBIT 1
F I L E D
Electronically
12-31-2011:04:45:40 PM
Craig Franden
Clerk of the Court
THE FORECLOSURE
DEFENSE HANDBOOK
An EASY to Understand Guide
to
Saving Your Home From Foreclosure.
Written in Layman's Language
Vince Khan
Consumer Defense Programs
What Others Have Said About This Book
In my opinion, the foreclosure defense guidebook by Vince Kahn is a monumental
directive for removing and smotheri ng the lending institutions and Wall Street evi
doers who have taken advantage of the American homeowner.
C. L. Ray, Justice (ret), Supreme Court of Texas
Before you feel sorry for yourself for one more moment, before you rationalize
how it's your fault and all of that - you need to know you were manipulated - all
of Amen" ca was manipulated - you were taken advantage of and you didn't even
understand how or why. It's time to end that ignorance in your life.
David Nelson
This book is a MUST HA VE for anyone who purchased or re-fed their home since
1999 and are curent on Iheir payments, those who are investing in foreclosed properies,
those who are attempting a Joan modifcation, those who are facing foreclosure and
those who've already had their home foreclosed upon. The tools you'll lear have been
and are being used successfully. You only have power against such large Banksters
when you know your rights and know how to enfore them.
Wy be a Bankster victim when you can be a Bankster victor with Vince Khan's book
and resources?
J Brce
We might be David, and the banks might be GOliath, but Kahn has given us some
very big rcks.
Dennis P
We are very happy to have a guide book to have as a reference to this subject. It
I have purchased other books on Foreclosure (all more expensive) but none have
been as good as "Foreclosure Defense Guidebook. " Well researched, wel wri tten
and actually useful. I would say this is the best book of its kind. Easily understood,
it lets you know what the bank's are doing and how you can fght back. I you are
searching for a book on foreclosure, this is the book to buy.
Judy
www.consumerdefenseprograms.com
2
Vince's book changed my lifel!!!
Mike Waters
Get the book. READ IT. Read i AGAIN. The pieces wil come together and
make sense.
Randy Frodsham
I couldn't stop reading. What a wonderul resoure that is an easy read & easy
I can't recommend this book enough. I have been studying this subject for two
years now and have found that Vince Khan's book is a godsend. Understanding
the truth behind the foreclosure mess and securiization is extremely complicated
and not for the faint of heart! However this book was the first, and only, one that
put it all into perspective for me and explained things, frankly, in simple terms.
you are battling to save your home frm foreclosure, this book is a 'must rad. ' I
you simply believe that anyone who is in foreclosure is a 'deadbeat' who deserves
to lose their home, I also implor you to rad this book. Your eyes will be opened
as you will come to understand that it is the 'lender' (or 'retender lenders' as they
are accurately referred to) who are illegally seizing these houses from the homeowners.
A Menjivar
3
Read Me First
This ebook is a culmination of thousands of hours of research by our team.
We've read hundreds of articles and interviewed countless people and industry
experts to compile this book. This is a very complicated web of deceit that the
banking industry would rather not have you know about. . . because if you did,
you'd be mad as hell.
You have the right to be mad. You've been conned, This is one of the largest
frauds perpetrated in the history of mankind.
This is why we decided to write this book and share our discovery with you so
you can understand what is going on. Information is power. We want you to be
informed.
You have no rights unless you know what your rights are. Education gives you
power.
By all rights, we should be charging for this research. But because we want to
share this information with as many people as possible, we decided to take a
different approach.
The American people have the ri ght to know that they have been lied to.
This is why we are making this ebook available free of charge. However, we
have a condition.
This is an honor bound contract.
If you find that the information contained in this book is worth sharing, you are
honor bound to share this book with at least 3 other people.
This is the cost of admission.
DO NOT PROCEED WITH THIS BOOK IF YOU
DO NOT AGREE TO THESE TERMS.
Seriously. stop. Only proceed if you agree.
Your word is your bond. Live in honor.
By the way, you can also buy this book in paperback on Amazon,com. Look
for "Foreclosure Defense Guidebook" ISBN: 978-1456470067. It might be easier
www. consumerdefenseprograms.com
4
to read than to carry around than 100+ loose pages. It is also available on the
Kindle.
wl.consumerdefenseproqrams.com
5
wlNW.consumerdefenseprograms.com
Warning: This Book is Out of Date
The law is constantly changing. Information is fluid. We are constantly updating
this book as new processes, new laws, and new research are discovered.
Chances are, the copy you have may be out of date.
To make sure you have the latest copy of our book, please come to our site:
w.consumerdefenseprograms.com
Disclaimer <- IMPORTANT
This is purely for educational and entertainment purposes. Nothing in this book is
to be taken as giving legal advice or practicing law. We are not attorneys. You
are advised to consult competent legal counsel. Your reliance on the information
presented within this book is at your own risk.
The authors make no warrantees, assurances or claims to the legitimacy,
accuracy or completeness of the information contained within this work, explicit
or implied. This is information that we want to present to you for your
consideration. It is the result of thousands of hours of research and interviews
with industry expers. We believe the information is accurate to the best of our
knowledge.
Seriously, this is not your standard disclaimer, Don't believe a word we
say. Do your own research and discover your own truth.
Copyright Notice
This book is copyrighted with all rights reserved. The book may be freely
distributed unaltered but its content cannot be used, reprinted, or republished
without the express permission of the publisher, Consumer Defense Programs
LLC. Email info@consumerdefenseprograms.com.
Permission is granted for printing for the purpose of non-commercial personal
use.
www.consumerdefenseprograms.com 6
Help, I am Facing Foreclosure.
Knock, knock, came the noise from the front door. I gingerly opened the door to
find my postman handing me an envelope requiring my signature. It was for
certified mail.
It was a Notice of Default from my servicer. It felt as if someone had physically
punched me in the gut and I felt like vomiting. Intellectually, I knew this moment
would arrive, but yet I cannot help the way I feel .
I couldn't even get myself to finish reading the rest of the document before I
tossed it on my desk and crawled into bed and cried.
As a grown man, I cannot recall when the last time I cried. I've been conditioned
to "be a man" and not to break under pressure. But despite it all, I cried.
Somehow, I wish that someone would come and tell me everything is going to be
OK, just like my mother did when I was a little boy. Unfortunately, nobody could.
Because nobody understands what I am going through. It's hard to "keep it
together" when your whole world is falling apar around you.
My name is Vince Khan. This is my stor.
I made a lot of money around 2002-2004. I made enough money to retire for the
rest of my life. With that money, I invested in a number of properties, partly as a
way to park my money, and partly as a way to make a little money investing in
real estate.
In 2009 I started another business that required a lot of startup capital. Things
didn't turn out as I had planned. I had invested all my money into the venture, but
it was not enough. I needed more money. In 2010, I made a decision to stop
paying the mortgage for 4 of my investment properties to feed my new start up, in
the hopes that eventually, my startup would turn around and I would then have
enough money to pay back the bank.
I was wrong. My startup failed and I lost everthing and was heavily in debt to
boot.
So, like millions of people around the country, I was faCing foreclosure.
Two months after I stopped making payments, I started looking at my options.
could either do a short sale (meaning I could sell the property for what is owed)
or just hold onto the properties for as long as possible before they foreclose on
me. Or I could put up a fight.
7
I chose to fight.
To be honest, I was just as ignorant as everyone else who was going through a
default. I borrowed the money. Now, for one reason or another, I couldn't pay.
So, I was led to believe that the bank was entitled to foreclose on my houses and
repossess them.
I was wrong.
It was at that time that I started learning about bank fraud. At first, I was
skeptical, but I kept an open mind. As I dug deeper into this issue, it became
clear that there was more than meets the eye. In fact, I discovered that banks
have sold mortgages to Wall Street as "mortgage backed securities" (MBS). At
first, I did not know what that meant. My thoughts were, "So what?"
As I studied this issue deeper, I came to realize that banks were actually
committing some ver clever schemes to steal people's homes without the
proper "standing" to do so.
You see, once a bank has sold a promissory note as an MBS, it no longer owns
the note. And if it does not own the note, it does not have the right (or standing)
to foreclose.
But they do this every single day, because they rely on our ignorance. They rely
on your ignorance. They rely on the judge's ignorance and they even rely on their
own lawyer's ignorance to pul l this scheme off.
On one side, we have a growing population of people living in tent cities without
running water, without toilets or other things you and I take for granted.
At the other end of the spectrum, we have bank executives getting multi-million
dollar bonuses for how quickly they can foreclose people's homes (without
having any actual legal authority to do so).
Not only that, these bank executives have received TRILLIONS of taxpayer
money from TARP (the Troubled Asset Relief Program) to pretty much do with as
they see fit. You know, buy up smaller banks, buy executive jets, go to the
Bahamas for exotic retreats and other wonderful ways to spend the handouts
from our government.
This got me mad.
But most frustrating of all, I discovered that as a homeowner, my choices were
very limited.
V.consumerdefenseprograms.com
8
Firstly, even if I took the time to learn about this fraud, so what? What does this
have to do with saving my houses from foreclosure? I am not a lawyer. I am too
poor to afford one, and even if I had $25,000 to retain one, there was no
assurance of success.
Secondly, I don't know enough about the law to put up a viable defense. I ' m just
your average computer geek. I don't know anything about the law. I don't have
the time or the mental energy to learn to be a lawyer to put up a defense.
Thirdly, there was very limited information available for homeowners to learn
about this stuff. Even if one has the time, it would take a full time occupation to
figure all this stuff out at the best of times (i.e., when one is not suffering from
crippling depression because one's world is falling apart).
Fourthly, very few attorneys even know about this stuff. There wasn't really
anyone I could ask to learn this information.
The odds were just stacked against me.
Faced with insurmountable adversity, I was faced with a decision; to give up or to
go down fighting.
My father told me a story about how Japan won so many battles in Asia (they
took over almost all of Asia before America dropped the bombs). He said that
unlike other armies, the Japanese doctrine was "death before dishonor." The
concept of surrender or retreat was the lowest form of shame for a Japanese
soldier. When they landed their troops into a battle, the Japanese would tell their
soldiers that the only way they would go home was to either win, or return in a
body bag. There was no retreat. As a result, the Japanese soldiers fought like
their lives depended on it, because they literally did.
For me, this was the doctrine in which I lived my life. I either succeed in what I
do, or I die trying. As Master Yoda said in The Empire Strikes Back, "Do or do
not, there is no try."
So, study I did.
I committed to dOing whatever it took to put up a fight and win.
I started to challenge the bank using the processes outlined in this book, and to
cut a long story short, I managed to compel the bank to issue a Rescission of the
Notice of Default on my property.
9
AFERFLCCPD- z1..l''ri
' FIEUTr.TI0P \ 'E!N~NC5
Qt.WA:Y1L*
Q Q @I ,zItT
EUCENc.TF`-1+'
tJ`vH\ > J^T:YN
VO\JH`^ UIWA\' S\ -JS
1'1l "'II! \.C\9.0o
\>`~ 1
I:" t
0.s o H 1 Qy {1r
"" 'V!Y m0S qQ g @g@
lJ!l
-k Pf B4 u Ua <m m d :n W ; ^7KOL -> ".. g,
WFL8- L G L.kO` CU!PASY 4 W M MTCA0 tLLC|Y0!0CREGI:IRAJ10N
S:nU:b 1L Y *`tCI3Q, AM
0 + O
-tGrV.%ln
odv< ~ I RP2 cIns i:l . t,

:<t:v . .\vutJI>CU.RlItJ1;rt#nj>+vr|C 1i 1
l^ 1^ th1.1|1|O< SJ' "FD\ `NOR!tI: X
!A!.OLt1YtUGO`!I.' nLLLhJ>,1M W
!AC+
T~O T gt t lcuW :J1r +1%M1IM~t u 1 LT TUM>CDV II! '"
M v U MV wS ^ 1 Q1) C
!y =r`s Mm< ^ % P L \|-8>
!Cd Un
7!5, :dHmt1[gto05 CAr. V t 11 n^.:!m >c .|31U !^t:c1 C )Om<
t OLJ' Wt 0Vt6 mW ) I" t 1a\ utoC:t0, 1W 1.1V( `0!N. < #l01I
\'C :^ t m\c lN:\ C0> n IY*|0\, |1, O Cl &' W ^v Wl W!0 f= >bw b
IU u :cc
`v Moc rl0 -n< |~:r<m;&i *|@O.L :cg 1 mu ~J 1m. 3 :v d :
'`<

' U nCUH,31 W4Nm>|lu)Om)3 3< &
MLUW l W 1hlY.4100t1U1W1Axc.Hm~:uman 1W1f'w lt H1
t<g ,!1Dl w>:r:,8\W> t >1W60">Rv7 1><\1^\v:)
cu<c _4 l,|N>M D0!Wl YS^e1 0qmm:yyj +~
Uf>0cvf4 lOU !M0I,CW 8f!1bl woco|qutcmV ^ >,D!>to<o|l\<
+.cdf- m~|MlccuonVItuJ I\CK V3> <C^f1| CM l|251\Kr
` !T*$ \\11F|FUF vcU 0IS1 @0 Tmt:cia = br! I Hml I:| r
cqo . `P$c::W(::rcmm!ijm1H u. ^[ntc|tbdndh .'"V|1! 0 r:v
df?'1Rll/O!0l 'UtJcD:<k
I /0-,
Essentially, this means that the bank cannot foreclose on my house and it is
currently in limbo.
wv.consumerdefenseprograms.com
1 0
As of the time of writing, I am in the process of filing a civil action called a "Quiet
Title Action" to remove the lien on the house. You can read more about the
progress of this on my website at w.consumerdefenseprograms.com.
As I learned more about this subject, it occurred to me that millions of other
people around the world were going through the same problems I was going
through. The biggest issue faced by distressed homeowners was that there was
no easy to understand, easy to follow materials available to the average
homeowner to put up a fight against lender fraud.
With this in mind, I put together a blog to help homeowners. All of a sudden, my
site got bombarded with so many people wanting to know more about what I've
discovered. Everyone started to ask me questions; everyone wanted me to help
them with their situation.
I quickly realized there were a number of problems with this situation.
1 ) I barely have enough headspace to deal with my own problem, let alone
everone who needed help.
2) If I answered people's questions openly, the BAR Association would love
to put a stop to this by accusing me of "practicing law."
3
)
Helping people takes time, and everyone's situation was different. I only
have a limited amount of time in the day. I barely had time to pee, let
alone help other people.
4) Helping people for free full time means I cannot spend that time to make a
living for myself. It is a full time job just to keep up with all the research
and reading to understand the strategies of foreclosure defense.
With these problems in mind, I decided to write this book. My goal is to give
homeowners an easy to understand resource so that they can quickly grasp how
the fraud is being perpetrated. Once they understand the fraud, then I could
teach them how to articulate a viable defense. I've written this book so that
anyone can put together a viable strategy to defend their home from lender fraud
and so they can keep their home for as long as possible.
Unlike other books, this book is written in a conversational tone using lots of
stories and analogies so everyone can understand. I believe that often "less is
more" when it comes to information. While other books are hundreds of pages
long, this book by comparison is rather small. Too much information leads to
feeling overwhelmed and "paralysis by analysis". My goal is to make this
handbook be a practical guide with real practical steps you can do right now
to save your home, yet be easy enough to digest in one evening's reading.
www.consumerdefenseprograms.com JJ
Please keep in mind, this is a scheme created by the brightest minds in the
banking industry. This is something banks don't want the public to know. They
have gone to great lengths to make sure people like you don't know about their
schemes. Court cases have been settled with gag order conditions on a regular
basis. I n one instance, an expert witness I've interviewed had his life threatened
by banksters for the information he knows.
The information presented in this book is highly controversial. ltruly believe that
lam writing this book at great risk to my own personal safety. Thanks to the
power of the Internet, my hope is that once this book is in the hands of enough
people, banks will not feel the need to "silence me."
I've always been inspired by the story of Jesus. In paricular, his bravery for
doing what's right in the face of overwhelming adversity. Jesus was arrested for
talking against the rabbis and was condemned to death. His jailer knew that
Jesus was a good man and did not want to see him dead. The jailer deliberately
left Jesus' jail door open and made arrangements for Jesus to easily escape.
Instead of running away, Jesus stayed in his cell and ended up dying on the
Cross.
This is true bravery.
While I don't want to be a maryr, I do feel strongly about helping homeowners
despite the dangers to myself.
If you are facing foreclosure and want an easy to read, and easy to understand
guide to help you stay in your home, then this book is for you. Too often, one has
to wade through thousands and thousands of pages of information to get a basic
understanding of what's going on. This type of information is often written in
legalese (by lawyers for lawyers) and is laden with double talk jargon that it is
hard for the average person to comprehend.
I hope you will join me in standing up against injustice and bank corruption. And if
this book makes a difference in your life, please "pay it forward." Please tell
others about il.
Vince Khan
www.consumerdefenseprograms.com 1 2
Table of Contents
What ()thcrs Hilve Said About This Book , ................ , ..................... " .... ,. ........... ,,,, ........... 2
Read Me Fi rst. ......" ... ""'""." ........." ...".,,............"',............ ,.", .. , .........", ...., .................. , ........... 4
Help, J U1 Fadng Foreclosure . .........", ................................................................................. 7
TabJe of (outenls ......" ...................... " ................................................................................... 13
Understanding the Securitization Process ................................................................... 15
Background and Introduction ........................................................................................................ 15
Incentive and Motivation of Securitization ............................................................................................17
The Game of Greed ....................................................................................................................... 18
Stage 1: The Pooling and Servicing Agreement Process ............................................................... 19
Stage 2: The Changing of the State of the Negotiable Instrument ............. ........... ......... .............. 20
Stage 3: Real Parties of Interest ................................. . ... ............. .. . ......................... ...................... 21
REMIC, Investors and Shareholders Explained .............................................................................. 23
The Repurchase Agreement ....................... .............................. . ......................... .......................... 25
Writing Off a Bad Debt ..... ................. ................... .. ........... ..................................... .......... ............. 27
But Can They Foreclose? ...... ................................................... ...................................................... 29
Conclusion ........................................... ......................................................... ................................. 30
The Bubble Burst oIZU08-2009........................... ............................................................ 32
Bank Fraud Exposed ...................................,,. .............. , ...................................... ." ............... 35
Give Me a Free iPod ............. ........................................................................................................ 36
The Great Pretender lender Switch ..................................................... ......... .. .................... .......... 38
You Cannot Make Carrots from Carrot Juice ................................................................................. 39
loan Mods are a Scam ................................................................................................................... 42
Lcga^rgumen!s............................................................................... , ................................... , 44
Beyond "Show Me the Note" ............................... .................................. ... . .. ....................... .......... 46
The Deed of Trust and Mortgage .................................................................................................. 47
Bifurcation ....................................... ..... . ............................. ........................................................... 47
Violation of Applicable State law .................................................................................................. 49
Perfection of Chain of Title ............................................................................................................ 50
Who or What is MERS? ................................................................................................................. 52
The Issue of a Defective Instrument .............................................................................................. 54
Robo-Signers and Document Fabrication ...................................................................................... 55
Illegal Trustee Argument ................. ........................................... . .... ... ... . .. . .................................... 57
The Reconveyance Argument ........................................................................................................ 58
The Fair Debt Collections Practices Act ............................................... .............. ............................ 60
The Debt Validation letter ............................................................................................................ 62
\hat About My Debt Obligations'! ................., ............... " ................................................ 65
Heads I Win, Tails I Win ........................ .......................................... .. ............................................. 65
Being Paid Not Once, But At least 3 Times .................................. ................................................. 66
The Bloody Road Al:ea...................................................................................................... 68
The Collapse of the Banking Industry? ............................... ... ................ ........................................ 69
Free lunch for Homeowners? ..................................................... ... . .............................................. 69
w .consumerdefenseprograms.com Jo
Opportunity for Peace ................................................................................................................... 71
I hope that by awakening more and more homeowners and people in the legal profession of the
extent of loan fraud that our banking friends might decide to come clean . ................................ 71
What Ar'e My Options? ................................................................. ....... " ............................... 72
Do Your Own Research .................................................................................................................. 73
Suing Your Lender .......................................................................................................................... 73
Communicating With Your lender ................................................................................................ 75
Getting a Securitization Audit ....................................................................................................... 77
learning the Rules of Court ........................................................................................................... 78
How to Deal with I lawyers .................................................................................................... 78
00 It Yourself ............................................................................................................................... .. 82
Help, My House is Up for Sale Next Week! ................................................................................... 84
The Bankruptcy Automatic Stay Method ...................................................................................... 85
I'm Not tn Default yet .................................................................................................................... 94
Start local Groups ......................................................................................................................... 95
Taking On The Fight ....................................................................................................................... 96
Please Spread the News ................................................................................................ ................ 97
Appendix ................................................................................................................................... 98
Appendix A: CFR Title 12: Banks and Banking ............................................................................... 99
Appendix B: Dissecting a Fraud in Action .................................................................. .................. 101
Appendix (; Homeowner Wins: Case law Successes .................................................................. 104
Appendix L. Fair Debt Collections Practices Act Debt Validation letter .................................. 112
Reconlmtnded Products ................................................................, ............. , .................... 114
Jurisdictionary ............................................................................................................................. 114
Affordable Securitization Audits ................................................................................................. 115
Bankruptcy Preparation Service .................................................................................................. 116
ww .consumerdefenseprograms.com
1 4
Understanding the Securitization Process
You are facing foreclosure. You don't have a lot of money or a lot of time and you
can't afford to hire a lawyer. And even if you could afford one, it is very hard to
find a lawyer who knows enough about bank fraud to help you.
This is where we begin our journey_ Before we delve into the nuts and bolts
about your options, we first need to understand how the fraud is being
committed. Once we expose the fraud, then you will know how to articulate a
viable defense. That's why we start this chapter by diving into the securitization
process and what it means. It is fundamental in exposing the fraud.
To fully comprehend the arcane wizardry and myth that encompasses the
securitization process in relation to the right to enforce a negotiable instrument (a
promissory note), this chapter is designed to support the legal argument behind
who is the real and beneficial pary in interest.
Background and Introduction
In 1933, the Glass-Steagall Act was enacted to regulate the FDIC and banking.
Specifically, it governed the protection of depositors' monies so that banks were
not allowed to gamble with the money in their safekeeping. This means banks
could not trade their assets on Wall Street.
In 1999, the Glass-Steagall Act was repealed and another bill was introduced;
known as Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. This effectively allowed banks to package
and securitize their loans onto Wall Street.
This means that suddenly the trillions of dollars from Wall Street could be used to
fund loans. ( This is a good thing.) This means that more loans were available to
more people.
w .consumerdefenseprograms.com
15
This means that Retirement Funds, Hedge Funds, and all sorts of institutional
investors had a "safe" place to park their money . . . these safe places would come
to be known as mortgage backed securities (MBS). ( This is also a good thing.)
These institutions demanded banks make these mortgage backed securities
packages available to them. These institutions relied on the following:
1) The bank's banking license
2) The bank's undelWriting process
o] The bank's collections infrastructure
( This is a good thing.)
Things stared to break down when banks realized that since they are not
required to be left holding the bag at the end of the day, they could simply
underwrite any old loan from any idiot who can sign their name to paper. Banks
decided to change their undelWriting guidelines around 2001-2002 (Bush era).
(This is where things started to go downhil.)
This means any McDonald's burger flipper could go down to the bank and get a
loan for 11,UUU,UUU with "no money down." (No ofense to those working in the
fast food industry.) These were commonly known as lar loans in the mortgage
industries. This is great for low income earners as long as the housing market is
in a boom growth curve. This gets really bad in a housing bubble where the price
of housing is way beyond the affordability index of most households' median
income.
ww.consumerdefenseprograms.com
16
Incentive and Motivation of Securitization
When a bank lends you money, they traditionally get 2. 5 times the face value of
the loan over 30 years. Not bad, considering that they did not use a single red
cent of their own money. It is al l digitally created through the Federal Reserve
System (read Moder Money Mechanics published by the Federal Reserve).
For example, if you borrowed $100,000 . . . over 30 yrs, you will have paid around
$350,000 to the bank. Look at the Truth in Lending disclosure statement from
your loan documents.
Because of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, banks are now able to sell mortgage
backed securities. Some bright people at Goldman-Sachs and others in the
financial industry came to the conclusion that they could make even more money
if they could sell loans on Wall Street, and so they did.
This book is the story of what happened.
Instead of making 2. 5 times over 30 years from money they did not put up, banks
decided they could make up to 1.5 times the face value of the toan
immediately. Just package these loans and sell them on Wall Street. As the
market grew, they not only made money from the sale . . . but also from the
appreciation of the stock (they are allowed to hold up to 1 0% of the security to
qualify as a sale under Financial Accounting Standards).
The Game of Greed
Under the Fractional Reserve
System, a bank can lend up
to 9 times the face value of
their depositors'
cash reserves.
money or
Instead of receiving 2. 5 times
over 30 years for a loan,
banks suddenly realized that
Fractional Reserve Banking Explained
Under the guidelines of the Federal Reserve,
a bank can lend up to 9 times the amount of
their depositors' money. In other words, if you
deposit $1 into your bank . . . they can lend up
to $9 out. Currently, in the US, the reserve
ratio is 10: 1 or 10%.
they could make even more money if they sold the loan and received the CASH
NOW.
So, from that $100,000 loan, they receive $150,000 cash. This is treated as a
deposit, which means they can now lend out $1 . 35 million (9 times $150,000).
And do it again, and again. Lather, rinse and repeat. (This is really good for the
bank. This is really good for borrowers as there is a sudden glut of unlimited
money to borrow from. This is really bad for the economy in the long rn, as we
will see.)
If you study basic Economics 101 in high school, you will know that if you have
too much money chasing limited goods, it leads to an increase in prices. Well,
this is exactly what happened.
The banks threw their underriting guidelines out the window. They had what's
called a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that the loans were properly
underwritten. This means that they were supposed to make sure loans they
underwrote are backed by people who could actually afford to pay it back.
Instead, they just ignored these underriting guidelines in the name of greed.
The banks knew that these loans were destined for Wall Street, and that they
were not going to keep the loans . . . so it suddenly became a game of hot potato,
as "it became someone else's problem."
They basically stuck it to Wall Street.
This means they stuck it to your retirement fund, your stock portfolio and your life
insurance portfolio.
It was the perfect set up for the biggest financial meltdown in the history of
mankind. It was the perect storm.
Before we go into the financial meltdown of 2008-2009, let's talk about the
Securitization process and how it relates to your loan and bank fraud.
w.consumerdefenseprograms.com 1 8
*
Stagel
Stage 2:
State of
Negotiable
Instrument
Stage 3:
IRS Tax Code
Obligations
Real JnefCial
Holders
i
UNDERSTANDING SECURITIZTION
Right to Foreclose
~ -=~ *~
Traded on Wall St.
^
W
Stage J. The Pooling and Servicing Agreement Process

Once a loan is closed, it quickly gets put into a Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
This is then registered on the SEC as a REMIC Trust. REMIC stands for Real
Estate Morgage Investment Conduit. It is known as a Special Purpose Vehicle
for the purpose of tax exemption purposes. I will explain why this is important in
Stage 3.
They appoint a master sericer of the REMIC and a Trustee to manage the Trust.
Normally, the Trustee of the Trust has the power and responsibility to administer
the assets of the Trust.
For example, back in the Feudal Lord days, these Lords would create Trusts to
put their assets (such as their land, their cast/e, and so on) into. In the event
something happened to the Lord, the Trustee had the power to manage the
estateltrust.
However, in the case of a REMIC, the Trustee does not have the power to
manage Ihe assets of the Trust. We will discuss in Stage 3 how this is different.
ww.consumerdefenseprograms.com 19
Once this REMIC is formed, it then gets converted into a security that is traded
on Wall Street. This will make more sense later when I explain the relationship
between an investor, a shareholder and a REMIC.
Stage Z. The Changing of the State of the Negotiable Instrument
Imagine your loan is a carrot. It gets thrown with thousands of other carrots in a
giant juicing machine called a REMIC. At the end of
the process, you get gallons and gallons of carrot
juice. This juice is then sold to hundreds of people.
This is what happens to your loan when it gets
securitized. Your loan is now owned by thousands
of shareholders all over the world.
Furthermore, the state of the loan is changed. Your
loan has been converted into a stock.
This is REALLY, REALLY important. Please spend a moment to understand
this. Re-read this section several times if you need to.
Your loan is no more. It is now and forever a stock.
In other words, you cannot make a carrot from carrot juice. What's done can
never be undone.
Once a loan has been securitized, it forever loses its security (i. e. , the Deed of
Trust, or the ability for the bank to foreclose on your house). This will be
explained in Stage 3.
This is why I say that over 85% of foreclosures are done fraudulently.
A loan is a negotiable instrument. There are specific laws governing negotiable
instruments called the Uniform Commercial Code. Specifically, the right for a
bank to enforce and foreclose on a property is subject to the claimant being a
real party in interst.
If the loan has been sold, then the bank can no longer claim that they are a real
party in interest.
Not only that, once a loan has been converted into a stock, it is no longer a loan.
If both the loan and the stock exist at the same time, that is known as double
dipping. Double dipping is a form of securities fraud.
A negotiable instrument can only be i n one of two states when it undergoes
securitization, not both at the same time. It can either be a loan (and treated
20
and governed as such) or a stock (and treated and governed as such). Once it is
traded as a stock, it is forever a stock. It is treated as a stock and regulated by
the SEC as a stock.
On your Deed of Trust or Mortgage, it has language that says something like
"This Deed of Trust secures a Promissor Note,"
Listen, when that promissory note got converted into a stock . . . that promissor
note no longer exists.
.
If a Trust was created to secure a promissory note, and that promissory note is
destroyed . . . then that Trust is invalid. The Trust secures nothing.
The Deed of Trust is what your lender uses to give them the right to foreclose on
your house. I f the Deed of Trust is invalid, then the lender loses their right to
foreclose on your home.
Stage Real Parties of I nterest
Let's talk about accounting rules, specifically the rule governing a sale. To
prevent accounting fraud, various governing bodies created Financial Accounting
Standards (FAS). As you know, accounting is a very important area that needs to
be regulated tightly to prevent companies from cooking the books.
Specifically, FAS 140 was created to govern the sale and securitization of a
negotiable instrument. Look it up. Google FAS 140.
One of the things about FAS 140 is the rule governing a sale. A transaction can
only be recognized as a sale if it is sold to a party at arm's length. In other words,
you cannot sell an asset to yourself (this is what Enron did to hide their losses).
Also, it says, (and I am paraphrasing) that once an asset is sold, the seller
forever loses the ability to control the asset.
To illustrate this point, imagine if I were to sell you a brand new laptop. You took
the laptop, and smashed it to a million bits with a sledgehammer. Because I sold
he laptop to you, I have no say whatsoever about what you do with the laptop. It
yours.
This is really important to understand.
Once an asset has been sold, the seller forever loses control of the asset.
What that means is, if your lender sold your loan to a REMIC, then they forever
lose their ability to enforce, control or otherise foreclose on your property. Put
simply, they are no longer the real party in interest. They are just a servicer.
So Who Are the Real and Beneficial Parties in Interest?
Iw.consumerdefenseprograms.com
21
Before we can properly answer this question, we have to discuss IRS tax codes.
You see, the real party in interest has to pay taxes on their earnings.
In other words, if your bank owns your note, they have to pay tax on the interest
earned from that note. If a REMIC owns your note, then the REMIC has a tax
liability.
The Case of Double Taxation
Corporations have known for years
about double taxation. This means, at a
corporate level, at the end of the year
they take all the revenue, and subtract
the expenses; what's left are the profits.
These profits are then taxed.
The corporation also has shareholders.
The corporation typically distributes
dividends to their shareholders. Once the
shareholders receive their dividends, this
is considered to be income to the
shareholders. This is also taxed.
In other words, profts are taxed twice.
To avoid the problem of double
taxation, banks put these loans into
SPVs (special purpose vehicles) so
they don't get taxed on them. This is
covered under Internal Revenue
Code 860.
This way, only the shareholders are
taxed.
This means, only the shareholders
are the real parties in interest.
I n the previous section, I discussed
the powers of the Trustee. Because
of this special IRS rule, the Trustee
is not the real and beneficial party of
interest because the REMIC does
not own the notes, the shareholders
promissory note.
do; therefore they cannot enforce the
In other words, they can't have their cake and eat it, too. They can either accept
double taxation and let the REMIC hold the centralized power, or they can
distribute the tax liabilities to the shareholders, in which case they have also
distributed the parties of interest.
The bank chose to have a distributed party of interest scheme to avoid paying
taxes twice. ( There is nothing wrong with this.)
But now they have a real pickle. If no one entity is a real and beneficial party in
interest, then each and every shareholder of the REMIC is.
So then the question is . . . who has the right to foreclose?
The answer is . . . no one.
If the thousands of shareholders each own a tiny part of your promissory loan,
can any one of them foreclose on your house? No.
22
A promissor note is only enforceable in its whole entirety.
That is the nature of the fraud being perpetrated before the American public and
worldwide.
REMIC, I nvestors and Shareholders Explained
There is a lot of confusion around the concept of securities conversion,
specifically around the various parties involved, such as the investor and the
shareholder.

This chapter explains in greater detail how each of these entities tie in together.
Funds the REMIC
Assets are locked as a permanent

attachment to the REMIC
Become Major
Shareholders
To illustrate the point, let's use another analogy. Let's say I am Steve Jobs in the
1 970's. I come to you asking for $1000 to invest in my little company called
Apple. Part of Apple's assets is the intellectual propery and design of the Apple
computer.
10 years later, we go public. Because you were my initial investor, your initial
shares are now worth a lot of money. We then convert your percentage of
ownership as an investor into publicly tradable stock.
Imagine, however, if immediately after l go public, I create another company and
assign the intellectual property and design of the Apple computer to this new
company. Is that legal?
The answer is no. That's commonly known as bait and switch. You cannot
register one thing with the SEC and market the stock . . . and then after the money
is transferred, switch out the asset.
How this relates to a REMIC is this: there are two pseudo government entities
called Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (these are actually privately owned
companies). These two giants fund or invest in most of the REMICs created for
the purpose of securitization. They are the investors.
Once the REMIC gets convered into stock, Freddie and Fannie get very rich
because they are the majori t shareholders of these publicly traded stocks.
When a REMIC is formed, its assets (your loan plus thousands of other people's
loans) are declared a permanent fixture to the REMIC. ( This is like that
intellectual property of Apple computer. ) This is registered with the SEC. It is
public information. In other words, once an asset is registered and traded as part
of the security, you can't just switch it out because it has become a permanent
fixture of the traded asset.
The conclusion I want you to take away here is that an asset declared in SEC
filing is permanently attached. This is a permanent conversion. This means
there is no doubt that your loan/promissory note is no more.
Let's take a case of double existence to ill ustrate the point. Let's say we have the
stock traded on Wall Street (that supposedly contains the note) then we take the
promissory note and we assign it to another bank that takes it and securitizes it
again.
If this situation were to happen, the same loan would be traded twice on Wall
Street. In other words, the second set of investors got duped. They bought a
lemon. They basically bought a forger.
This is securities fraud. It cannot happen.
24
The Repurchase Agreement
Let's talk about the Repurchase agreement clause in the Pooling and Service
Agreement that created the REMIC.
There are typically clauses within the Pooling and Service Agreement governing
both the submission into as well as the repurchase mortgages. Let's spend a few
moments analyzing these because it is very important that you understand these
terms in your foreclosure defense strategies (and if needed, ariculate your
defense).
When your original lender (called an Originator) sells your loan into a REMIC,
they are required to:
1 ) Deliver your promissory to the REMIC within 90 days. This means that the
Originator has to endorse the promissor note using the language "pay to
the order of' to a NAMED PARTY.
2) They have to physically deliver your note to the REMIC.
3) State law requires that they also record this delivery in your County
Recorder's office.
I n 99% of the time, all three things were never done. This leads to a defect i n the
chain of title.
Next, let's talk about the repurchase of the promissory note out of the REMIC.
There is no clause i n any Pooling and Servicing Agreement that I have been
able to find that governs the event of default that gives the servicer the
right to repurchase the note in default. This is because this event is governed
by FAS 140. In other words, the "lender"/servicer cannot just repurchase your
loan out of the REMIC. Remember, the sale has to be done to an arm's length
third party. And if you sell something, you can't take it back. The only time you
can take it back is if it was defective.
So let's look again at what a typical Pooling and Servicing Agreement says about
defective repurchasing of mortgages. If an instrument is found to be defective
(meaning it did not fulfill the above o required steps), the originator is required to
buy the note back at full face value.
Let's use an analogy to illustrate this pOint. If I sold you a computer for $1000 and
you take it home, turn it on, and nothing happens . . . then it can be proven that I
sold you a defective product and you are entitled to your $1000 back.
If after 4 years (assuming I gave you a 5 year parts warranty), the computer
refuses to boot, you can still come back to me (because of the defect) and ask
for your money back (or I can replace the part). As you know, in the computer
industry, a 4 year old computer is very out of date and is worth only a fraction of
25
the original price . . . but I still have to give you your money back at the full $1000
purchase price.
But, if through no fault of my own, your computer broke, then I am not bound to
honor the warranty. For example, if you dropped the computer and it broke, then
that's just tough luck on you.
If you then list your broken computer on craigslist for $20, and I see it, then there
is nothing stopping me from buying it back. But I would never buy it at the original
$1000 price, that's just silly.
In other words, a loan that is in default is never worth as much as a good
performing loan. It has to be bought back in its defective status.
Using this analogy, we can see that if a loan was to go bad (default) through no
fault of the Originator; there is no clause that requires the Originator to buy back
the loan.
We can also see that the Originator/servicer does not have to buy back the note
at the same price it sold into the REM/C. It is buying the note back as a
non performing asset at best at a substantial discount.
26
Writing Of a Bad Debt
Next, let's talk about how I can make the claim that the shareholders andlor the
REMIC wrote off the nonperforming debt to receive a tax credit. There is no
specific evidence or law that backs up this argument; just something I call
condition precedent."
For years, physicists have postulated that there were these things called "black
holes" but no one was able to find one. You see, a black hole is a collapsed star
that is so dense that no light can escape it. And because we depend on light to
see, no one could actually "see" a black hole until one day, somebody discovered
this phenomenon called the "event horizon." It is the line in which the
gravitational pull of the black hole equals the strength of the light trying to escape
from the black hole. Because of the existence of the event horizon, people then
concluded that there must be a black hole inside the event horizon.
Using this condition precedent, I will illustrate why it is in the interest of the
REMIC to write off a debt rather than to try to collect it in a foreclosure.
Let's say you are a farming supply shop owner and I come to you asking for
credit. We've known each other for years, so you say, "sure". I used your credit to
buy some seeds and fertilizers for my farm. Sadly, we had a flash freeze this
year and all my crops died. So, l owe you $100, but I cannot pay you and go out
of business. As a business owner, you can do one of three things.
1 ) Carry the debt as an asset.
2) Assign it to a third pary through endorsement.
3) Write it of as a loss, and then sell it off to a debt collector.
That's it. So let's look at each of these cases.
If you carry the debt as an asset. . . then you do not get tax credits for the loss. My
purchase of seeds still counts as revenue for the purposes of taxes, Le. , you are
taxed on money you did not receive.
If you assign it to a third party endorsement, then I will owe the money to the third
pary. The requirement is that I signed a promissory note, and you physically
endorse the note to the other pary. I n this instance, the debt between you and I
is settled. I now owe the third party. You cannot write off the loss as a tax write
off.
If you write the debt off as a loss, then you don't count my purchase as revenue,
but the loss you suffered through the bad debt, and it is offset against other
income.
As we discussed earlier, the REMIC cannot foreclose because the real paries in
interest are the shareholders. So, in order for them to realize any benefit from a
nonperforming note, they sell it to another party in full, so that that party may be
able to collect (foreclose) on the debt.
27
The REMIC can either sell it as a perfect debt or a written off debt. A perect debt
is one that the REMIC and the shareholders do not receive any tax credit. When
the REMIC sells the perfect but non performing debt, it will only receive pennies
on the dollar as our previous example with the faulty computer.
Or, the REMIC can sell the debt as a written of debt, receive tax credit for the
sale. AND receive money from the buyer of the nonperorming note for pennies
on the dollar.
If it was you, what would you do? Either way, you are receiving pennies on the
dollar, i.e., about the same amount. Might as well get the tax credit for it, right?
That is why I believe that the shareholders and the REMIC are actually writing
the debt off, and then selling it onto the servicer, who attempts to foreclose on
the propery as if it was perfect. It's not.
28
But Can They Foreclose?
Let's take a skeptical look at our analysis.
Let's say that the individual shareholders did not write the asset off and indeed
sell the non-performing note back to the bank wishing to foreclose on your home.
Does this give them the right to foreclose on your home?
The answer is still no.
EVEN I F the bank is able to resolve the following issues:
1 ) The original delivery of the title of the promissory note has to be properly
done within 90 days of sale into the REMIC. If this was not done, this
means that the chain of title was broken, leading to a defective instrument.
Therefore, they cannot foreclose based on a defective instrument.
2) The bank has to prove that the loan was not written off by the REMIC.
This is very difficult to do.
3) The bank has to prove there is a perected chain of title from origination, to
the REMIC, and from the REMIC back to the bank. You and I know that
this is never done properly.
They still have this problem of CFR Title 12: Section 226 (included in the
Appendix).
226.39 Morgage transfer disclosures.
(a) Scope. The disclosure requirements of this section apply to any
covered person except as otherwise provided in this section. For purposes
of this section:
(1) A "covered person" means any peron, as defned in 226.2(a)(22),
that becomes the owner of an existing mortgage loan by acquiring legal
title to the debt oblgation, whether through a purchase, assignment, or
other transfer, and who acquires more than one morgage loan in any
twelve-month period. For purposes of this section, a servicer of a
mortgage toan shalt not be treated as the owner of the obligation if
the servicer holds title to the loan or it is assigned to the sericer
solely for the administrative convenience of the servicer in sericing
the obligation.
More than likely, your servicer buys back notes on a regular basis, i.e., more than
1 mortgage in any 1 2 month period.
Ww.consumerdefenseprograms.com 29
If the servicer buys back a loan for administrative purposes, i.e. , to foreclose,
then they do not have the rights of the owner of the obligation, i.e., they do not
have the right to foreclose.
So as a foreclosure defense, it is up to you to challenge the bank to prove all of
these points.
If on your Notice of Default or Substitution of Trustee, the documents mention
someone like New York Mellon Trust Series 123223, then this will indicate that
the servicer is foreclosing on behalf of a REMI C. And as we know, the REMIC
cannot foreclose because it owns Ucarrot juice" (i.e., the shareholders are the true
party in interest).
If you are in a judicial state and when you confront the bank regarding standing,
and they say "we bought the note back so we can foreclose," then challenge
them to prove that the loan has not been offset as a bad debt through both a
Request for Admissions and Request for Production of Documents asking for
accounting records of the chain of action within the REMIC. We have this
process outlined in our automated coaching program within the membership
program on Y.consumerdefenseprograms.com.
If the bank gives you some answer like "the investor for this loan is Fannie Mae,"
they are bringing fraud before the court. As we discussed earlier, the investor is
not a real party in interest.
Conclusion
So let's summarize our pOints. Since over 85% of loans have been securitized,
we now know that banks are not the real parties in interest in any foreclosure
transactions. Neither are the investors of the REMIC. No one can foreclose.
When a loan goes into default, the REMI C writes it off. Once an asset is written
off, the shareholders receive tax credits from the IRS. This means that the note is
settled. The note is gone.
The only way a bank can foreclose on you is if they buy the promissory note back
from REMIC as a written off debt, just like a debt collector would. Tax credit has
been given to the shareholders and the REMIC. It is no more. So, essentially,
these banks are picking up the promissory note for pennies on the dollar and
through deceit, they try to reattach the converted loan to the dead
TrusUMortgage. They then take these documents and represent them to the
world as if they are the real parties in interest. They bring these documents into
court, deceiving the cour and their own counsel (who, for the most part, is
ignorant of this scheme).
Look, the servicerf'pretender lender" would not willingly disclose any of this stuff
to you or to the court during a foreclosure.
30
1 ) They never tell you who the holder in due course is. At best, they tell you
who the investor is. As we know, the investor is not the holder in due
course and does not have the authority to enforce the note.
2) They do not disclose whether they own the note or acting as a sericer to
enforce the note. Ofen times, they are just acting as a servicer with no
authority to enforce the note. Remember, if the note is held by the REMIC,
it is unenforceable.
3) If they bought the note back for the purpose of foreclosure in truth (and not
as an administrative procedure). then they never disclose whether the
debt was written off by the REMIC . . . or whether the proper chain of title
can be demonstrated.
This is how banks steal your house, and the houses of millions of families around
the country.
This means, if you are facing foreclosure, you need to learn the truth about your
loan and learn how to fight for your rights.
This means that if you have lost your home due to foreclosure, you might be a
victim of fraud and be entitled to punitive damages of up to 3 times the value of
your loan.
So, let's summarize to see how this all works together. The bank originates the
loan and sells it to the REMIC for 1 . 05 to 1 . 5 times the face value of the loan. I t
got paid i n full (and more). Then, when the loan goes into default, it picks up the
note for pennies on the dollar, foredoses on your house and then sells it to the
next sucker for full price. Oh, did I mention that the FDIC covers between 70% to
80% of the loan amount, also?
Wow. You've got to tip your hat to them. From a purely technical business stand
point, that's just utter brilliance.
This is why lwant to share this information so you know you've been conned.
You have a right to be angry. You SHOULD BE!
Iw.consumerdefenseprograms.com
31
The Bubble Burst of 2008-2009
No one was complaining when things were going strong. Everyone was happy.
Everyone had a home. Housing prices were growing in double digits. Until.. .the
house of cards started to tumble down.
No one can pin it to a specific date, but sometime in 2008, things stared going
downhill. The bubble had gotten to a point where more and more homeowners
were realizing that they could no longer afford multi-million dollar (arificially
inflated) homes on a minimum wage income. More and more homes were
beginning to go into default.
As more and more loans went into default, this affected the value of the
morgage backed securities (MBS). You see, the shareholders and investors of
these stocks made three fatal assumptions about what they bought:
1 ) They assumed that the bank did the right thing in their underriting
process. They didn't.
2) They assumed that once a loan in their porfolio went into default, they
were able to foreclose and cover their losses. They were wrong.
3) They assumed that this ride would never end. It did.
Once Wall Street investors realized they could not cover their losses (by
foreclosing on their underlying assets), they became very upset (and rightly so).
They started suing the banks and stopped buying these toxic assets.
Investors stopped buying these MBS. Soon, the pool of money dried up and no
one could get loans, not even those with 800 plus FI CO scores.
Then house prices started to plummet. . .
32
The 3 Trillion Dollar Bailout (TARP)
As more inveslors sued these banks, things got ugly. This is the Day of
Reckoning for our banker friends. It's time to pay the Piper.
The banks got scared. All their greedy scams had finally caught up with them.
So, they got together and bribed Congress to bail them out, threatening that if
Congress didn't, we would have a financial Armageddon; the Fall of Wall Street.
Everybody's retirement funds would immediately be wiped out. Put simply, "they
were too big to fail . "
Donald Trump said it best, "When I borrowed $1 00,000 and I defaulted, it was
MY PROBLEM. When I borrowed $100 million and I defaulted, it became THEIR
PROBLEM."
Faced with a no win situation, Congress quickly signed the TARP (Troubled
Asset Relief Program) bailout, which authorized the Federal Resere to give over
$900 billion to the banks in the first round. We now know that the Federal
Reserve Bank has since given over $3.5 TRILLION dollars to the banks with very
few strings attached.
Let's be very clear here.
The banks were given "free money" from the Taxpayers to pretty much "do
with as they see fit." They could give bonuses to top executives. Go to the
Bahamas for a retreat. Buy jets. Buy up smaller banks. Invest in gold.
Whatever they wanted, with no strings atched.
As housing prices kept dropping, many low-income homeowners (as well as real
estate investors) got caught. No one expected the bubble to happen. Everyone
thought this ride would never end. Low income homeowners and investors alike
would buy any property at almost any price, knowing that they could sell the
property a few months later for more than what they bought the property for in a
hot market.
Now, homeowners and investors find themselves with properties that are worth
significantly less than what is owed.
Worse, many homebuyers and investors went into the game with negative cash
flow business plans. Their expected exit strategy was through price appreciation
in an appreciating market.
V.consumerdefenseproqrams.com
33
When the capital markets dr up, no one could get loans since housing prices
are dependent on people's ability to secure loans. When people could no longer
get loans; no one could afford to buy houses.
Thus we find ourselves in a housing crisis today. The markets that experienced
the highest growths, specifically California, Nevada, Florida and Arizona, are also
the ones with the highest foreclosure problems.
Currently, millions of families are faced with an unrealistic burden for mortgage
payments well beyond their income ratio. Added to this, millions of families are
out of work due to the contraction i n the economy as the market is correcting
itself into a true equilibrium.
As more and more families find
themselves in financial trouble, the rate
of real bank defaults is much higher than
what the banking industry would like us
to believe. Many people are months, if
not years, behind on their payments but
banks are not ready to foreclose and
declare these loans delinquent.
As more and more loans go into default,
more and more homeowners are fighting
back. More people are learning about
loan fraud and securitization, but until
now, few people could fully comprehend
the mechanics of how the fraud was
being perpetrated.
This is the reason why this book is being given to you and why people are
passing this book to everyone they know. I am exposing the fraud for the first
time i n simple English so people can understand.
Bank Fraud Exposed
So, now that we've explained the securitization process, you are probably more
informed about this problem Ihan most judges and attorneys. You see, most
people just don't know about this scam that is being perpetrated on the American
public. I hope that you use this opporunity to get informed. Tell your friends
about it. Talk about it to your neighbors. Write to your Congressperson. Next time
you are at a social gathering, bring this up. This is the only way we wake up
America.
So let's summarize in case you missed it:
When a loan has been securitized, it has been converted from a debt into a
stock. The real and beneficial parties in interest are the individual shareholders
holding a fraction of the note. Therefore, no one person may foreclose on the
property.
But wait a minute. If this is the case, why are there so many houses being
foreclosed on every day? Even today, despite the robo-signer scandals?
The problem goes way deeper than robo-signers. This is not only on loan
assignments not properly assigned and recorded, but also on the fact that they
do not even have the right to do so.
Remember FAS 140? Once an asset has been sold, you forever lose control
over that asset. If it is sold into a REMI C, how can the bank (who is no longer the
real party in interest) foreclose?
They can't.
They get away with it every single day because they rely on our collective
ignorance.
They rely on your ignorance.
The judge's ignorance.
The attorney's ignorance.
The foreclosure and mortgage industry personnel's ignorance.
It's time to wake everyone up.
35
Give Me a Free iPod
Let's talk about the difference between an investor, a shareholder and a real
party in interest.
Ihen your loan is underwritten, the bank needs investors to initially provide the
money to fund the transaction. Oftentimes this is Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.
They put up the initial cash so that the REMIC can buy these loans. This security
is then traded on Wall Street. In other words, when the REMIC got converted into
a stock, the investors make money because they got the ground floor investment.
Buy low, sell high. In many cases, they became the majority shareholders of
these REMIC Trusts.
So, let's talk about the rights of a shareholder by using Apple stocks as an
example. Let's say you own 1000 Apple shares . . . and Apple advertises that they
historically pay about $1 000 per month in dividends.
Let's say after a couple of months, Apple had a bad quarter and stops paying you
your $1 000. And the next month, it doesn't get better. They now "owe" you
$2000.
Does this then give you the right to go into an Apple store and pick up a new Mac
laptop and an iPod?
The answer is . . . you'll likely get arrested for theft.
This is the same thing with
shareholders of a REMIC.
A shareholder of an asset cannot just
go to the store and pick up goods as
recompense. This means the individual
shareholders cannot dip in and touch
the loan/asset. Besides, they own
"carrot juice," remember? This means
they own a little bit of thousands of
loans.
36
So, let's look at the cast and crew of the heist. We have the following characters:
The Lender
The Investor
The Shareholder
The REMIC
The Trustee of the REMIC
The Servicer
The Original Lender cannot Foreclose
As I discussed earlier under FAS 140, the original lender sold it to the REMIC
and forever lost their rights to enforce the note.
The Investor and Shareholder cannot Foreclose
As I illustrated with the Apple and iPod example, while the investors and
shareholders as a whole are the real parties in interest, individually they cannot
just come in and foreclose because they only own a tiny portion of your loan.
The REMIC and the Trustee
Remember, the REMIC holds all the loans together in a pooling and sericing
agreement. However, because they chose to avoid the IRS tax rules (I . R. C 860)
for double taxing, they pass on the real pary in interesUownership 01 the asset to
the individual shareholders. So neither the REMIC nor the Trustee may
foreclose.
The Servicer is Not a Real party in interest
The Servicer can only collect the money and pass it to the REMIC. That's the
extent of their job.
So, Who Can Foreclose?
The answer is: nobody.
Oftentimes you will hear the bank respond to enquiries as to who the real party in
interest is by saying, "Fannie Mae is the investor." They are technically not lying.
This is true. But as I illustrated earlier, an investor becomes a majority
shareholder of the traded stock . . . but they are not a) the holder in due course or
b) the real pary in interest.
This is the lie that banks are bringing before the cour every single day.
Only the true and beneficial holder in due course is the real party in interest and
not the investor.
Again, if the bank is not the real party in interest, nor the holder In due
course . . . what business do they have in foreclosing your house?
If Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are not the true and beneficial holder in due
course, how can foreclosures be done in their name?
This is the scam bankers don't want you to know.
The Great Pretender Lender Switch
This is how the scam is perpetrated by your so-called lender. They advertise that
they offer loans. They work with the mortgage broker network around the nation
to get consumers to apply for the loan. Once the loan has been approved (I use
the word "approved" very loosely because very little due diligence is actually
done by the so called lender), they are pre-placed into a REMIC. The lender then
waits for the paperwork to be signed. Once it is signed, it is immediately
transferred into the REMIC.
Once a REMIC has enough
loans to be packaged, it gets
registered onto the SEC
database and then gets
converted and traded as a
stock.
All the while, unbeknownst to
the consumer, the lender all of a
sudden switches their position
from lender to servicer of the
note. Again, as you recall under
the accounting rule FAS 140 . . . once an asset has been sold, the lender forever
loses control of the asset. In other words, they no longer own or control your
loan. They merely act as a servicer for your loan, with the proceeds going directly
into the REMIC to be distributed to the shareholders.
Remember, since your lender is just a servicer, they do not own the note. They
do not have the right to enforce the note. They can only act as a servicing agent.
Please refer to CFR Title 12: Banks and Banking, Par 226 - Truth in Lending
(Regulation Z). This is enclosed in the Appendix for your convenience. These are
codified laws of banking. It defines who a Lender is, and what the rights of a
Servicer are. SpeCifically, it refers in 226 (a) 1 that a sericer is not treated as the
owner of the obligation.
(a) Scope. The disclosure requirements of this section apply to any
covered person except as otherwise provided in this section. For
purposes ofthis sec/ion:
(I) A "covered person" means any person, as defned in 226.2(a)(22},
that becomes the owner ofan existing mortgage loan by acquiring legal
w.consumerdefenseprograms.com 38
title to the debt obligation, whether through a purchase, assignment, or
other transfer, and who acquires more than one mortgage loan in any
twelve-month period. For purposes of this section, a servicer of a
mortgage loan shall not be treated as the owner ojthe obligation if the
servicer holds title to the loan or it is assigned to the servicer solely for
the administrative convenience oj the servicer in servicing the
obligation.
You will also note that the scope does not cover the servicer if the servicer was
assigned the note for administrative convenience in sericing the obligation.
This means, the servicer is not treated as and does not have the rights of a
lender (or owner of the obligation).
As I discussed earlier, even if the servicer was to buy the note back after it has
been securitized, reattachment of the loanlnote to the Deed of TrusUMortgage is
impossible.
You Cannot Make Carrots from Carrot Juice
Once a loan has been written off, it is discharged. Once a loan has been
securitized, reattachment is impossible.
Reattachment is impossible for the following reasons:
1 ) Permanent conversion
The promissory note had been converted into a stock as a permanent fixture.
Its nature is forever changed. It is now and forever a stock. It is treated as a
stock and governed as a stock under the SEC.
Since the Deed of Trust secures the promissory note, once the promissory
note is destroyed, the Deed of Trust secures nothing. Therefore, the Trust is
invalid.
2) Asset has been written of
Once an asset is written off, the debt is discharged, since the owner of the
asset has received compensation for the discharge in the form of tax credits
from the IRS. The debt has been settled.
The servicer acts as a debt collector of an unsecured note. The servicer is
deceiving the court, the county, and the borrower when it tries to re-attach the
note to the Deed of Trust as if nothing has happened. It's called adhesion.
l.consumerdefenseprograms,com 39
The funny thing about the law is, it is legal until or unless the other party
objects. Since this scam is so devious, it is beyond the comprehension of
most people . . . including that of lawyers and judges. It takes someone who has
studied accounting. securities and law to unravel this deception. Most people
in the legal profession only take the arguments on face value.
3) Broken chain of assignment
Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), the promissory note is a one of
a kind instrument. All assignments (much like endorsements on the back of a
check) have to be done as a permanent fixture onto the original promissory
note. The original promissory note has the only legally binding chain of title.
Without a proper chain of title, the instrument is faulty.
Rarely can a lender "produce the note," because by law, the original note has
to be destroyed. Remember? The note and the stock cannot exist at the
same time. Ofentimes, the lender would come into court with a photocopy of
the original note made years ago.
Another popular method of deceit lenders prefer is to use the State Civil Code
in non-judicial states to state that "there is no law requiring a lender to
produce the note or any other proof of claim." THEY DON'T HAVE IT and
CANNOT PRODUCE IT.
Oftentimes, the lender would do blank assignments of the original promissory
note into the REMIC. Then, when they need the note to perform the
foreclosure, they will magically produce a blank assignment. Again, this is not
legal and is bringing fraudulent documents before the courts and the county
records.
Let's be very clear here. Once a loan has been securitized, the note is no
more. Anything the lender brings to court as evidence is prima facie evidence
of fraud. The attorney for the lender is either an accessory to fraud through
ww.consumerdefenseproqrams.com 40
ignorance or willful intent. Either way, as an informed borrower, it is your job
to bring this deception to light so these lawyers can be sanctioned.
So, your lender would close your loan, sell it to REMIC and get paid.
Once your loan goes into default, the loan is written off. The loan is then bought
bythe same lender in the open secondar market as a dead/unsecured note. To
be able to pull this stunt off, every lender involved in this scheme is required to
act in collusion.
Once the servicer buys the dead note, they then claim to be the true holder in
due course of a written off asset. They then present to the world that they are
who they claim. They rely on the homeowner/borrower to be ignorant of this
deception and clean up, allowing them to take possession of a house for pennies
on the dollar.
This is the extent of the fraud done to the American public every single day.
As a homeowner defending your rights, it is imperative you understand the
nature of this fraud so you can use these arguments to defend your home.
As a legal professional, it is imperative that you understand these arguments so
you can raise the proper objections and interrogatories when representing your
clients in a foreclosure defense.
41
Loan Mods are a Scam
By now, you should wise up to this whole notion of
who is Ihe real party in interest. So, if your lender is
not a real and beneficial party in interest, how can
they give you a loan mod?
WARNI NG
SCAM
AHEAD
The answer is . . . they can't.
"What? It happens al l the time," I hear you say.
The truth is, very few loan modifications are approved and they usually take
months.
If you have ever tried to talk to your bank about getting a loan mod, you will likely
hear something like, "I am sorry, sir, we can only consider you for a loan mod if
you are 60 days or more delinquent."
WHAT??
That's just stupid.
Not really. Here's why.
Let's make it simpler for you to understand the scam. Remember FAS 140?
Once an asset has been sold, the LenderlServicer forever loses the right to
enforce or control the asset . . . except when a loan is considered delinquent.
After b days, your servicer becomes a debt collector and is governed
under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act.
This is another scam they don't want you to know about.
If you have ever received a Notice of Default or anything else from the bank, you
will see a language like, "This is an attempt to collect a debt." This is required by
law under the Fair Debt Collections Practices
Act.
As we discussed earlier, typically, the REMIC
writes the debt off to receive tax credit against
future earnings. The servicer then buys this
asset back as a non-perorming and non
secured debt, very much like the collection
agencies that buy non-performing credit card
debts.
Once a debt has been written off for tax
42
purposes, it is discharged. The company may sell the asset to a debt collector,
who will do anything and everything in its power to lie, cheat and steal to collect
on the debt. This is why they have the notice "This is an attempt to collect a
debt." This is your clue that they are not the original creditor.
Once a debt is set off, the FDIC comes in and covers % of the face value of
the loan.
Your bank buys the bad debt for pennies on the dollar from the REMIC so that
they can negotiate a loan modification.
Once they get you to sign the loan mod agreement, they have successful l y
renegotiated, recontracted and re-acquired the loan. Notice how hard i t i s to get a
loan modification? Do you know why?
They can no longer dump their toxic assets on those "suckers on Wall Street."
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Wall Street is getting
wise. Now, strict underwriting standards must be applied because they have to
keep the loan.
Furthermore, there are strict accounting rules about buying back toxic assets.
The asset has to be bought on the open market. That is why it takes months for
them to buy your note back.
Can you see the light now? Are you having an "aha" moment?
But If They Bought The Loan, Don't They Then Have the Right to
Foreclose?
Once a debt has been written off as a bad debt, the owners get tax credits for the
asset. When this happens, the debt is discharged. Settled. Gone.
What these banks are doing is buying a discharged asset. They then try to
convince the world; the borrower, the courts and the Trustee, that they are the
real party in interest. That is a lie.
As I discussed earlier, once a loan has been written off, it cannot be re-adhered
and made whole again. Remember? You cannot make carrot from carrot
juice. It's forever changed.
Enter Robo-Signers and Fraudulent Loan Assignments
Let me ask you a question. If you could pick up a promissory note for pennies on
the dollar, and all you have to do is to "convince" (con) the homeowners that you
are the true party of interest. . . to what extent would you go to lielcheaVsteal to get
the home?
43
The answer is . . . whatever it takes. At least that's what the banks are doing.
This brings us back to the Uniform Commercial Code. Under the law, the original
promissory note is the only valid and legally binding chain of title for the note.
Your original promissory note is like an original check. It's a one of a kind
instrument.
To convince the court that they have the right to foreclose, banks have taken to:
a) Forging documents
b) Creating arbitrary loan assignments to suit their needs
c) Bringing fraudulent documents before the court
d) Recording fraudulent documents at the county
There is a company called Loan Processing Serices (LPS), who for less than
$100 can fabricate any loan documents the bank needs to facilitate their
foreclosure. It's called reverse engineering of title. Instead of following proper
legal due process of proper chain of title assignment as required by law, these
companies will reverse engineer a title to facilitate for the foreclosure, even if
they have to bend the rules a little. Thev then go under oath to testif that they
have frt hand knowledge of the fact that these loan documents are legitimate.
I have depositions of employees from these foreclosure mills passing the notary
stamp around and stamping Signatures as they go. They literally pass around
notary signatures like it was a rubber stamp. Often times, you can see signatures
as notaries that do not match what is registered with the State.
There was even an instance where one outfit had an "assignment table" where
they would put a whole stack of paper and a manager would then rubber stamp
the appropriate loan assignment as they saw fit with no verification, no firsthand
knowledge of the fact, no confirmation and no zip.
But as I discussed earlier, you cannot make carrots from carrot juice. If a loan
has been securitized, any supposed original promissor note is nothing more
than counterfeit at best; not to mention securities fraud.
Don't believe us? Just go to YouTube and search for the Alan Grayson
Foreclosure Fraud and the video deposition of nationwide title clearing Bran Bl y.
These are but two of hundreds of such videos. Congressman Grayson IS a
Representative from Florida . . . one of the worst affected States in the US.
It's enough to make you sick.
44
Legal Arguments
The issues around foreclosures are confusing, stressful and emotional.
This is made worse because the banks are committing open fraud, but are trying
to cover it up. Like I mentioned earlier, not even the bank's managers or their
own counsel knows what's going on. By reading this book, you are more
educated than 99% of the people out there facing foreclosure.
Take a read of these two great articles:
http://www.usatoday. com/money/economy/housing/20 1 0-12 -21-
mortgagenote21 CV N.htm
http://www. bloomberg. com/news/20 1 1 -0 1 -06/foreclosures-may-be-undone-by
massachusetts-ruling-on-mo_-transfers. html
And another great article from the Financial Times about Securitization:
http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/20 1 1/0 1 /07/4S2081/a-court-case-to-challenge
securitisation-standardsl
With your newfound set of eyes, read the aricles again. Seriously, click on the
link and read it. You will now be able to spot the lies and say "aha" when you look
at the problem through the loan fraud lens. It all makes sense.
Everyone is confused. The lawyers and the judges think that it's just a procedural
error. It's not.
In this chapter we will go into more legal arguments to discuss the issue of
subject matter jurisdiction (or Standing) as well as the Fair Debt Collections
Practices Act as it applies to the foreclosure problem.
45
Beyond "Show Me the Note"
Some of you may have heard of the argument "show me the note." Time and
time again, these cases are tossed out of court. This scheme comes from well
intentioned people in the media who are ill-informed about the legal process.
Fundamental to the American jurisprudence system is the concept of standing.
Let me illustrate standing using another analogy.
Let's say a husband and wife are arguing in court over who should take the
couch. All of a sudden, some guy shows up and says, "I want the couch." This
third party is not a real party in interest and therefore has no standing to be in the
controversy.
However, if that third party then shows up with a sales receipt from the wife
proving that he paid for the couch, al l of a sudden he has standing.
This is really important for us to understand. In building your case, you should
study up on the securitization process and arguments. You have to be able to
articulate and defend your allegation that the bank is not a real party in interest,
and therefore, lacks subject matter jurisdiction on the controversy. I n other
words, they lack standi ng.
Under the Federl Rules of Civil Prcedure Rule 1 7, "an action must be pursued
by a real pary in interest." (Google it up.) So, if it can be proven that the bank is
not a real party in interest, then the bank cannot enforce the note. Don't take our
word for it. Look it up yourself and consult counsel.
One of the ways a bank can obfuscate the problems of securitization is to
present "Ihe note" to the court. As I explained above, the note is invalid once it
has been securitized, but in order for the bank to perpetrate the Iheft of your
house, they will do whatever it takes to complete the scam.
Under Uniform Commercial Code, a note is a one of a kind negotiable instrument
that has the only legally binding chain of assignment. Oftentimes, your lender will
show up with a photocopy of the note made years ago . . . again, obscuring the
facts in order to steal your house. This is admissible unless you know how to
object. Again, consult with counsel about the Federal Rules of Evidence 1002
and 1003.
Another way banks hide their fraud is to do what's called "blank assignments," so
that the loan may be assigned many times amongst themselves that are tracked
by MERS (which we will explain later), while keeping a blank assignment of the
note handy in the event a foreclosure is needed. This is blatant abuse of the law.
The law is very specific here. The promissory note, as well as the Deed of Trust,
must be together at all times and there must always be a clear and unambiguous
chain of title that is traceable in public records for all paries of interest in real
estate.
46
Remember, the argument we want to go by is not "show me the note," but
instead "show me standing" or "show me that you are a real party in interest."
One of the ways they can do this is to present the original promissory note. By
understanding the argument of securitization, you may be able to refute the note.
The Deed of Trust and Mortgage
When you sign to close on your loan, you signed a number of documents. Most
imporant are the Deed of Trust or Morgage (depending what State you live in)
and the Promissory note.
The Deed of TrusUMorgage secures the promissory note.
The Deed of TrusVMortgage is the document that gives your lender the right to
sell your house in a foreclosure action.
Both the Deed of TrusVMortgage and the Promissory note must always point to
the same party at all times to have Perfection of Chain of Title.
Bifurcation
In every State (that I know of), the law is very specific in regards to recordation of
public record at the County Hall of Records with regards to real property.
Specifically all real paries of interest in real property must be recorded at the
County. In other words, if someone has an interest in a piece of propery, they
MUST record this interest on public record.
www.consumerdefenseproqrams.com
47
When a promissory note is
sold or assigned, it
therefore must be recorded
in public record to maintain
perfected chain of title for
the security.
If there is a break in a
chain of title, then
bifurcation occurs where
the Deed of Trust/Mortgage
paints to one party while
the promissory note paints
to another party.
.. _

Carpenter v Longan
Under a US Supreme Court ruling, it is stated that
the Promissory Note is the object, and the Deed of
Trust is the attachment.
Where the Promissory note goes, the Deed of
Trust must follow, much like a dog and its tail.
Where the dog goes, the tail must follow. Not the
other way round.
Once bifurcation occurs, then the security has been broken because State law
has been violated.
.consumerdefenseprograms.com 4
Violation of Applicable State Law
In ever Deed of Trust/Mortgage, it states specifically that the instrument is
subject to applicable State and Federal laws. If it can be shown that an
assignment of the promissory note occurs without the corresponding assignment
at the county recorder's office for the Deed of TrusVMortgage, then the
instrument has violated State law. Thus, violating the terms of the Deed of
Trust/Mortgage, making the instrument invalid.
Since interest in the promissory note has been sold to a REMIC (Real Estate
Mortgage Investment Conduit) and proper assignment was never done at the
county, then the terms of the Deed of TrusVMortgage has been violated, making
it invalid. This will convert the debt from a secured instrument to an unsecured
instrument. This means the lender might be able to sue you to collect the
money, but can never sell your property to collect on the collateral.
However, this happens every day right in front of our eyes because the general
public is too uninformed to argue these pOints and so the banks get away with
this.
The lender cannot enforce an instrument that is defective.
49
Perfection of Chain of Title
In January 201 1 , the Massachusetts Supreme Court issued a decision in U. S.
BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION VS. Antonio IBANEZ in which al i the
Justices unanimously agreed. I n order for the bank to be able to foreclose,
they must show a perfection of chain of title, both in the Deed of
TrusUMortgage and the Promissory note. It was also ruled that a blank
assignment was not acceptable proof of perection of title for the promissory
note.
This is HUGE. You should be referring to this case and motion the cour to
take "mandatory judicial notice" for the ruling decision in your case if you are
considering doing any sort of litigation, whether as a defendant in a Judicial
State or as a Plaintiff in a Non-Judicial State.
Here are the important paints you need to undersland from this Supreme Court
decision:
1 ) A Defective Title cannot be fixed.
The Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that the bank has to demonstrate
perfection of title at the time the Notice of Default is issued.
A defective title is like bad food. Once food has gone bad, you can never fix it
The same goes with the Deed of TrusUMortgage. The "lender" cannot retro sign
or "reverse engineer" the Chain of Title after the fact. But most of the time this is
the case when it is handled by a foreclosure mill. They have roba-signers whose
job is to sign bogus assignments and reverse engineer titles.
It is your job to challenge this point when your lender presents supposed "proof'
before the court. Ofentimes, they will bring in a photocopy of the Deed of Trust
made years ago at the lime you closed on your loan. The photocopy does not
and cannot attest to who the current real and beneficiary party in interest
is.
2) The Bank must show a perection of the Chain of Title for the Deed of
TrustMorgage
This means that any assignments of the Promissory note must also be reflected
at Ihe county recorder's office (and not with MERS-I will talk about MERS i n a
bil).
If an assignment of the Promissory Note is not recorded on the County Records,
then perfection is not achieved.
What this means is, if you can prove that your note has been securitized or sold
to another pary away from your original lender, and that they did not record this
assignment at the County Recorder's Office, then bifurcation occurred. This
50
leads to a defect in the chain of title, making the Deed of TrusVMortgage
unenforceable.
3) The Bank must show a perfection of the Chain of Title for the Promissory
Note
If we have a situation where you closed with Bank A and Bank A sold the note to
Bank B, who then sold the note to a REMIC (securitized the note), then it was
ruled that there must be a chain of endorsement following Uniform Commercial
Code 9-206. Typically, this is done in the form of a stamp on the back of the
promissory note from Bank A to Bank B as "Pay to the Order of Bank B Without
Recourse".
Title must show this chain of "Pay to the Order of' on the back of the note, just
like it would on a check, all the way to the last person trying to collect on the
note. If the bank cannot show this chain of title ending in a point as the person on
the title, it does not have perection of title and is not eligible to collect.
In order to collect and enforce the note under UCC 9-301 , the pary enforcing
the note must demonstrate that it has the position of Holder in Due Course or
having authority from the Holder. Failing that, the bank is committing theft.
4) Blank ASSignments are Not Acceptable
It is STANDARD BANK PRACTICE to make blank aSSignments to avoid the
problem of having to maintain proper chain of title on the promissory note. I n
previous situations, the courts have allowed blank assignment and possession to
be acceptable forms of proof of claim.
With the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruling, this is no longer true. Blank
assignments are no longer acceptable forms of proof of Penection.
Let me repeat this if you missed it.
If your note has been securitized, then the bank that is handling the securitization
ALWAYS creates a Blank Assignment to be used in the event a foreclosure
action is initiated and proof of title needs to be produced. All they do is to give the
blank assignment promissory note to the party wishing to foreclose and voila!
With your newfound knowledge, you now know how to build an objection to this
practice.
If you refer to point 1) , the bank cannot reverse engineer these assignments.
Once the instrument is defective, it is forever defective. Proper assignment must
be done in conjunction and at the time of the deed, not retrospectively.
51
All paper work must be demonstrated to be perfected at the time of the Notice of
Default. If it can be shown that this is not the case, then you could have the
foreclosure process thrown out.
Who or What is MERS?
In order to facilitate the tracking of the thousands of true shareholders who owns
the promissory note, an electronic registration system must be developed.
Bankers got together and created the Morgage Electronic Registration Systems
(MERS). As you can see from our previous arguments that due to IRS Code 860
governing tax pass through for Special Purpose Vehicles, the real parties of
interest are the individual shareholders. This could be thousands of them . . . and it
would be impossible to track these parties at the County Record. Furthermore,
these parties change hands literally daily, so it would be impossible to Irack these
using conventional means.
When you look at your Deed of Trust or Mortgage, if your loan mentioned MERS
of the frst or second page, then there is a good chance (1 00% actually) that your
loan has been securitized.
MERS functions as a registry. It is much like your County Recorder. However,
what is unique about MERS is they are often named either as a Beneficiary or a
Nominee on the Deed of Trust/Mortgage. There are a number of problems with
this.
a) To be a BenefiCiary, one has to put up the money to fund the loan. MERS
never fronts up a single dime for the loan. They are solely there for the
purpose of tracking transfers.
b) MERS recordation is not official. The only legally recognized recordation
on public record is with the County.
c) MERS is never a Holder in Due Course. No promissory note was ever
assigned to them.
d) Only a real and beneficiary party in interest may assign a promissory note,
appoint a substitution of trustee or assign the Deed of Trust.
MERS apPOints loan assignments to mysterious parties every day for the
purpose of foreclosure without actually having the authority to do so. If you have
ever received a Notice of Default or Notice of Substitution of Trustee, you will
likely see MERS appOinting some entity you've never heard of or dealt with as
the beneficiary of your Deed of Trust/Mortgage.
Courts all around the countr have ruled against MERS having the authority to
appOint Trustees and assign Deeds of Trust/Morgages. Unless it is officially
registered at the County Hall of Records, it is not officially recognized.
52
It makes as much sense as your local County Recorder going in, taking the Deed
to your house and assigning it to his brother. He has no authority to do so.
The Recorder is just that. . . a keeper of record. He cannot appoint anyone to be
anything. MERS functions just like a recorder. It is a registration system. It does
not have the authority to appoint anyone. MERS is not a real or beneficial party in
interest. This has been validated i n many Federal cour decisions.
On your Deed of Trust/Mortgage, you will see language that says "From time to
time, the Lender may appoint a Substitution of Trustee . . . ", it doesn't say "The
Nominee or the Beneficiary may . . . ". because only the Lender can do this. Yet
MERS blatantly violates the terms of the Deed of Trust every single day.
The Terms of a Deed of Trust is like an "Article of Incorporation" or Constitution
of your Trust, much like the Constitution of the United States. It is the underlying
terms that bind the whole Trust together, and must not be violated.
So when we have a situation where State law is being violated through improper
assignment, the Deed of Trust is made invalid. When the Trustee is being
appointed by "some party" that is not given the proper authority to do so, this also
casts issue to make the Deed of Trust defective.
ww.consumerdefenseprograms. com
53
The Issue of a Defective Instrument
If the promissory note is owned by thousands of parties, then there is no one
party that may come forh to lay claim on the promissory note. If no one party can
be named "the beneficiary" or "the lender," then the promissory note is defective.
If no loan assignment was properly done, it cannot be Ufixed". A lender cannot
simply reverse engineer the title of the Deed of Trust or Promissory note to make
it better. Once an instrument is defective, it cannot be used to collect the debt.
If the terms of the Deed of Trust/Morgage can be shown to violate applicable
State law, then it too is defective. If it is defective, then it cannot be used to give
the lender the "due on sale" clause. The terms of the Deed of Trust must be
respected in whole and one cannot pick and choose which par to respect and
which par to ignore.
You have to understand how to read the terms of the Deed of Trust/Mortgage so
you can articulate and defend your title against fraudulent claims. So, I would
recommend that you bring out your Mortgage/Deed of Trust from your closing
packet and take a careful look at them to see if there are any of the above
defects I mentioned. You might be surprised at what you discover.
4
Robo-Signers and Document Fabrication
What banks have done to correct these defects in their documentation is to do
what's called "reverse engineer" the title. As you recall, they are required by law
to do the assignments within a reasonable time of the deed, but in their haste to
make money, these things were conveniently overlooked.
There are now even outfits that work with banks to fabricate the required
documents, complete with affidavits (from a minimum wage employee who does
not even work for the bank) to testify that the bank has standing to foreclose. As
you can see from the price list below, it's amazingly affordable.
GETNETDDCUMENTRECDVERY
D *'x!`C OU C0\fsctmiw sn.t:lori1LOIK C r Jrr<:sIOW ere IC 0fDC <Ocr,
cdttm :auosccc<. I\C 5CP
vr<subssto>.
Tmscw= !=CuUcrtsCU!CCUC*h! DXmnanmis mcc.ttcdoJcrLU n J$\msc
tbrcIOUT 0 C N!`!m: CmcrF0r Sta\u sO"e.lif, oro)ett t
.
, al, 0. , ot!'rCD TfUO t.Cm5cnv s.
',,"ljQ aocuoorc<r:1nco"U^tC BYV1Omau. L0o rit of:cwoccr. DOCXw!l ucccw:hcIICO1
rclwc<!OP, t|cmocrOO `O:0W [C< rq aqp 11(
Nt`" WOmyct,E1 nong>kcinmc crwC H= I.OP 2I O C '4OK ;' W1CT !i tg
smmn>.
BBB8fUfBS
P \i.. !^r1 'C'f \! 'E O!RDLronsOSC I C\C]cc.t\,usoi<vr rati:r
LCIImng r|cCCUO. .>pr""cnt'
.
: UK<P/'`C
I>Jtnmrry5I1R( oc .n<rtnIP +c
cv.oc11 1c.c< . v t J
vtoOB;c.; { a D1IS
NL'M ML
%PVICE
03
SI29 FC
S0
CF0
The rule regarding an afidavit is that one has to be done with firsthand
knowledge of the facts. These minimum wage employees process between 100
to 200 files a day. They literally rubberstamp these documents with absolutely no
verification whatsoever of the facts. There have been instances where several
55
banks try to foreclose on the same house . . . yet these document mills have
employees creating affidavits to testify that they know for a fact that the loan
belongs to the foreclosing entity. Someone is lying. We just don't know who.
That's why we have what's called "the due process of the law". When one makes
an affidavit, one is declaring under oath that one is telling the truth and knows
that their statements are accurate with firsthand knowledge. How can one know
with firsthand knowledge of the facts when one processes 100+ files a day? It's
impossible.
If you take a look at the price list above, you can see that for around $35, literally
anyone can order the documents to fabricate a missing assignment of the chain
of title to demonstrate to the court that the party doing the foreclosing has the
authority to do so.
As we mentioned in the previous section, a defective instrument is like bad food.
Once it is defective, it cannot be fixed.
If you get an MSI (Mortgage Scene Investigation) securitization audit, it will likely
show that your loan is subject to robo-signing. This can then be used as a valid
legal defense to prove that the assignments were not done legally following
proper due process.
56
Illegal Trustee Argument
There have been two instances in which a Federal Court Judge issued a
statewide injunction freezing ali foreclosures against homeowners against Bank
of America and Recontrust. One was in Utah in late 2010, and more recently, in
January 2011 in Nevada, because in both instances, Recontrust is not registered
to do business in that state.
If a company wants to do business in a state, it needs to register within that state
as an entity. This way, if someone within that state wants to sue them, they can
look up who the owners are, and where they live, so they can be properly served
with a summons.
In almost all instances, these foreclosure mills are not registered to do business
in the state they are attempting to foreclose in.
Many homeowners have used this defense to at least forestall foreclosure. It is
not enough to stop a foreclosure, but it is another claim the homeowner can
make in a Quiet Title Action defense making the argument that the Trustee is a
"non-entity. "
57
The Reconveyance Argument
This strategy comes from an attorney in California who is doing this with his own
house.
If you look at your Deed of Trust or Mortgage, you will invariably see language
that covers the clause of "reconveyance." The language typically goes like this:
"23. Reconveyance. Upon payment of all sums secured by this Security
Instrument, Lender shall request Trustee to reconvey the Property and
shalt surrender this Security Instrument and all notes evidencing debt
secured by this security agreement to trustee. "
When you have a situation where:
a) The note can be proven that it was securitized, then it can be proven that
the lender has, in fact, been paid in full.
b) The note has been sold from Bank A, to Bank B, and then to Bank C, who
is trying to foreclose.
In any event, this strategy involves bringing a civil action against the Originator;
Bank A, requiring them to do their job in a breach of contract civil action.
You see, a Deed of Trust secures the promissory note. It is the Deed of Trust
that gives the lender the "power of sale" clause to foreclose. If the original lender
is forced to issue a reconveyance, then the Deed of Trust has collapsed.
This is a ver effective, yet easy, method some people have used to stop
foreclosure, reason being that:
a) The originator is ofen out of business and cannot respond to the civil
action, thus the homeowner wins by default.
b) The originator had already sold the note with "no recourse", This means
the REMIC or the servicer can NEVER go back to the originator.
c) If the Originator loses the civil action by default, nothing bad happens to
them.
d) I f the Originator wins the civil action, nothing good happens to them.
Here's the kicker. If the Originator is still in business and they lose the civil action
in court, then there are very specific dire consequences that results. If they lose,
then it can be proven that every loan they have ever originated that has lost their
V.consumerdefenseprograms.com 58
home is the result of their gross negligence to perform their duty. This means
every homeowner who has lost his or her home can sue the Originator.
It is for this reason that the Originator often doesn't show up, or settles when
confronted with this strategy.
If you are interested in learning more about this strategy, we have a sample kit
that will guide you through the process on our site at:
http:/www.consumerdefenseprograms.com. Look under the Products tab for the
"Quick Reconveyance Method."
9
The Fair Debt Collections Practices Act
As you recall, your pretender lender becomes a debt collector after you are 60
days delinquent. This is the only way they can negotiate a loan modification with
you, because it gets discharged out of the REMIC. I have included a copy of the
FDCPA in the Appendix at the end of this book. You can also simply Google "Fair
Debt Collections Practices Act."
Let's talk a bit more about debt collectors. It is a scam. Debt collectors depend on
people's ignorance to collect their ill-gotten gains. This is one of those dirty little
secrets bankers have been hiding for years. They don't want you to know this
scam. We are blowing their dirty laundry out in the open because we are sick of
seeing so many people suffer at the hands of bankers.
Remember our example of the farming supply shop owner who gave me credit?
The crops froze and I had no money to pay back the loan. Remember, as a
business owner, you can do one of three things.
4) Carry the debt as an asset.
5) Assign it to a third party through endorsement
6) Write it off as a loss
A debt collector is someone who (is not the original creditor) buys a debt
that has been ofset, and attempts to collect it. They have purchased the debt
after you have declared it a loss. This is very imporant for you to understand.
This is why the government created a set of laws called the Fair Debt Collections
Practices Act (USC Title 1 5 Section 1 692) in order to minimize the deceit and
protect people. Sadly, not many lawyers understand this mechanic. They think
debt collectors act legitimately.
Let's say it again. Once a debt has been written off, it is discharged. It cannot
be collected again. Debt collectors use deception to convince people that they
were assigned the debt.
So, how does this relate to a REMIC and a debt collector? As we discussed
earlier, the individual shareholders are the real and beneficial interest holders.
Since the individual shareholders cannot endorse and assign their portion of the
loss, then they have to write it of as a bad debt. The Trustee of the REMI C
cannot do it, either, because the Trustee i s not the real and beneficial holder of
the promissory note. The REMIC has given up that right when it chose to
structure itself as a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) for the purpose of a straight
tax pass through.
The only way your lender can foreclose on you is to rely on the same deception
tactics used by debt collectors. The Fair Debt Collections Practices Act governs
the deceptive practices also. Remember, a debt collector pulls off their deception
through people's ignorance. This is whal your "lender" is doing 10 you. That is
60
why in all their communications, you will see "This is an attempt to collect a debt".
An original creditor is not required to disclose this.
So if you are in cour, or if you are counsel representing your client, it is important
for you to ask opposing counsel to stipulate the nature of their ownership of the
note. Ofentimes, opposing counsel will come into the court room representing
that their client has "repurchased the note," not realizing that they have, in fact,
brought fraud before the court. If opposing counsel is ignorant, then they are not
lying. It is up to you to get them to stipulate the true nature of the negotiable
instrument through interrogatories and discover; including subpoena of
accounting records. If you do this, watch how quickly the blood drains from
opposing counsel's face. It's quite a sight.
A defective instrument is not enforceable. An instrument that has been previously
discharged and bought as a bad debt is not enforceable. Don't be fooled. It's
like buying a cheap knock off Rolex watch in Mexico. It might look the same, but
underneath the face, it is not.
VW.consumerdefenseprograms.com 61
anyone who disputes a debt to see if you know the law. This is why it is so
important for you to know the law as well!
Under the Uniform Commercial Code Section 3-204, the name and the
signature of both the beneficiary and the original creditor must be disclosed in the
same document 3-204 (d). The signature of the borrower must be included as .
well into the assignment or transfer; unless a clause in the deed of
trusUmortgage waives that (most deeds of trust disclose this at clause #20).
FTC, HUD COMPLAINT and Comptrolier of the Currency
If you believe your mortgage servicer has not responded appropriately to a
written inquiry, you should contact your State's Attorney General Consumer
Protection Office. You should also contact the Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) to file a complaint under the RESPA regulations.
It is important that you issue complaints to these authorities because they cannot
act on their own. They need a damaged party to give them the authority to
prosecute a case. The more people complain to these authorities, the more likely
they will take notice and investigate.
In your complaint, explain to them what you have asked, provide copies of your
communication and where they broke the law. Specifically, under the Fair Debt
Collections Debt Section 1 692g.
Write to:
Office of RESPA and Interstate Land Sales,
Department of Housing and Urban Development,
451 Seventh Street, S.W, Room 91 54,
Washington, DC 20410,
You might also want to contact the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC
works for the consumer to prevent fraudulent, deceptive, and unfair business
practices in the marketplace and to provide information to help consumers spot,
stop, and avoid them.
The FTC's address is:
600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20580
(202) 326-2222
w .ftc.gov
63
You should also write to the Ofice of Comptoller of the Currency. This is the
organization that oversees banking and banking practices.
You can write to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency at:
Comptroller of the Currency
Administrator of National Banks
Washington, DC 20219
htp./w .occ.gov/
W.consumerdefenseprograms.com 64
What About My Debt Obligations?
"But I have been brught up to be honorable. I am a man of my word. I
signed the prmissory note, promising that I would pay I got my house. I
am now in default. The bank has the right to foreclose on my house . . . "
Most of us are decent, honest folks. We believe in paying our debts. Millions and
millions of people echo the above sentiment. You are not alone.
I am not talking about a free lunch.
I am not talking about scamming the system, nor am I talking about taking
advantage of some bizarre loophole in the law.
What we're talking about is fairness, equity and giving the everyday homeowner
a fair shake.
Heads I Win, Tails I Win
The beauty with the capitalist system i s that i t encourages free enterprise. It
encourages people to take risks. With high risks come
high rewards. Oftentimes you win, and sometimes you

lose.
However, in the situation where "heads I win (and keep all
the money), tails I get bailed out" . . . it gets down to a
question of fairness and equity. Remember, the bailout
comes from taxpayer money (YOUR MONEY). They
received over o. TRILLION dollars of free money. Pretty
much with no strings attached, to do with as they see fit.
On the other side of the spectrum, millions of homeowners are being kicked out
of their homes. No loan modifications to compensate for being "upside down"
(i.e., they owe more than their house is worth).
Where's the fairness in that? Particularly when they can use that same bailout
money to pay their top executives millions in bonuses (for the number of homes
they can foreclose and how quickly they can process them).
I don't know about you, but this sort of behavior is enough for the pitchforks to
come out.
Enough is enough.
Being Paid Not Once, But At Least Times
Being in a capitalist society, making money is not only
OK, but is encouraged. But where does making a profit
end and extortion/greed begin?
1 ) The Banks Risked None of Their Own Money
One of the rules of capitalism is risk V. rewards.
With high risks come high rewards. If they were able
to create money out of thin air (through the
fractional reserve banking system) and make 2. 5
times the face value of a loan . . . we're talking about
1 0,000% return on cash. This is an awesome
return. Sign me up any day.
2) The Bank Got Paid When They Securitized The loan
As I discussed, they got paid between 1 . 05 to 1 . 5 times the face value of the
loan when they securitized . . . within days of closing your loan.
3) They Got Paid for Stock Value Appreciation
The Lender also owns stock in the REMIC5. They can own up to 10% of
these Trusts. So when the market went up, they profited from the appreciation
of the asset.
4) They Got Paid by TARP
They got paid over 3. 5 TRILLION dollars of taxpayer money to do as they see
fit, including buying up other banks.
5) They Got Paid by FDIC
When the loan goes into default, banks are covered for 70% to 80% of the
value of the loan.
b} They Get to Keep Your House
To add insult to injury, they also get to kick you out of your home. They keep
the house and sell it again to the next sucker so they can repeat the scam.
How many times are these guys paid? Where is the fairness in all this for the
average little guy?
I don't know about you, but I am tired of being screwed. No one ever looks after
the little guy.
This is why I wrote this book in the hopes that you will share it with your friends
and neighbors, so more Americans can wake up to this scam.
66
I am sure there are some people who disagree with what we are saying. But
thank God, that's still legal in this countr. We each have the right to our own
opinion.
All I am saying is, enough is enough.
When they threaten our homes, they threaten our families. The home is one of
our most sacred assets. Without it, we are lost. Once they own our homes, they
can use that to leverage us and further enslave us.
To paraphrase Sun Tzu ( The Ar of War): "never back a rat into a corner. Always
leave a hole for the rat to escape, else the rat will bite back." The bankers have
backed us into a no win situation. J hope that by educating you about this scam,
you will decide to fight back.
67
The Bloody Road Ahead
By aU indications, 201 1 and onwards will be even worse than before. More and
more loans known as option ARMs (adjustabl e rate mortgages) will come due as
many of these loans have a romance period of 3 to 5 years. Once dues come,
and people's interest rates get hiked up, more people will get into trouble with
their loans.
As of the middle of 2010, the general American public stared learning about
robe-signers and improper loan assignments. This has been all over the news.
But as you have seen, this deceit goes much deeper than just procedural errors.
It is massive and willful fraud committed by the banking cartel.
It is anticipated that there will be a massive boom in the legal profession in the
next 5 to 1 0 years in the area of foreclosure defense and litigation, because as
more and more homeowners learn about loan fraud, they will likely seek out legal
professionals to seek relief from our predator
friends in the banking industry.
Not only that, there will be more and more
homeowners who have already lost their homes
wanting to have their grievances redressed as
they discover that their foreclosure was done
fraudulently. There is no statute of limitations on
fraud. This will mean more and more lawyers will
have plenty of opportunities to pursue civil
actions against these lenders for real and
punitive damages.
This is a problem that will haunt the banking industry for years to come. I expect
there will be a massive rise in adveriSing across the nation for "wrongful
foreclosure contingency attorneys" in which attorneys will pursue clients who
have lost their homes due to fraud for a big chunk of the settlement.
That is why the people in the banking industry who know about this are doing
everything they can to keep the truth from coming out. This problem will result in
very significant and long lasting implications to the banking industry for years to
come.
68
The Collapse of the Banking Industry?
If homeowners around the
country start awakening to the
fraud committed and star
suing banks en mass, could
this lead to a collapse of the
banking industry?
As much as I dislike the fraud
that is being committed by our
banking buddies, I do not
, relish the thought of the
collapse of the banking industry. It's like a child behaving badly. I disapprove of
the poor behavior but I do not dislike the child,
Let's not forget that we in the Western world have a lot to be grateful to our
banking friends, Much of our current lUXUry and way of life is, in part, due to the
banking system.
A collapse of the banking system will hurt everyone and ruin any chance of
economic recovery.
That said, Congress will never let this happen. There will likely be additional free
bail out monies issued to cover our banking friends against any possible harm
done to them. As we recall, they are simply "too big to fail" and beyond reproach.
They hold too much sway in government and fund most of the political
contributions to our representatives.
Free Lunch for Homeowners?
Another argument I have heard is that this is just another way for deadbeat
homeowners to get away with a free lunch and "stick it to the banks" at the
expense of other homeowners who pay their dues "like everybody else."
Nothing can be further from the truth.
Most people who cannot afford to pay for their mortgages are people who have
lost their jobs as a result of the economy. Bad things sometimes happen to good
people. This does not make them bad people. These are your friends, your
neighbors, or your relatives who are sufering.
The grievances we want to address are:
1 ) The housing bubble was caused by the banking industry out of greed.
69
2) The banks have enjoyed record profits from the boom.
3) The banks have been paid by Wall Street as well as by taxpayer money.
4) The banks are not the real parties of interest in foreclosure actions.
5) The notes bought from the secondary markets are unsecured. Re
adhesion of an asset that has been written off is illegal, immoral and
unconscionable.
6) Haven't the people suffered enough?
The point is, even if every homeowner decides to stop paying their morgages,
the lenders are not harmed directly because they are nothing but a servicer. The
people who are potentially harmed are the shareholders of the REMICs. But their
losses are covered by the FDIC. The banks have the TARP money set aside for
this purpose. They have already been covered for this loss.
The law is the law. Banks cannot pick and choose which laws to use when it is
convenient for them and which laws to ignore when it isn't. They cannot reattach
an unsecured note (that has been written off) and con the homeowners into
thinking that it is Perfect (without defects).
What these so called lenders (servicers) are dOing is actually taking this
opporunity to reap massive profits by acquiring people's houses for very little.
They will then manipulate the market again to fe-stimulate the economy and wait
for the prices of these houses to rise so they can sell them for even more prOfits.
I feel this is unethical and repugnant. Enough is enough.
What I am saying is that the fraud must stop. A foreclosure action must be done
bya real parin interest. Period. If it isn't, then it is nothing more than theft and
extortion.
70
Opportunity for Peace
I hope that by awakening more and
more homeowners and people in the
legal profession to the extent of loan
fraud, that our banking friends might
decide to come clean.
All we are asking is a fair deal. People all
around the country are suffering. All we're
saying is, enough is enough. Let the greed stop
and let the compassion for each other begin.
I hope to avoid the blood bath of litigation
ahead as it will not be gooc for the banking industry, and ultimately, it will come
back to haunt everyone. Like I said, we need a strong and reliable banking
system.
I hope that banks will feel that they can come back to homeowners and
proactively renegotiate home loans to make housing more afordable for
everyone to keep people in their homes.
If the people in the banking industry can see that Ihey are exposed to a massive
amount of litigation damages if they continue with this fraud and change their
predatory ways, perhaps we might see some economic recovery as more people
can actually afford to stay in their homes and spend money to support the
economy ins lead of feeding the banking system.
I hope that the people, the media, the government and the banks can all work out
an amicable accord to allow homeowners to stay in their homes. If not, then this
country is heading towards a legal blood bath.
71
more information.
What Are My Options?
The purpose of this book is to share some information with
you. We hope that this is just the beginning of your
educational journey.
Again, please don't believe a word we say. Do your own
research.
Whatever you do, don't go to your bank manager and
demand justice. He is likely to be as ignorant as everone
else. This is a scheme that only a few people at the highest
level of the banking and finance industry are aware of.
Don't go in half-cocked and demand that your bank show
you that they are a real party in interest. Arm yourself with
If this book has inspired you to take action, then the next step is for you to learn
more about this process so you can properly articulate and defend yourself.
If you are facing foreclosure, time is not on your side. Playing the ostrich game of
hiding your head in the sand is not going to make the problem go away. The
banks are going to steal your home and kick your family to the curb.
We understand that many of you who are facing foreclosure are experiencing
crippling depression and it is a struggle to even wake up and get dressed every
day. We know. We have been there.
But really, your choices are very simple.
Option 1 . Give up. Continue to feel sorry for yourself. Wallow in your
depression. Lose your home.
Option 2, Learn to fight. Defend your rights. Educate yourself. Force your
lender to prove standing.
If you are inclined to learn more and educate yourself further, we've put together
a series of videos to help you get up to speed quickly about foreclosure defense.
People have paid a lot of money to come to our seminars (including lawyers) to
learn this information. We've invested thousands and thousands of hours
researching this information so you can cut to the chase. Like we said, if you are
facing foreclosure, time is not on your side.
To learn more about foreclosure defense strategies, come to:
htp://ww .consumerdefenseprograms. com/resources/videos/
72
Do Your Own Research
If you are interested in fighting foreclosure, then you need to arm yourself with
more information. Do not rely on the information contained in this book. This
book should be used as a starting pOint and a framework only.
Verify the facts. Don't believe a word I say. Consider this a work of fiction.
Discover your own truth. Seriously, I could be talking out of my backside and
feeding you rubbish.
You have no rights until you learn your rights. I want you to own the process.
Research the laws.
Star reading up on the laws around securitization. Interview a number of
attorneys in town to see if there are any that would be willing to work with you
and support you in this matter.
Suing Your Lender
Oftentimes, challenging your lender to call them on their bluff will invariably lead
to litigation. For most people, the idea of suing a big corporation is enough to
make them vomit. Most would rather eat maggots than to show up in a
courtroom. Before you freak out, take a deep brealh. It's not as bad as you think.
Most of us fear the courroom because of our mental association with courts. We
tend to think people only need to show up in
cour because they are criminals or they are
being sued. It sucks being on the receiving
end of a civil action.
The tables turn when you are the one doing
the suing. It is the other side (the bank) that
will be squirming. However, you can't just go
about suing the bank for no reason. Courts
have rules.
If you are going to accuse someone of
something, you better have proof. That's it in a nutshell. In other words, the
Plaintiff (the person doing the suing) has the burden of proof.
The second rule of court is that evidence is everything. Allegations are cheap.
Anyone can accuse anybody of anything. But imagine jf I had a picture of a guy
holding a gun, pointing at a teller with a bag of money in his hands, plus 1 0 other
people at the scene testifying to the fact. This is something that is convincing
enough to get the person convicted.
73
Another thing you need to know about the cour system is, judges do not know
the law.
"WHAT?'"
That's insane.
No it's not. There are literally millions of laws out there. Criminal law, family law,
contract law, intellectual property law and so on. There is no way a judge could
know every law that has ever been written. It is the responsibility of the litigants
to bring the law before a judge so he/she can make a ruling based on evidence
and law.
So, if you were to come to court showing the judge where your lender is breaking
the law by bringing the appropriate laws before the court, would you feel a little
better about going to court?
If you were then able to come to court with 1 0 reams of paper full of evidence
showing where the bank lied, cheated and stole money and you were backed up
by an expert witness who used to be an ex-banker, would you feel a little better?
Would the bank feel a little squirmy?
See the difference? You just need to learn to build your case.
Imagine if you have done all your research, built your arguments, gathered a
bunch of evidence about the fraud and presented this argument to a lawyer. Do
you think it is more likely she will be on your side rather than tell you to take a
hike? I would hope so.
The problem is, most people think the bank is the Lender and that they do have
the right to foreclose. Now we know better.
The key in successfully defending against foreclosure is building and gathering
your evidence.
74
Communicating With Your Lender
Under the Truth in Lending Act, you are
entitled to demand full disclosure from your
lender.
Before jumping off the deep end, the best
place to start is to write your lender to
discover who they are. That might sound
strange . . . but they are not who you think they
are. You will often discover that they are, in
fact, not a lender at all, but they are a servicer
pretending to be your lender.
Try writing to your lender and ask them the following, pOintblank:
"Under the Truth in Lending Act, I have a right to know who the true party
of interest in this transaction is. Please stipulate whether you are the
holder in due course for my promissory note. If you are not the holder,
then you admit to being the servicer of this obligation. I demand that you
tell me who the holder in due course is.
Please also stipulate for the record whether or not my loan has been
securitized, and if so, what the name of the REMICfTrust my loan is
bundled with."
This will give you a lot of surprising information and will help you towards getting
proof of their fraud.
You might have to write two or even three letters before you get a valid response.
Many times, banks will not want to reveal their fraud. They will likely respond with
a standard form letter created by a no name, minimum wage employee to the
efect of:
"Your request is denied. There is no law that requires us to produce the
note. Your request is frivolous. We will continue to enforce the obligation."
These letters are not signed. There is no name on the response.
You might have to copy your letter to the FTC as well as the Comptroller to the
Currency (the body that governs banking in the US).
It is absolutely insulting.
However, it is imperative you document and have proof that you sent these
letters as they can be used as evidence in a cour of law. It is often a good idea
to have a "silence through acquiescence clause" in your letter.
For example, "If you do not respond with an answer within 30 days, then you
admit that this loan has been securitized and that you are merely a servicer of
the obligation and not a real party in interest."
To help you get started, I have included a sample letter on our website at
http://www.consumerdefenseprograms.com for you to use to initiate your pre
litigation discovery with your lender. Look under the Resources tab.
76
Getting a Securitization Audit
One of the things banks hate the most is a
securitization audit, as it blatantly exposes their
fraud. If banks hate it, then we love it.
A securitization audit is an audit done by a third
party researcher who scours through EDGAR (the
SEC's database for all public placements) looking
for your loan. This is tedious and grueling work, as
they have to literally find a needle in a haystack of a
few thousand loans.
What an auditor would provide you at the end of a
securitization audit is a document and an affidavit
that is admissible in court as evidence. The
document will show which REMIC your loan has
been securitized to. Since this information is publicly available through the SEC,
the affidavit is a simple statement of fact (given with firsthand knowledge) that
backs up the fact that the loan has, in fact, been securitized.
Forensic vs. Securitization Audit
What is the diference?
A forensic examination or audit will
audit your loan documents to make
sure your lender followed the law under
TILA (Truth I n Lending Act) and
RESPA (Real Estate Settlement
Procedures Act).
As you recall, as a Plaintiff, we have
the burden of proof. This is the Holy
Grail of proof that is needed to prove
that the bank is committing fraud.
Sadly, getting a good and reliable
securitization audit can be tricky.
Some companies charge as much
as $4000 for one because they know
the power and value of what it can
do for a case. It's pretty much like
that picture of a guy holding a gun at
the bank. If your bank is caught with
that smoking gun, it's a bad day to
be a banker.
Some people have used the Forensic
audit to stop a foreclosure claiming the
lender did not do the right thing, or did
not give them appropriate disclosures,
or notices of their rights, for example,
the rights of rescission.
If you are interested in getting an
afordable securitization audit,
come to http:/www.consumerdefenseprograms.com. We have searched far and
wide for the best and most cost-effective auditors in the country.
77
Learning the Rules of Court
If you are considering taking action to defend your home, then it will be
imperative that you learn how courts work. We found a fantastic resource called
Ju|1SccllOnu_ D_ Dr. Frederic Gray. He is an attorney who has a lot of
experience with litigation cases.
As Dr. Gray points out, "Going to court is like going into a knife fight. Don't go into
it with a potato peeler. Bring the biggest and baddest hatchet you can find."
Don't you dare trto go to court and "wing it." Go in prepared. This is your house
we're talking about.
Most of us are not trained nor versed in the workings of the court. We do not
have any experience in the courtroom. If you are going to take on your lender to
defend your home, we recommend you learn how to fight to win. For more
information about Juri sdiclionary, visit: ww.consumerdefenseprograms.com.
How to Deal with L Lawyers
For the record, I think the legal profession is one of the noblest in existence and
they have the potential to do the most good for the people. I have the highest
respect for good lawyers who fight for the rights of the people.
Many people have asked me for recommendations of good lawyers who know
foreclosure defense. Sadly, lawyers who know this stuff are few and far between.
Unfortunately, most of the time, lawyers are arrogant and deceptive. They call
people without a law degree laymen. The idea that a layman knows something
they don't know is beyond the comprehension of most lawyers.
Most lawyers (and sadly, judges, too) buy into
the whole bank scam. "You borrowed the
money. You enjoyed the house. You can't
pay. The bank is foreclosing. What's the
problem here? You're just trying to get out of
the debt. This is another one of those internet
scams." If they don't say as much, then their
body language says it all.
I saw one situation where a person had al l the
evidence and prepared a pleading. They
presented it to a lawyer. The lawyer told him
that he needed to put up $2000 before he
would even read the documents. Two weeks later, after taking the person's
money, the lawyer came back and told him, "This is crap. If you want me to
78
handle this, l will need a $5000 retainer (and that's only to get started)." I was
informed that he wanted $25,000!
I see this time and time again.
That is not to say that there aren't any good lawyers. Sadly, they are the
exception rather than the rule.
Before engaging the services of a lawyer, I recommend that you buy and study
up on the rules of court (buy Jurisdic/ionar). Even though your case might be
handled by a lawyer, it is imperative you know what the lawyer l dOing (or not
doing, for that matter).
I also recommend that you do as much of the homework as possible to build your
case. Gather the evidence. Do the securitization audit. Take your first crack at
building your own pleading. Do a Google search. Look for a template for a quiet
title action or wrngful foreclosure. Start reading up on what others have done.
This will save you money and several headaches . . . and increase your chances of
success.
It is hard enough to deal with the stress of losing your home and the prospect of
fighting the bank. You don't need to fight your own counsel. Interview any lawyer
you intend to work with. See if they have done any previous litigation or know
about commercial law. Most importantly, see if the person is someone who is
open minded and someone you can trust. Use your gut. If you don't like the guy,
then I don't care how good he is-run.
When working with a lawyer, you should be a thorn in his side (in a good way).
Don't just leave it to him. You should always be on top of your lawyer. Make sure
he is accountable for how many hours he spends on your case. If you are going
to pay someone $250/hour, you have the right to know what he is working on and
when. A common tactic lawyers use is to have paralegals do their work for them.
They would charge you their lawyer's rate and have the paralegal do the work.
Make sure you get clear distinctions between these rates.
My main concern with lawyers is that they see their clients not as people
suffering from bank fraud, but as buckets of money. You pay them a retainer.
You are hard on your luck. You barely have a roof over your head and you need
help. Yet these people see a retainer as an invitation to rip you off. Their
objective is to do anything and everything they can to spend that retainer as
quickly as possible and hit you up for more. If you run out of money, their
response is "Sorry. Tough luck." It seems like once these people get their Bar
cerificate, they made a deal with the Devil and traded their humanity and soul
away. Some people have taken to calling them "Bar flies."
Here's why you may not want the most experienced and sharpest one you
can find. They are often in high demand, they don't need the work and they don't
have the time to properly prepare and research your case. Instead, it might be
better to find a friendly attorney and bring him a case with solid arguments, solid
evidence and solid laws to back it up. All he has to do is to massage it. All you
have to do is to make sure he is actually REPRESENTING (talking on your
behalf, using your arguments) you.
One way to weed out crap lawyers is
to give them this book and ask them to
read it. We have written this book with
the purpose of not only exposing the
fraud but also showing lawyers how to
argue the case. A good lawyer can take
what we have presented here and do
their own research to support the
arguments presented here. If they are
not willing to read it or demand that you
pay them for THEIR EDUCATION, then
they might not be someone you want to
work with.
One key point: you'll want to enlighten
potential lawyers you intend to work with
that this is a major growth area of law. If
they learn the arguments of foreclosure
defense, they will likely have a lot more
business and a huge competitive
advantage over other lawyers in town.
Again, there are likely good lawyers out
By the way, REPRESENT
actually means RE-PRESENT.
Your lawyer re-presents you into
the court system as a legal
fiction (and not a person of flesh
and blood). They talk because
you can't. They call people like
you "incompetent," in the same
way a quadriplegic or a 6-year
old child is incompetent.
Your Legal Fiction is your name
spelled in ALL CAPS. It is not
you. But it is a representation of
you (much like a drawing).
All governments, banks and
legal entities around the world
can only interact with the legal
fiction of you.
there. Unforunately, many of them are often booked up and are hard to find.
The advantage of a good lawyer is that they can prepare your arguments, make
sure they are legally suficient and be able to represent you in court. Since he
should have experience in the courtroom, he would know what to say and do.
As boring and as weird as it may sound, learn to love the law. It is there for you.
If you are looking for a lawyer or know of a good one you can refer other
members to, please come to our site and check our referrals under the
Resources tab: htp:l/www.consumerdefenseprograms.com.
80
\. consumerdefenseprograms.com
81 www.consumerdefenseprograms.com
Do It Yourself
If you can't afford a lawyer or can't find a good one to work
is to do it yourself. This is known as pro se
(or pro per in California).
More and more homeowners are choosing
to do it on their own. Frankly, this
information is so exotic and so new that few
people can rely on lawyers to support them.
Let's be clear. This is not easy. This
could be one of the most demanding
thingsyou have ever been asked to do in your life.
Don't Do This.
Seriously, this is not a standard disclaimer. Don't do this. The litigation process is
not for the weak of heart.
It is better that you find other solutions than to litigate against your lender half
cocked. It's like a fly hitting a windshield. It is not pretty if you don't know what
you are doing.
That said, your home is everything. Without it, you are lost. You are ungrounded
and uprooted. Your family is unsettled.
Now that you know about the fraud, you have to decide whether you are willing to
fight for your rights. However, if you do decide to do this, you will have to commit
to doing it to the very end.
As Yoda says, "Do, or do not. There is no try."
We have put together a coaching membership program to help homeowners with
resources so they can do this on their own.
82
Our membership program allows you to connect with other homeowners so that
you can suppor each other, share and collaborate on ideas. As a benefit of the
membership program, you will also receive sample documents you can use to
challenge your lender and fight for your rights. Other benefits include:
Access to sample responses. Once a lender responds, we have
samples used by others in our program that you can use to craft your own
responses.
Legal Resources. We will show you where to go to look for local laws as
it applies to you and where you can find people to help prepare
documents who understand this process and more.
Group Conference Calls where you can ask and collaborate with
members on a weekly basis.
Guest speakers. We bring experts from around the country to talk about
mortgage defense successes to give you ideas to help you with your
situation.
Access to our Archives. We have over 40 hours of archive content that
will be available excluSively to members of our community.
Drip Delivered Content. Instead of dumping you with hours and hours of
content, we give you day by day automated content delivery so that you
are never lost. Our automated system will tell you when to send out
letters, when to order a securitization audit, when to go to the county
recorder's office for research, and more.
Let's be clear. This is a membership to a homeowner's suppor club and is not a
substitute for good competent legal advice. You should seek competent legal
counsel where possible. (Sorry, I am required to tell you this. The Sar
Association has a monopoly on the legal franchise.)
For more information about our foreclosure defense membership program, come
to: http://w .consumerdefenseprograms.com/coaching-program/intro/. lt is more
affordable than you think.
83
Help, My House is Up for Sale Next Week!
If you find yourself in a situation
where you are about to lose your
home, you have two options
legally.
One is to file a civil action against
your lender followed by a motion
for a Temporary Restraining
Order (TRO) and Injunctive Relief.
The other is to file for bankruptcy
protection with an automatic stay.
Firstly, in order for a TRO and/or an Injunctive Relief to be granted, the petitioner
has to show a strong likelihood of success. This means that as a Plaintiff, you will
need to bring compelling evidence to convince the judge that you deserve a stay
of the sale. It is your job to bring significant controversy that brings doubt as to
who the real pary in interest is in the foreclosure action.
Obviously, having a securitization audit would be hugely beneficial as well as a
pleading/complaint that argues the points and authority that the lender is not the
real party in interest. However, this takes time. Time you might not have.
Crafting a pleading takes time and requires great care. It is not something that
can be rushed. You should consult your lawyer as to the proper method and
process for this.
If you are a member of our foreclosure defense membershi p program, we have
included sample TROs, Injunctive Reliefs as well as sample pleadings that others
have used. It is then up to you to customize the arguments as it applies to your
own situation. Be warned. You do so at your own risk. These sample documents
do not come with any assurances whatsoever.
Sadly, TROs are RARELY granted. The Plaintiff has to bring an overwhelming
amount of evidence to cast significant doubt to the judge for one to be granted.
84
The Bankruptcy Automatic Stay Method
To buy time, some homeowners declare bankruptcy. When you declare
bankruptcy, you receive an automatic stay from all creditors, including the lender.
Many homeowners feel this is the best and most assured way to stop the sale
from happening.
Be warned. Bankruptcy is not for the
weak hearted. Do not enter
bankruptcy lightly.
You will need to declare all your
assets, income and financial details.
It is like having a permanent anal
probe of your financial details. It is
not pleasant.
Never ever lie, especially in
bankruptcy court. You will go to jail. As great as the temptation to hide the
precious little money you have from your creditors is, don't do it.
The other down side of bankruptcy is that it is a mark in your public credit score.
But frankly, having a bankruptcy or a foreclosure these days is not as big a deal
as it once was. Almost half the countr has been through it. It's like being a leper
in a leper colony. It's not as big a deal anymore.
The fact is, however, for most homeowners this might be the only way to keep
their house from the auction block while they buy time to build their case for
their foreclosure defense.
The other thing about bankruptcy is, that in my experience, I have found that
most of the wins come from the bankruptcy courts. The thing about bankruptcy is
that it has the nice Rule 3001(d).
Federal Rules of Bankruptcy 3001 (d) Evidence of perfection of security
interest.
If a security interest in property of the debtor is claimed, the proof of claim
shall be accompanied by evidence that the security interest has been
perfected.
It requires the lender to provide proof of claim.
This means that the table is suddenly turned. It is now the lender who has to
come up with the proof of claim. And if you know how their fraud is being
perpetrated, then you know how to object and deflect their deception.
What many people do after they file for bankruptcy is to file an adversar
prceeding. As a debtor, this is absolutely free. An adversary proceeding is like a
normal civil action, but done under bankruptcy court, and under bankruptcy rules.
It allows the debtor to challenge the bank to provide proof of standing.
The other thing
many home
owners do is file
their house as an
unsecured debt.
Please note, you cannot file an adversar proceedin
under Chapter 7. This is very important to remember.
This will then prompt the lender to complain. But in doing so, they are then
required to provide proof of claim which they often are unable to do.
Navigating the bankruptcy process is not for the weak hearted. Even for
someone who has a lot of experience in legal procedures. I highly (seriously,
HIGHLY) recommend that you get competent help. Look, I am here to save you
money. If I HIGHLY recommend something, I mean it Some things you can cut
corners with, but bankruptcyis something I don't recommend that you do on your
own. Trust me when I tell you that I tried to do it myself. It was a disaster. I
wished I had professional help.
Normally, hiring a law firm to handle your bankruptcy costs from $2000 to $4000
for Chapter 1o We found a company (not related to us) that specializes in
preparing bankruptcy documents who can do it for less than $1 000.
If you are interested in this service, come to
w .consumerdefenseprograms.com. lt is listed under Resources.
In the next chapter, we go into the practical matter of "now I know that there is
fraud going on with my house, what can I do about itT
w .consumerdefenseprograms.com 86
Practical Matters
In this chapter, we go through specific practical things you can do right away to
challenge your lender.
At its heart, there are four classes of people that are affected by foreclosures.
1 . Someone who is about to lose his or her home in a Non-Judicial State
(California, Nevada, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, etc.)
2. Someone who is about to lose his or her home in a Judicial State (New
York, New Jersey, Ohio, Florida, etc.)
3. Someone who has already lost his or her home
4. Someone who is hanging by their teeth, who is upside down or can no
longer pay their mortgage, trying to get a loan modification, or someone in
good standing.
Each class of person has diferent options and procedures available to them.
This chapter will outline in brief some of these options. Of course, this is just a
book and is no substitute for competent legal advice, so please consult counsel
before doing anything that could affect your home.
Non-Judicial State Homeowners
Most Western States of the US are Non-Judicial States. In these states,
foreclosures are governed by State Civil Code.
These homeowners have it the toughest. Being in a non-judicial state, Lenders
need not prove anything. They can simply notify the homeowner of the default,
then after a certain number of days, as defned under State Civil Code, the
property then proceeds to a Trustee sale at a public auction.
The only option available to you if you are a Non-Judicial State resident is for you
to file a civil action against your lender to compel them to provide proof of claim,
and therefore standing.
The other option is to declare bankruptcy (also known as BK). In bankruptcy,
generally speaking, you have two options, Chapter 7 (no asset BK) or a Chapter
1 3 (asset BK). What some homeowners do is to declare Chapter 7 and list their
property as an unsecured asset and wait for the lender to object. This then puts
the burden of proof on the lender. If your loan was closed with Lender A and is
being foreclosed on by Lender B or C . . . there must be (by law) a valid chain of
assignment to show that Lender C is the real and beneficial party of interest. As
we discussed, because of the problem of securitization, this is never done. This
l.consumerdefenseprograms, com 87
creates a real problem for the Lender (who is frankly doing this fraudulently
anyway).
For those with a lot of assets (such as equity in their homes). they can do a
Chapter 1 3. Under a Chapter 1 3 bankruptcy, you can file an Adversary
Proceeding where you sue your lender to compel them to produce valid proof of
claim. The beauty with Bankruptcy Court is that you have the law on your side.
Rule 3001(d) of the Federal Code of Bankruptcy requires that your lender provide
evidence of "perfected title."
If you choose to file a civil action against your lender, you better have proof as
we discussed earlier. The best proof you can bring is a securitization audit to
prove that your loan has been securitized. Then, work with your lawyer to build
an argument around the points outlined in this book. Unfortunately, this will set
you back at the minimum $5000, and more likely closer to $1 0,000 to $25,000.
Another option you could do is to do a "quick reconveyance method" as
discussed in Chapter 4. This can be very effective in stopping your servicer's
ability to foreclose because it closes out the Deed of Trust/Mortgage. This
method is only applicable when you have clear evidence of movement or
securitization. You can find out more about this method on our website under the
Products tab.
Alternatively, if you cannot afford a lawyer, you could try to do this yourself. Great
places to start are LivingLies.com and stopforeclosurefraud.com. These are
blogs with lots of articles, sample pleadings and lots of other resources I used
during my research.
Another option is to join our foreclosure defense membership program. We
realized that there are SO MANY homeowners needing help. That is why we
developed a coaching membership program with specific information and
resources to help homeowners with their foreclosure defense. Our membership
program has sample pleadings, sample responses, forms and procedures others
have used in their foreclosure defense. You will also be able to network with
other homeowners local to you . . . meet with them to have coffee, and support
each other. For more information about this program, come to our website at:
http:/w.consumerdefenseprograms. com
A good place to start, if you are in a Non-Judicial State, is to start writing to your
lender to demand that they produce valid proof of claim. You can find a couple of
sample letters on our site. This will be a good place to get started.
Judicial State Homeowners
In a Judicial State, your lender has to sue you to get a judgment before they can
foreclose on your house. As we discussed earlier, the burden of proof is on the
plaintiff. This means that if you are in a Judicial State, you have the advantage of
requiring the lender to produce proof of claim.
The problem in most cases is that homeowners in Judicial States do not know
the nature of foreclosure fraud. They either don't show up or if they show up,
don't know how to argue their points, and thus end up losing their homes
anyway.
The other problem in Judicial States is that because there are so many cases,
judges end up forgoing their Oath of Office to the people they serve. Instead of
dispensing justice fairly to all, they rubber-stamp judgments without a second
glance. This is not fair to the homeowners, but if homeowners don't know their
rights, nor know how to argue their points, then sadly, there's little justice for
them. As they say, you have no rights unless you know what those rights are.
So, the best thing to do if you are a resident of a Judicial State then is to arm
yourself with education. Learn the nature of loan fraud. Learn the procedure of
rules of court and on how to defend yourself in answering a summons and
complaint.
You should know by now that your best course of action is to push the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure 17, "an action has to be taken in the name of a real
party in interest" . . . in other words, you are to challenge your lender's Standing
and their right to foreclose. If they are not a real and beneficial party in interest,
then they do not have the right to foreclose. Allowing them to proceed with their
foreclosure without Standing amounts to nothing more than theft and extortion,
both of which are illegal.
Other homeowners in Judicial States choose to take a more proactive approach.
Instead of waiting to be sued by their lender, they do a forensic audit, gather
evidence of loan securitization and then sue their lender to get a Quiet Title
Action to remove the Morgage from their property, since no one can come forth
to produce valid proof of claim.
For members of our foreclosure defense membership program, we have sample
templates that homeowners can use to take matters into their own hands.
Homeowners Who Have Lost Their Homes
For those homeowners who have already lost their homes, there are two
situations. There are those who have lost their homes due to a sale, but are still
staying in their homes and there are those who have been forced to move out.
Many lawyers and people in the media are advising homeowners who have lost
their homes but are still living in them to stay in their homes. It could take
months sometimes for the lender to come around to actually force the
homeowner out.
Typically, in order for a lender to force a homeowner to move out, they will need
to file for an "unlawful detainer". This takes a while to be granted and this gives
the homeowner additional time. Staying another month or three at home means
another few more months they do not have to pay rent elsewhere.
Another technique homeowners do is to challenge the lender's standing to
foreclose, even after the fact, to fight the unlawful detainer. This is something you
will likely need to consult with an attorney about for more information.
The Wrongful Foreclosure Action
Homeowners who have already lost their homes but believe their loans have
been securitized might want to see if they can do a Wrongful Foreclosure civil
action against their "pretender lenders."
Here are some hints that your loans have been securitized:
- There is a company called MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems)
involved in the Notice of Substitution of Trustee, or on the original Deed of
TrusUMortgage (this is usually on the first 2 pages of your documents).
- Your loan is with one of the following institutions: GMAC, Countrywide Home
Loans, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, or. Chase.
- You closed with a small no name bank, and you are now being serviced by a
more well-known institution like the ones named above.
If you can gather sufficient evidence that your loan has been securitized, then
you might be able to build a case using the arguments presented in this book to
bring a civil action against your lender for a wrongful foreclosure and/or fraud.
Essentially, you are accusing your lender of committing fraud in that they did not
have Standing to foreclose on your property.
I n a civil action in which you have suffered damages as a result of something the
other party has done against you, typically you are entitled to three times the
damages (three times the value of your loan). This is typically called "punitive
damages." It means there are damages other than documented real
90
financial/physical harm. This includes stress, torment, humiliation, etc. Again, this
is something you should bring up with your attorney.
Before talking to an attorney (and wasting a lot of money), you ought to make
sure you have a case. In court, the truth is irrelevant. Evidence is everthing. It's
a sad fact of the system. It is your job to bring a strong case with plenty of strong
evidence of wrong doing before you can even begin accusing your lender of any
wrong doing.
The best way to star is to get a securitization audit. Look in the "What are my
Options" chapter for more information about getting a securitization audit.
Next, you would want to do more research about the problems of securitizations
and build your case and arguments. Good places to star include:
- ConsumerDefensePrograms.com
- LivingUes.com
- stopForeclosureFraud.com
- 4c1osureFraud.com
- MyPrivateAudio.com
Remember, you have no rights unless you know what your rights are. Your
"lender" is not about to volunteer information that will allow you to burn them. It's
your job to dig these up.
Getting a Contingency Lawyer
Look, most of us have our backs against the wall. We are barely surviving. We
don't have money and we don't have the time to study up on the law to take on
the bank by ourselves. And, hiring a lawyer on a umaybe" is not money
necessarily well spent.
Getting a contingency lawyer might be a really good option for many people.
However, there is no shorage of opporunities for contingency lawyers. These
lawyers get their choice as to what cases they want to take. It is your job to bring
them a case that is worth a lot of money, delivered on a silver plate. Make it a "no
brainer" for these lawyers to want to work with you. The best way to do this is to
have everything prepared, ready to go. This means that you have a securitization
audit, a basic pleading and argument already in place, and any applicable laws
that can be used in support of your case.
Be warned. A contingency lawyer will likely eat up a large percentage of your
91
settlement. I have heard of cases where they eat up as much as 70% of your
settlement. That said, there is a proverb I want to share with you.
10% of nothing is stil nothing.
A 20% to 40% of a multi-million dollar settlement is still a good deal, especially if
you didn't know you had a case in the first place.
But I would advise that you do your homework and bring your case on a silver
platter.
Honestly, the most dangerous person for a banker is a determined homeowner
who has already lost their home. It's like having a photo of a guy holding a gun,
pointing at a teller with a bag of cash under his arms. All the evidence is already
there. It just takes determination to assemble the evidence forensically to build a
case.
For help with a post foreclosure coaching, we have another membership program
that supports homeowners through the process with sample pleadings and other
resources at http://w .consumerdefenseprograms.com.
92
Loan Modification Applicants
For those of you in the middle of a loan modification, chances are good that you
will not be given one. As we outlined earlier in this book, loan modifications are a
scam. Your lender does not own the note. Frankly, there is no real incentive for
them to grant you a loan modification. It is your job to push the issue and
make it in your lender's best interest to deal with you fairly before you
bring them to cour.
How do you do this?
Imagine if we were playing a three shell game. Let's say I am a scam mer and I
have very swift hands. Somehow, I was able to swipe the ball (and there are no
balls in play at all). The typical rule of the game is for you to point to where the
ball is, I will then lift that cup. If the ball is under the cup you pointed to, then you
win. If not, I win. Now, imagine if you point at the two OTHER CUPS . . .forcing me
to lift those two cups. By a process of elimination and deduction, the ball
therefore MUST BE UNDER THE REMAINING CUP. Because we both know the
scam, you are going to give me an out. You are going to give me a wink (as to
say, I know your scam) and I will read the hint and will then say,
"Congratulations, you won. Now go away, kid, you are hurting my business," i.e. ,
I know that you know that there is no ball, but in order to maintain the illusion, I
am forced to admit that the ball must be under the last cup.
What we're saying is, you will basically build all the arguments to prove to your
lender that you know their fraud. You bring all the evidence to prove that they
don't own the note. You build your pleading as if you are going to sue them, and
send them a letter informing of your intention to file suite. You then tell your
lender that to save the pain of litigation, you propose that they deal fairly with you
for a fair loan modification and principle reduction.
You see, if you present them an ofer they cannot refuse, then you are coming
into the negotiation from a position of power.
You always want to negotiate from a position of power, not from a position of
weakness. Most homeowners approach loan modifications from a position of
desperation, as in, "Please. I am begging you. I desperately need you to give me
a loan modification before I go into foreclosure."
I am just showing you a different approach. This process works because in one
instance, one of my friends sued the CEO of Bank of America. It was AMAZING
how fast the offer for a loan modification came in because the CEO personally
pushed for the loan modification to be approved, no matter what.
Good luck. I know these are desperate times. But we need to be persistent. Don't
be a sheeple. Wake up. Take proactive action.
93
I'm Not I n Default Yet
Let's be clear. In no way do I advocate that you stop making payments and
deliberately go into default now that you have discovered this fraud.
If fact, if you are in good standing, your chances of fighting foredosure fraud is
even greater because of the following:
1 ) In a Non-Judicial State, once you are in default, the State Civil Code takes
over and your rights are greatly diminished. The "lender" does not need to
prove anything and if you fight them in court, they will tell you (and the
judge) so. And it's true.
2) The real and beneficial parties in interest are the individual shareholders
of the REMIC. Your debt has not been passed around in the secondary
market. This makes the allegations very specific in your Quiet Title Action
and the other side has very little place to hide.
If you are in good standing, the best place to start is to start writing your "lender"
(aka servicer) and demand to know full disclosure of the real parties involved.
Use the sample letters on the website at
http:/www.consumerdefenseprograms.com. Have your "lender" disclose whether
your loan has been securitized and to which REMIC.
Then get a securitization audit (or if you can figure out how to do one on your
own by looking at the SEC database).
Next, start a litigation process against your ulender" under a Quiet Title Action.
You are advised to best get a lawyer to work with you in this process.
If you choose to do it on your own, you might want to consider joining our
foreclosure defense membership program where we provide you with sample
Quiet Title Action pleadings others have used in the past as well as other suppor
resources to help you fight foreclosure fraud.
94
Start Local Groups
Look, this problem afects everyone. When sections of houses are foreclosed on,
it affects local communities. We have situations where there are literally
hundreds of houses sitting empty while thousands of families live in tent cities
around the country.
All the while our banker friends are getting
millions of dollars in bonuses from OUR
TAXPAYER MONEY.
We encourage you to get together with
people in your community to talk about this.
Raise each other's awareness.
We are in the middle of a global economic
depression. Everyone is suffering. And it
isn't getting better. One of the ways we can
change it around is by claiming our homes
possibly free and clear (or otherwise, get a
fair loan modification that we can actually
afford). Imagine if, instead of paying $2000 a month on your mortgage, you can
use that towards a new car or towards your children's education. Start injecting
money back into the economy to create real local jobs again.
Together, we can each make a difference. But you have to get of the couch and
take action.
W.consumerdefenseprograms.com
95
Taking On The Fight
If what I have written speaks to you and has inspired you to take action, then I
have done my job. However, that said, I am advising you to slow down.
Don't Do This.
As cruel as it sounds, I am again advising you against doing this process as I
have outlined. It is a lot of work and frankly is very painful. This process is not
easy. You will not be able to sleep. Every time the phone rings, you feel like
vomiting because you think it might be your lender or their lawyer calling you.
Every time you receive a letter from the lender or their lawyer, you feel like
someone has punched you in the guts.
To file a civil action against your lender is not something for the weak of heart.
However, if you do decide to do something about it, then welcome to the
movement. You should commit to doing it all the way.
Never approach a lion's den, and halfway during the fight, drop your shield and
run. You will be eaten. The same goes for this process. If you decide to do this
process, then you should commit to finishing it. A they say, "Never start a fight
you are not willing to finish."
This is perhaps the hardest thing you will have to do in your lifetime. It is the
classic epic battle of life and death. David vs. Goliath. This is the fight to save
your family. It is worh fighting for. It means that your children will have a roof
over their heads instead of living in a tent city.
It is for this reason we created our membership program so homeowners can
suppor each other. We've made it afordable so everyone can join . . . but like any
organization, it takes money to maintain. We have staff to feed and servers to
maintain. Your support means we can continue to do this research and support
our members.
For more information, come to our site at
htlp:lwww.consumerdefenseprograms.com.
Please Spread the News
Our mission is to awaken people to the problem of foreclosure fraud. If you know
someone in the press, send a copy of this book to them. Please help us by
forwarding this ebook to as many people as possible.
Pass this on to someone. Make a difference. Give this book to someone who
can benefit from the information contained in this book. We are all connected.
What happens to one of us affects us all.
If you are on Facebook, please tell your friends about il. Post a link to our site.
I hope you will join us.
UN
, -
Vince Khan
and
Your friends at Consumer Defense Programs.
Y.consumerdefenseprograms.com
97
Appendix
The following are supporting documents from various different sources that
expose bank fraud.
www. consumerdefenseprograms. com
98
Appendix A: CFR Title JZ Banks and Banking
PART 226-TRUTH IN LENDI NG (REGULATION Z)
226.39 Mortgage transfer disclosures.
Link to an amendment published at 75 FR 58501, Sept. 24, 2010.
(a) Scope. The disclosure requirements of this section apply to any covered
person except as otherwise provided in this section. For purposes of this section:
(1) A "covered person" means any person, as defined in 226.2(a)(22), that
becomes the owner of an existing mortgage loan by acquiring legal title to the
debt obligation, whether through a purchase, assignment, or other transfer, and
who acquires more than one mortgage loan in any twelve-month period. For
purposes of this section, a servicer of a mortgage loan shall not be treated as the
owner of the obligation if the servicer holds title to the loan or it is assigned to the
servicer solely for the administrative convenience of the servicer in servicing the
obligation.
(2) A "mortgage loan" means any consumer credit transaction that is secured by
the principal dwelling of a consumer.
(b) Disclosure required. Except as provided in paragraph (c) of this section, any
person that becomes a covered person as defined in this section shall mail or
deliver the disclosures required by this section to the consumer on or before the
30th calendar day following the acquisition date. If there is more than one
covered person, only one disclosure shall be given and the covered persons
shall agree among themselves which covered person shall comply with the
requirements that this section imposes on any or all of them.
( 1 ) Acquisition date. For purposes of this section, the date that the covered
person acquired the mortgage loan shall be the date of acquisition recognized in
the books and records of the acquiring pary.
(2) Multiple consumers. If there is more than one consumer liable on the
obligation, a covered person may mail or deliver the disclosures to any consumer
who is primarily liable.
(c) Exceptions. Notwithstanding paragraph (b) of this section, a covered person
is not subject to the requirements of this section with respect to a particular
morgage loan if:
( 1) The covered person sells or otherwise transfers or assigns legal title to the
mortgage loan on or before the 30th calendar day following the date that the
covered person acquired the mortgage loan; or
(2) The mortgage loan is transferred to the covered person in connection with a
repurchase agreement and the transferor that is obligated to repurchase the loan
continues to recognize the loan as an asset on its own books and records.
However. if the transferor does not repurchase the mortgage loan, the acquiring
party must make the disclosures required by 226.39 within 30 days after the
date that the transaction is recognized as an acquisition in its books and records.
(d) Content of required disclosurs. The disclosures required by this section shall
identify the loan that was acquired or transferred and state the following:
99
( 1 ) The identity, address, and telephone number of the covered person who
owns the mortgage loan. If there is more than one covered person, the
information required by this paragraph shall be provided for each of them.
(2) The acquisition date recognized by the covered person.
(3) How to reach an agent or party having authority to act on behalf of the
covered person (or persons), which shall identify a person (or persons)
authorized to receive legal notices on behalf of the covered person and resolve
issues concerning the consumer's payments on the loan. However, no
information is required to be provided under this paragraph if the consumer can
use the information provided under paragraph (d)(1) of this section for these
purposes. If multiple persons are identified under this paragraph, the disclosure
shall provide contact information for each and indicate the extent to which the
authority of each agent differs. For purposes of this paragraph (d)(3), it is
sufficient if the covered person provides only a telephone number provided that
the consumer can use the telephone number to obtain the address for the agent
or other person identified.
(4) The location where transfer of ownership of the debt to the covered person is
recorded. However, if the transfer of ownership has not been recorded in public
records at the time the disclosure is provided, the covered person complies with
this paragraph by stating this fact.
(e) Optional discosures. I n addition to the information required to be disclosed
under paragraph (d) of this section, a covered person may, at its option, provide
any other information regarding the transaction.
w.consumerdefenseprograms.com 1 00
Appendix B: Dissecting a Fraud in Action
This information is courtesy of Thomas Anderson of ww.theclassifiedfiles.com.
This notice from WESTPAC Australia might seem innocent enough. It's just a
public notice . . . right?
Let's dissect the fraud that is happening right in front of your eyes.
PUBLIC NOTICE
WESTPAC MORTGAGE SECURITISATION DISCLOSURE
In the interest of public awareness and to ensure that Mortgage Holders with
Westpac are given full disclosure of the details of their loans, please be advised
of the following announcement:
Westpac Banking Corporation in association with JP Morgan (Australia) Limited,
Perpetual Trustees, Waratah Receivables Corporation and Westpac
Securitisation Management Ply Limited have been involved with a number of
Residential Mortgage Securitisation programs including:
Series 2002-1 G WST Trust
Series 2007 - 1 G WST Trust
Progress 2010-1 Trust (AMP Bank)
REDS Trust Series 2010-1 (Bank of Queensland)
Torrens Series 2010-1 (Bendigo and Adelaide Bank)
Each of the Trusts are comprised of a pool of Residential Morgages that
Westpac originates and sells to a Trustee such as JP Morgan Trust
Australia Limited, Perpetual Trustees Limited or Waratah Receivables
Corporation. [Color variations and balding are mine to show several named
companies.}
In each instance, the Trust gains equitable title to the Residential Morgages
as a result of the assignment.
The Mortgages are then pooled into Tranches, within what are termed
"SPV's" or Special Serice Vehicles and then Notes or Commercial Paper are
offered to Investors on the Secondary Market backed by these securities.
You will not have received notice of the sale or assignment of your
Mortgage, as that could create a Title Perfection Event and collapse the
Trust.
To prevent this, the Trusts have hi red Westpac as the Servicer of the Loans,
under a Pooling and Servicing Agreement so that we may continue collecting
mortgage repayments and interest from you, to pass onto them.
In that way, you will not realise that there is any material change.
We have ensured that at a branch level, our staff will not be aware of any
assignment of your Mortgage, and as such will not be able to ofer any
assistance in the matter.
Thank you for your business.
WESTPAC BANKING CORPORATION
for further enquiries, please contact:
Manuela Ad IWestpac Securitisation Management Pty Limited
Chief Operating Officer Level 20, 275 Kent Street, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia
Westpac Banking Corporation +612 8253 3589
575 Fifth Avenue, 39th Floor
New York, New York 10017
J.P. Morgan Trust Australia Limited
(ABN 49 050 294 052)
This is a notice that was sent to Australian homeowners who had their loans with
WESTPAC (a major bank). The laws in Australia require that they notify the
creator of the promissory note of changes t
o
their negotiable instrument.
You've got to love how they cleverly crafted the letter like you've got nothing to
worr about.
First, notice that they tell them that the loan is going to be pooled into a SPV (for
the purpose of tax pass through).
Second, notice the sentence: "You will not have received notice of the sale or
assignment of your Mortgage, as that could create a Title Perfection Event
and collapse the Trust." Knowing what we know about securitizatio!1, it is true.
They DID NOT do a formal assignment (therefore, the title is not Perfected).
Perfected title, according to Black's Law dictionar, means that the title of an
instrument has been properly recorded in public record reflecting the proper and
true owner of the instrument.
So, monetarily and accounting-wise, they sold and assigned the note.
Procedurally and legally, the note was never sold.
Next, pay attention to this: "that we may continue collecting morgage
repayment and interest from you, to pass onto them."
102
They are then collecting the proceeds and interests and passing it onto (and
directly) to the shareholders of the REMIC (SPV).
Finally, this is the clincher: "In that way, you will not realise that there is any
material change."
What they are saying is, "we've just created an unlawful assignment, but we don't
want you to realize that we did it."
And, by the way, this fraud happens at the highest level of banking . . . don't worry
about talking to your branch staff about it, they wouldn't know.
"We have ensured that at a branch level, our staff will not be aware of any
assignment of your Mortgage, and as such will not be able to ofer any
assistance in the matter,"
103
PO|D|X L. Homeowner Wins: Case Law Successes
Patton V. Diemer, 35 Ohio St. 3d 68; 518 N.E.2d 941; 1988). A judgment rendered by a
court lacking subject matter jurisdiction is void ab initio. Consequently, the authority to
vacate a void judgment is not derived from Ohio R. eiv. P. 60(B), but rather constitutes
an inherent power possessed by Ohio courts. I see no evidence to the contrary that this
would apply to All courts.
"A party lacks standing to invoke the jurisdiction of a court unless he has, in an
individual or a representative capacity, some real interest in the subject matter of the
action. Lebanon Correctional Institution v. Court of Common Pleas 35 Ohio St.2d 176
(1973).
"A party lacks standing to invoke the jurisdiction of a court unless he has, in an
individual or a representative capacity, some real interest in the subject matter of an
action." Wells Fargo Bank, V. Byrd, 178 Ohio App.3d 285, 2008Ohio4603, 897 N.E.2d
722 (2008). It went on to hold, "If plaintiff has offered no evidence that it owned the
note and mortgage when the complaint was filed, it would not be entitled to judgment
as a matter of law."
(The following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Wells Fargo,
litton loan V. Farmer, 867 N.V.S.2d 21 (2008). "Wells Fargo does not own the mortgage
loan ... Therefore, the ... matter is dismissed with prejudice."
(The following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Wells Fargo V.
Reyes, 867 N.V.S.2d 21 (2008). Dismissed with prejudice, Fraud on Court & Sanctions.
Wells Fargo never owned the Mortgage.
(The following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Deutsche Bank
V. Peabody, 866 N.V.S.2d 91 (200S). EquiFirst, when making the loan, violated
Regulation Z of the Federal Truth in Lending Act 15 USC 1601 and the Fair Debt
Collections Practices Act 15 USC 1692; "intentionally created fraud in the factum" and
withheld from plaintiff... "vital information concerning said debt and all of the matrix
involved in making the loan."
(The following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Indymac Bank V.
Boyd, 880 N.V.S.2d 224 (2009). To establish a prima facie case i n an action to foreclose a
mortgage, the plaintiff must establish the existence of the mortgage and the mortgage
note. It is the law's policy to allow only an aggrieved person to bring a lawsuit . . . A want
of "standing to sue," in other words, is just another way of saying that this particular
plaintiff is not involved in a genuine controversy, and a simple syllogism takes us from
there to a "jurisdictional" dismissal:
104
Bethley, 880 N.Y.S.2d 873 (2009). The Cour is concerned that there may be fraud on
the part of plaintiff or at least malfeasance Plaintif INDYMAe (Deutsche) and must have
"standing" to bring this action,
(The following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Deutsche Bank
National Trust Co v.Torres, NY Slip Op 51471U (2009). That "the dead cannot be sued"
is a well established principle of the jurisprudence of this state plaintiff's second cause
of action for declaratory relief is denied. To be entitled to a default judgment, the
movant must establish, among other things, the existence of facts which give rise to
viable claims against the defaulting defendants.
"The doctrine of ultra vires is a most powerful weapon to keep private corporations
within their legitimate spheres and punish them for violations of their corporate
charters, and it probably is not invoked too often ... " Zinc Carbonate Co. V. First
National Bank, 103 Wis. 125, 79 NW 229 (1899). Also see: American Express Co. v.
Citizens State Bank, 181 Wis. 172, 194 NW 427 (1923).
(The following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Wells Fargo V.
Reyes, 867 N.V.S.2d 21 (2008). Case dismissed with prejudice, fraud on the Court and
Sanctions because Wells Fargo never owned the Mortgage.
(The following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Wel ls Fargo,
litton loan V. Farmer, 867 N.Y.S.2d 21 (2008). Wells Fargo does not own the mortgage
loan. "Indeed, no more than (affidavits) is necessary to make the prima facie case."
United States v. Kis, 658 F.2d, 526 (7th Cir. 1981).
Bethley, 880 N.V.S.2d 873 (2009). The Court is concerned that there may be fraud on
the par of plaintiff or at least malfeasance Plaintiff INDYMAC (Deutsche) and must have
"standing" to bring this action.
lawyer responsible for false debt collection claim Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15
USCS 169216920,Heintz V.Jenkins, 514 U.S. 291; 115 S. Ct. 1489, 13t l. Ed. 2d 395
(1995). and FDCPA Title 15 USc. sub section 1692.
I n determining whether the plaintifs come before this Court with clean hands, the
primary factor to be considered i s whether the plaintiffs sought to mislead or deceive
the other party, not whether that party relied upon plaintiffs'
misrepresentations. Stachnik V. Winkel, 394 Mich. 375, 387; 230 N.W.2d 529, 534
(1975).
"Indeed, no more than (affidavits) is necessary to make the prima facie case." United
States v. Kis, 658 F.2d, 526 (7th Cir. 1981). Cert Denied, 50 U.S. loW. 2169; S. Ct. March
22, (1982).
"Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or
when an inquiry lef unanswered would be intentionally misleading." U.S. v. Tweel, 5S0
F.2d 297 (1977).
"If any part of the consideration for a promise be illegal, or if there are several
considerations for an un-severable promise one of which is illegal, the promise, whether
written or oral, is wholly void, as it is impossible to say what part or which one of the
considerations induced the promise." Menominee River Co. v. Augustus Spies l & C Co.,
147 Wis. 559 at p. 572; 132 NW 1118 (1912).
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(a)(l) which requires that "Ia]n action must be
prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest." See also, In re Jacobson, 402 B.R.
359, 36566 (Bankr. W.O. Wash. 2009); In re Hwang, 396 B.R. 757, 766-67 (Bankr. CD.
Cal. 2008).
Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. V. Chong, 824 N.V.S.2d 764 (2006).
MERS did not have standing as a real party in interest under the Rules to file the
motion ... The declaration also failed to assert that MERS, FMC Capital LlC or
Homecomings Financial, llC held the Note.
Landmark National Bank v. Kesler, 289 Kan. 528, 216 P.3d 158 (2009). "Kan. Stat. Ann.
60-260(b) allows relief from a judgment based on mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or
excusable neglect; newly discovered evidence that could not have been timely
discovered with due diligence; fraud or misrepresentation; a void judgment; a judgment
that has been satisfied, released, discharged, or is no longer equitable; or any other
reason justifying relief from the operation of the judgment. The relationship that the
registry had to the bank was more akin to that of a straw man than to a party possessing
al l the rights given a buyer." Also In September of 2008, A California Judge ruling against
MERS concluded, "There i s no evidence before the court as to who i s the present owner
of the Note. The holder of the Note must join in the motion."
LaSalle Bank v. Ahearn, 875 N.V.S.2d 595 (2009). Dismissed with prejudice. lack of
standing.
Novastar Mortgage, Inc v. Snyder 3:07CV480 (2008). Plaintiff has the burden of
establishing its standing. It has failed to do so.
DU Capital, Inc. v. Parsons, CASE NO. 07-MA-17 (2008). A genuine issue of material fact
existed as to whether or not appellee was the real party in interest as there was no
evidence on the record of an assignment. Reversed for lack of standing.
Everhome Mortgage Company v. Rowland, No. 07AP-615 (Ohio 2008). Mortgagee was
not the real party in interest pursuant to Rule 17(a). Lack of standing.
In lamber v. Firstar Bank, 83 Ark. App. 259, 127 S.W. 3d 523 (2003), complying with
the Statutory Foreclosure Act does not insulate a financial institution from liability and
does not prevent a party from timely asserting any claims or defenses it may have
concerning a mortgage foreclosure A.CA. 18-S0-116(d){2} and violates honest services
Title 18 Fraud. Notice to credit reporting agencies of overdue payments/foreclosure on
a fraudulent debt is defamation of character and a whole separate fraud.
A Court of Appeals does not consider assertions of error that are unsupported by
convincing legal authority or argument, unless it is apparent without further research
that the argument is well taken. FRAUD is a point well taken! lambert Supra.
No lawful consideration tendered by Original Lender and/or Subsequent Mortgage
and/or Servicing Company to support the alleged debt. "A lawful consideration must
exist and be tendered to support the Note" and demand under TILA full disclosure of
any such consideration. Anheuser-Busch Brewing Company v. Emma Mason, 4 Minn.
318,46 N.W. 558 (1890).
National Banks and/or subsidiary Mortgage companies.cannot retain the note, "Among
the assets of the state bank were two notes, secured by mortgage, which could not be
transferred to the new bank as assets under the National Banking laws. National Bank
Act, Sect 28 & 56" National Bank of Commerce v. Atkinson, 8 Kan. App. 30, 54 P. 8
(1898).
"A bank can lend its money, but not its credit." First Nat'l Bank of Tallapoosa v.
Monroe, 135 Ga 614, 69 S.E. l123 (19l1).
It i s not necessary for rescission of a contract that the party making the
misrepresentation should have known that it was false, but recovery is allowed even
though misrepresentation is innocently made, because it would be unjust to allow one
who made false representations, even innocently, to retain the fruits of a bargain
induced by such representations." Whipp v. Iverson, 43 Wis. 2d 166, 168 N.W.2d 201
(1969).
"A bank is not the holder i n due course upon merely crediting the depositors
account." Sankers Trust v. Nagler, 23 A.D.2d 645, 257 N.Y.S.2d 298 (1965).
"Any conduct capable of being turned into a statement of fact is representation. There is
W. consumerdefenseprograms.com 107
no distinction between misrepresentations effected by words and misrepresentations
effected by other acts." (The seller or lender) "He is liable, not upon any idea of benefit
to himself, but because of his wrongful act and the consequent injury to the other
party." Leonard v. Springer, 197 111 532. 64 NE 299 (1902).
"I f any part of the consideration for a promise be illegal, or if there are several
considerations for an un-severable promise one of which is illegal, the promise, whether
written or oral, is wholly void, as it is impossible to say what part or which one of the
considerations induced the promise." Menominee River Co. v. Augustus Spies l & C
CO.,147 Wis. 559 at p. 572; 132 NW 1118 (1912).
"The contract is void if it is only in part connected with the illegal transaction and the
promise single or entire." Guardian Agency v. Guardian Mut. Savings Bank, 227 Wis.
550, 279 NW 79 (1938).
Moore v. Mid-Penn Consumer Discount Co., Civil Action No. 90-6452 U.S. Dist. lEXIS
10324 (Pa. 1991). The court held that, under TILA's Regulation Z, 12 CFR 226.4 (a), a
lender had to expressly notify a borrower that he had a choice of insurer.
Marshall v. Security State Bank of Hamilton, 121 B.R. 814 (III. 1990) violation of Federal
Truth in lending 15 USCS 1638(a}(9), and Regulation Z. The bank took a security
interest in the vehicle without disclosing the security interest.
Steinbrecher v. Mid-Penn Consumer Discount Co., 110 B.R. 155 (Pa. 1990). Mid-Penn
violated TILA by not including in a finance charge the debtors' purchase of fire insurance
on their home. The purchase of such insurance was a condition imposed by the
company. The cost of the insurance was added to the amount financed and not to the
finance charge.
Nichols v. Mid-Penn Consumer Discount Co., 1989 Wl 46682 (Pa. 1989). Mid-Penn
misinformed Nichols in the Notice of Right to Cancel Mortgage.
McElvany v. Household Finance Realty Corp., 98 8.R. 237 (Pa. 1989). debtor filed an
application to remove the mortgage foreclosure proceedings to the United States
District Court pursuant to 28 USCS 1409. It is strict liability in the sense that absolute
compliance is required and even technical violations will form the basis for liability.
lauletta v. Valley Buick Inc., 421 F. Supp. 1036 at 1040 (Pa. 1976).
Johnson-Allen v. lomas and Nettleton Co., 67 B.R. 968 (Pa. 1986). Violation of Truth-in
lending Act requirements, 15 USCS 1638(a)(10), required mortgagee to provide a
statement containing a description of any security interest held or to be retained or
acquired. Failure to disclose.
w.consumerdefenseproqrams.com 1 08
Cervantes v. General Electric Mortgage Co., 67 B.R. 816 (Pa. 1986). creditor failed to
meet disclosure requirements under the Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C.S. 1601-1667c
and Regulation Z of the Federal Reserve Board, 12 CFR 226.1
McCausland v. GMAC Mortgage Co., 63 B.R. 665, (Pa. 1986). GMAC failed to provide
information which must be disclosed as defined in the TILA and Regulation Z, 12 CFR
226.1
Perry v. Federal National Mortgage Corp., 59 B.R. 947 (Pa. 1986) the disclosure
statement was deficient under the Truth In Lending Act, 15 U.S.C.S. 1638(a)(9).
Defendant Mortgage Co. failed to reveal clearly what security interest was retained.
Schultz v. Central Mortgage Co., 58 B. R. 945 (Pa. 1986). The court determined creditor
mortgagor violated the Truth In lending Act, 15 U.S.C.S. 1638(a)(3), by its failure to
include the cost of mortgage insurance in calculating the finance charge. The court
found creditor failed to meet any of the conditions for excluding such costs and was
liable for twice the amount of the true finance charge.
Solis v. Fidelity Consumer Discount Co., 58 B.R. 983 (Pa. 1986). Any misgivings creditors
may have about the technical nature of the requirements should be addressed to
Congress or the Federal Reserve Board, not the courts. Disclosure requirements for
credit sales are governed by 15 U.s.C.S. 1638 12 CFR 226.8{b), (c). Disclosure
requirements for consumer loans are governed by 15 U.s.C.S. 1639 12 CFR 226.8{b),
(d). A violator of the disclosure requirements is held to a standard of strict liability.
Therefore, a plaintiff need not show that the creditor i n fact deceived him by making
substandard disclosures. Since Transworld Systems Inc. have not cancelled the security
interest and return all monies paid by Ms. Sherrie I. LaForce within the 20 days of
receipt of the letter of rescission of October 7, 2009, the lenders named above are
responsible for actual and statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.s.c. 1640(a).
Porter v. Mid-Penn Consumer Discount Co., 961 F.2d 1066 (3rd eir. 1992). Porter filed an
adversary proceeding against appellant under 15 U.S.c. 1635, for failure to honor her
request to rescind a loan secured by a mortgage on her home.
Rowland v. Magna Millikin Bank of Decatur, N.A., 812 F.Supp. 875 (1992) Even technical
violations will form the basis for liability. The mortgagors had a right to rescind the
contract in accordance with 15 U.s.c. 1635(c).
New Maine Nat. Bank v. Gendron, 780 F.Supp. 52 (l992). The court held that
defendants were entitled to rescind loan under strict liability terms of TILA because
plaintiff violated TILA's provisions.
Dixon v. S & S loan Serice of Waycross, Inc., 754 F .Supp. 1567 (1990); TILA is a remedial
statute, and, hence. is liberally construed i n favor of borrowers. The remedial objectives
of TILA are achieved by imposing a system of strict liability in favor of consumers when
mandated disclosures have not been made. Thus, liability will flow from even minute
deviations from the requirements of the statute and the regulations promulgated under
it.
Woolfolk v. Van Ru Credit Corp., 783 F.Supp. 724 (l990) There was no dispute as to the
material facts that established that the debt collector violated the FOCPA. The court
granted the debtors' motion for summary judgment and held that (1) under 15 U.s.c.
1692(e), a debt collector could not use any false, deceptive, or misleading
representation or means i n connection with the collection of any debt; Unfair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Jenkins v. Landmark Mortg. Corp. of Virginia, 696 F.Supp. 1089 (W.D. Va. 1988). Plaintiff
was also misinformed regarding the effects of a rescission. The pertinent regulation
states that "when a consumer rescinds a transaction, the security interest giving rise to
the right of rescission becomes void and the consumer shall not be liable for any
amount, including any finance charge." 12 CFR 226.23(d) (1).
Laubach v. Fidelity Consumer Discount Co., 686 F.5upp. 504 (E.D. Pa. 1988). monetary
damages for the plaintiffs pursuant to the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organization Act, 18 USC 1961. (Count I ); the Truth-in-lending Act, 15 USC 1601.
Searles v. Clarion Mortg. Co., 1987 WL 61932 (E.D. Pa. 1987); liability will flow from
even minute deviations from requirements of the statute and Regulation Z. failure to
accurately disclose the property in which a security interest was taken in connection
with a consumer credit transaction involving the purchase of residential real estate i n
violation of 15 USCs 1638(a)(9). and 12 CFR 226.18(m).
Dixon v. 5 & 5 loan Service of Waycross, Inc., 754 F.Supp. 1567, 1570 (S.D. Ga. 1990).
Congress's purpose i n passing the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), 15 USCs 1601(a). was to
assure a meaningful disclosure of credit terms so that the consumer will be able to
compare more readily the various credit terms available to him. 15 USCs 1601(a). TILA
is a remedial statute, and, hence, is liberally construed in favor of borrowers.;
Cervantes v. General Electric Mortgage Co., 67 B.R. 816 (E.D. Pa. 1986). The court found
that the TILA violations were governed by a strict liability standard, and defendant's
failure to reveal in the disclosure statement the exact nature of the security interest
violated the TILA.
Perry v. Federal National Mortgage, 59 B. R. 947 (E.D. Pa. 1986). Defendant failed to
accurately disclose the security interest taken to secure the loan.
Porter v. Mid-Penn Consumer Discount Co., 961 F .2d 1066 (3rd Cir. 1992). Adversary
proceeding against appellant under 15 USc. 1635, for failure to honor her request to
WI.consumerdefenseprograms.com 1 1 0
rescind a loan secured by a mortgage on her home. She was entitled to the equitable
relief of rescission and the statutory remedies under 15 USc. 1640 for appellant's
failure to rescind upon request.
Solis v. Fidelity Consumer Discount Co., 58 B. R. 983 (Pa. 1986). Any misgivings creditors
may have about the technical nature of the requirements should be addressed to
Congress or the Federal Reserve Board, not the courts. Disclosure requirements for
credit sales are governed by 15 U. S.C.S. 1638 12 CFR 226.8(b), (c). Disclosure
requirements for consumer loans are governed by 15 U.S.C.S. 1639 12 CFR 226.8(b),
(d).
A violator of the disclosure requirements i s hel d to a standard of strict liability.
Therefore, a plaintiff need not show that the creditor in fact deceived him by making
substandard disclosures. Rowland v. Magna Millikin Bank of Decatur, N.A., 812 F.Supp.
875 (1992),
Even technical violations will form the basis for liability. The mortgagors had a right to
rescind the contract in accordance with 15 U.S.c. 1635(c). New Maine Nat. Bank v.
Gendron, 780 F.Supp. 52 (D. Me. 1992). The court held that defendants were entitled to
rescind loan under strict liability terms of TILA because plaintif violated TILA's
provisions.
Google:
"The Boyko Decision"
"Rickie Walker Case"
There are so many others, we can publish a whole Bible sized handbook but
frankly, it's pretty boring . . .
w.consumerdefenseprograms.com 1 1 1
Appendix D: Fair Debt Collections Practices Act - Debt
Validation Letter
USC Title 1 5 1692g. Here is the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act in regards
to validation of debts.
809. Validation of debts
(a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection
with the collection of any debt, a debt colleclor shall, unless the following
information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid
the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing-
(1) the amount of the debt;
(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;
(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the
notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be
assumed to be valid by the debt collector;
(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the
thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt
collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the
consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the
consumer by the debt collector; and
(5) a statement that, upon the consumer's written request within the thirty-day
period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of
the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.
(b) If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period
described in subsection (a) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or
that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the
debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof,
until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment,
or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification
or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the
consumer by the debt collector. Collection activities and communications that do
not otherwise violate this title may continue during the 3D-day period referred to
in subsection (a) unless the consumer has notified the debt collector in writing
that the debt, or any portion of the debt, is disputed or that do not otherwise
violate this title may continue during the 30-day period referred to in subsection
(a) unless the consumer has notified the debt collector in writing that the debt, or
any portion of the debt, is disputed or that the consumer requests the name and
address of the original creditor. Any collection activities and communication
during the 30-day period may not overshadow or be inconsistent with the
disclosure of the consumer's right to dispute the debt or request the name and
address of the original creditor.
(c) The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section
may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.
(d) A communication in the form of a formal pleading in a civil action shall not be
treated as an initial communication for purposes of subsection (a).
(e) The sending or delivery of any form or notice which does not relate to the
collection of a debt and is expressly required by the Internal Revenue Code of
1 986, title V of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, or any provision of Federal or State law
relating to notice of data security breach or privacy, or any regulation prescribed
under any such provision of law, shall not be treated as an initial communication
in connection with debt collection for purposes of this section
www.consumerdefenseprograms.com 1 1 3
Recommended Products
Jurisdictionary
Can't afford a |awyC|`hCnthis product is for you.
This is the complete Pro Se guide to litigation. If you want to go to cour, you
must absolutely understand the rules of court. Jurisdic/ionar offers you a quick
introduction to help you understand the framework of court.
What is a Motion?
What is a proper Cause of Action to be considered legally sufficient?
How do you make the Judge follow the law?
If you don't know the answers to these, how will you stand a chance in court?
Even if you hire a lawyer, how do you know they are doing a good job for you?
How do you know what questions to ask your lawyer to make sure that he is
representing you properly if you are ignorant? Your lawyer could be taking you to
the cleaners.
If you plan to go to court, don't you dare go without Jurisdictionar.
Afordable Securitization Audits
Having a Securitization audit is like having a picture of your banker in the vault,
stuffing money into his bag after hours (i.e. , caught in the act of stealing).
Bankers absolutely hate these as it exposes their fraud.
There are many so called "securitization auditors" out there who promise the
world. Unless you actually know what to look for, you could be wasting your
money. We've investigated quite a number of auditors, and many of them are
scams or are simply way too expensive for the average homeowner. Some
charge as much as $2000, while some attorneys charge as much as $4000 for
an audit because they know the power an audit can have.
Before you can bring a civil action against your lender, you will need to have
proof. Without sufficient proof, your case is subject to dismissal.
Having a securitization audit will ensure that your case will be able to survive a
Motion to Dismiss to get into the Discovery phase of the civil action.
To order a securitization audit, come to:
http://www.consumerdefenseprograms.com/resources/securitization-audit!
EXHIBIT 2
F I L E D
Electronically
12-31-2011:04:45:40 PM
Craig Franden
Clerk of the Court
Return to Search Results
You searched for: RecDateID >=Tue Oct 05 00:00:00 PDT 2004 and <=Thu J an 05 00:00:00 PST 2012 and approximate search
in BothNamesID for carpentier
28 items found, displaying all items.1
Description Summary Add All to My Images
Reconveyance
3124955
11/09/2004 09:45:00 AM
Grantor:
Grantee: CARPENTIER KATHLEEN M
Add to My Images
Reconveyance
3154405
01/10/2005 04:17:00 PM
Grantor:
Grantee: CARPENTIER KENNETH J
Add to My Images
Deed
3195434
04/08/2005 11:23:00 AM
Grantor: CARPENTIER KENNETH J, CARPENTIER SANDRA
Grantee: CARPENTIER KENNETH J, CARPENTIER SANDRA
Add to My Images
Deed Of Trust
3195435
04/08/2005 11:23:00 AM
Grantor: CARPENTIER KENNETH J, CARPENTIER SANDRA M
Grantee: SECURITYNATIONAL MORTGAGE COMPANY, MORTGAGE
ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS NOMINEE
Add to My Images
Deed Of Trust
3200397
04/19/2005 04:02:00 PM
Grantor: CARPENTIER KENNETH J, CARPENTIER SANDRA
Grantee: MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS NOMINEE,
CAPITAL ONE HOME LOANS LLC
Add to My Images
Deed Of Trust
3208651
05/04/2005 09:49:00 AM
Grantor: CARPENTIER JAMES S, CARPENTIER JOAN E
Grantee: AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION, AAMES HOME LOAN
Add to My Images
Reconveyance
3218398
05/23/2005 03:56:00 PM
Grantor:
Grantee: CARPENTIER JAMES S
Add to My Images
Reconveyance
3225988
06/07/2005 02:05:00 PM
Grantor:
Grantee: CARPENTIER JAMES S, CARPENTIER JOAN E
Add to My Images
Deed Of Trust
3423557
08/08/2006 03:45:00 PM
Grantee: CARR MARY ANN
Add to My Images
Lien
3427517
08/17/2006 04:08:00 PM
Grantor: CARPENTIER JAMES S, CARPENTIER JOAN
Grantee: SPARKS CITY
Add to My Images
Notice Of
Default
3459648
11/06/2006 02:28:00 PM
Grantee: MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC,
SECURITY NATIONAL MORTGAGE COMPANY
Add to My Images
Notice Of Sale
3496628
02/09/2007 02:47:20 PM
Grantor: FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, LOANSTAR
MORTGAGEE SERVICES LLC, CARPENTIER KENNETH J, CARPENTIER
SANDRA M
Grantee:
Add to My Images
Document Search http://icris.washoecounty.us/recorder/eagleweb/docSearchResults.jsp?se...
1 of 3 12/19/2011 6:26 AM
Notice Of
Default
3521943
04/17/2007 04:06:54 PM
Grantee: AAMES HOME LOAN
Add to My Images
Cancel Default
3544568
06/15/2007 04:21:05 PM
Grantee: MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC
NOMINEE, SECURITY NATIONAL MORTGAGE COMPANY
Add to My Images
Cancel Default
3545610
06/19/2007 03:13:33 PM
Grantor: MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC NOMINEE,
SECURITY NATIONAL MORTGAGE COMPANY
Grantee: CARPENTIER KENNETH J, CARPENTIER SANDRA M
Add to My Images
Notice Of Sale
3564893
08/13/2007 04:48:07 PM
Grantor: TRUSTEE CORPS, CARPENTIER JAMES S, CARPENTIER JOAN E
Grantee:
Add to My Images
Notice Of Sale
3577211
09/20/2007 04:42:26 PM
Grantor: FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, LOANSTAR
MORTGAGEE SERVICES LLC, CARPENTIER KENNETH J, CARPENTIER
SANDRA M
Grantee:
Add to My Images
Trustees Deed
3585121
10/16/2007 04:56:07 PM
Grantor: FIRST AMERICAN LOANSTAR TRUSTEE SERVICES TR
(CARPENTIER), CARPENTIER KENNETH J, CARPENTIER SANDRA M
Grantee: WELLS FARGO BANK NA
Add to My Images
Notice Of
Default
3629741
03/12/2008 03:57:05 PM
Grantor: CARPERNTIER JAMES S, CARPENTIER JOAN E
Add to My Images
Lien
3652080
05/21/2008 10:47:36 AM
Add to My Images
Notice Of Sale
3661497
06/19/2008 12:15:40 PM
Grantor: QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP, CARPENTIER JAMES S,
CARPENTIER JOAN E
Grantee:
Add to My Images
Judgment
3750715
04/20/2009 12:41:06 PM
Grantor: CARPENTIER JAMES, CARPENTIER JOAN
Grantee: COLLECTION SERVICE OF NEVADA
Add to My Images
Lien
3769768
06/11/2009 01:43:03 PM
Add to My Images
Lien
3831583
12/18/2009 02:54:18 PM
Add to My Images
Release
Judgment
3852334
02/24/2010 12:48:10 PM
Grantor: COLLECTION SERVICE OF NEVADA
Grantee: CARPENTIER JAMES, CARPENTIER JOAN
Add to My Images
Lien
3905759
07/28/2010 11:05:01 AM
Add to My Images
2 of 3 12/19/2011 6:26 AM
Lien
3954113
12/16/2010 01:33:38 PM
Add to My Images
Notice Of Sale
4046455
10/03/2011 08:46:33 AM
Grantor: QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP, CARPERNTIER JAMES S,
CARPENTIER JOAN E
Grantee:
Add to My Images
3 of 3 12/19/2011 6:26 AM
You searched for: exact search in BothNamesID for carpentier, james
Deed Of Trust
1745676
12/22/1993 10:05:00 AM B: 3935 P: 632
Grantor: CARPENTIER JAMES S
Grantee: REPUBLIC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
No images
Deed Of Trust
1835021
09/22/1994 10:30:00 AM B: 4156 P: 494
Grantee: REPUBLIC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
No images
Deed Of Trust
1835177
09/22/1994 03:41:00 PM B: 4156 P: 891
Grantee: FIRST UNION HOME EQUITY BANK
No images
Request Notice Of
Default
1835178
09/22/1994 03:41:00 PM B: 4156 P: 895
Grantee:
No images
Reconveyance
1886675
04/19/1995 08:46:00 AM B: 4286 P: 93
Grantor:
No images
Deed Of Trust
1992151
05/06/1996 04:40:00 PM B: 4565 P: 734
Grantee: FIRST UNION HOME EQUITY BANK
No images
Request Notice Of
Default
1992152
05/06/1996 04:40:00 PM B: 4565 P: 739
Grantee:
No images
Homestead
2074218
02/21/1997 12:29:00 PM B: 4793 P: 88
Grantor: CARPENTIER JAMES, CARPENTIER JONI
Grantee:
No images
Deed
2393040
10/28/1999 02:35:00 PM
Add to My Images
Deed Of Trust
2393041
10/28/1999 02:35:00 PM
Grantee: MERITAGE MORTGAGE CORPORATION
Add to My Images
Reconveyance
2405694
12/14/1999 09:47:00 AM
Grantor:
Add to My Images
Deed Of Trust
3208651
05/04/2005 09:49:00 AM
Add to My Images
Reconveyance
3218398
05/23/2005 03:56:00 PM
Grantor:
Add to My Images
Reconveyance
3225988
06/07/2005 02:05:00 PM
Grantor:
Add to My Images
1 of 2 12/19/2011 6:22 AM
Deed Of Trust
3423557
08/08/2006 03:45:00 PM
Grantee: CARR MARY ANN
Add to My Images
Lien
3427517
08/17/2006 04:08:00 PM
Add to My Images
Notice Of Default
3521943
04/17/2007 04:06:54 PM
Grantee: AAMES HOME LOAN
Add to My Images
Notice Of Sale
3564893
08/13/2007 04:48:07 PM
Grantor: TRUSTEE CORPS, CARPENTIER JAMES S, CARPENTIER
JOAN E
Grantee:
Add to My Images
Lien
3652080
05/21/2008 10:47:36 AM
Add to My Images
Notice Of Sale
3661497
06/19/2008 12:15:40 PM
Grantor: QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORP, CARPENTIER JAMES S,
CARPENTIER JOAN E
Grantee:
Add to My Images
Judgment
3750715
04/20/2009 12:41:06 PM
Grantor: CARPENTIER JAMES, CARPENTIER JOAN
Grantee: COLLECTION SERVICE OF NEVADA
Add to My Images
Lien
3769768
06/11/2009 01:43:03 PM
Add to My Images
Lien
3831583
12/18/2009 02:54:18 PM
Add to My Images
Release Judgment
3852334
02/24/2010 12:48:10 PM
Grantor: COLLECTION SERVICE OF NEVADA
Grantee: CARPENTIER JAMES, CARPENTIER JOAN
Add to My Images
Lien
3905759
07/28/2010 11:05:01 AM
Add to My Images
Lien
3954113
12/16/2010 01:33:38 PM
Add to My Images
2 of 2 12/19/2011 6:22 AM
DOC #3629741
03/12/2008
03:57:05 PM
Electronic
RecordingRequestedBy
TICOR TITLE
-
RENO
Washoe
County
Recorder
Recording requested by:
Kathryn
L. Burke
-
Recorder
Fee: $16.00 RPTT: $0
When recorded mailto: Page
1 of 3
Quality
Loan Service
Corp.
2141 5thAvenue
San
Diego,
CA 92101
Thesinciarnionari harabyaffirms thatthereisno
Space
above this line for Recorder's use
TS No.:NV-08-141434-BL Order# W860369 LoanNo.:0003770195
AssessorsParcel
No(s)
030-091-12 "2 &
/
Property
Under Deed of Trust
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN: That
Quality
Loan Service
Corp.
iseitherthe
original trustee,
the
duly
appointed
substituted trustee,
or
acting
as
agent
forthetrustee or
beneficiary
undera Deed ofTrustdated
4/22/2005,
executed
by
JAMES S.CARPERNTIER AND JOAN E.CARPENTIER, HUSBAND AND WIFE
AS JOINT
TENANTS,
as
Trustor,
to secure certain
obligations
in favorof AAMES FUNDING
CORPORATION DBA AAMES HOME LOAN,
as
beneficiary,
recorded5/4/2005,as InstrumentNo.
3208651,
inBook
xxx,Page
xxx ofOfficial RecordsintheOfficeoftheRecorderof WASHOE
County,
Nevada
secunng, among
other
obligations including
1
NOTE(S)
FOR THE ORIGINAL sum of
$170,800.00,
thatthebeneficial interest undersuchDeed ofTrustand the
obligations
secured
thereby
are
presently
held
by
the
undersigned;
thata breach
of,
and default
in,
the
obligations
forwhichsuch Deed of
Trustis
security
hasoccurredinthat
payment
has notbeen made of:
Installment of
pnncipal
and interest
plusimpounds
and /oradvanceswhichbecame due on 10/1/2007
plus
amounts thataredue or
may
become due forthe
following:
late
charges,delinquent propertytaxes,
msurance
premiums,
advances made on senior
liens,
taxesand/ormsurance,
trustees
fees,
and
any
attorney
feesand courtcosts
arising
fromorassociated withbeneficiaries effort to
protect
and
preserve
its
security
must be curedas a condition ofreinstatement.
That
by
reasonthereofthe
presentBeneficiary
undersuchdeed ofTrusthas executedand delivered to
said
dulyappointed
Trusteea written Declaration ofDefaultand Demand forSaleand has
deposited
with
said
dulyappointed
Trusteesuch Deed ofTrustand alldocuments
evidencing obligations
secured
thereby
and hasdeclaredand does
hereby
declareallsums secured
therebyimmediately
due and
payable
and
has electedand does
hereby
electtocausethetrust
property
tobe soldto
satisfy
the
obligations
secured
thereby.
NOTICE
You
may
havethe
right
tocurethedefault hereonand reinstate theone
obligation
secured
by
suchDeed
ofTrustabovedescribed.SectionNRS 107.080
permits
certain defaults tobe cured
upon
the
Payment
of
theamounts
required by
that
statutory
sectionwithout
requiring payment
ofthat
portion
of
principal
and
interest whichwouldnotbe due had no default occurred.Where reinstatement is
possible,
ifthedefault is
notcuredwithin 35
daysfollowing recording
and
mailing
ofthisNoticetoTrustororTrustor's successorin
interest,
the
right
ofreinstatement will terminate and the
property may
thereafter be sold.The Trustor
may
have the
right
to
bring
a courtactiontoassertthenonexistence ofa default or
any
otherdefenseof
Trustortoacceleration and Sale.
Page
1
3629741
Page
2 of 3
03/12/2008
03:57:05 PM
TS No.:NV-08-141434-BL
Loan No.:0003770195
NoticeofDefault
Page
2
To determineifreinstatementis
possible
and the
amount,
if
any,
tocurethe
default,
contact:
Residential CreditSolutions
C/O
Quality
Loan Service
Corp.
2141 5thAvenue
San
Diego,
CA 92101
619-645-7711
If
you
have
any questions, you
shouldcontacta
lawyer
or the
governmentalagency
which
may
have insured
your
loan.
Notwithstanding
thefactthat
yourproperty
isin
foreclosure, you may
offer
your
property
forsale
provided
thesaleisconcluded
prior
totheconclusion oftheforeclosure.
Dated:3/10/2008
Quality
Loan Service
Corp.,
AS AGENT FOR BENEFICIARY
By:
StateofNevada
)
ss.
County
ofClark
)
'
mstrument wasackno edbefore me,a
notary pubilc, by
on
,20
Notary
Public
If
you
have
previously
been
discharged
thro h
bankruptcy, you may
havebeen releasedof
personal
liability
forthisloaninwhichcasethislett i intendedtoexercisethenoteholder's
rights against
thereal
property only.
THIS OFFICE ISATTEMPTING CO ECT A DEBT AND ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL
BE ED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
As
required by
law,you
arehere
y
thata
negative
credit
report reflecting
on
your
credit record
may
be
submitted toacredit
report age
c
'
you
fail tofulfill thetermsof
your
credit
obligations.
3629741
Page
3 of 3
03/12/2008
03:57:05 PM
Stateof
CaliJpmia
)
County
of U
t{] )
On . Ad! before
me,
, /-ft
^L
,NotaryPublic,
personally appeared
ElepfaAM
My
who
proved
tome on thebasisof
satisfactory
evidencetobe the
person
whose nam re subscribedtothe
withininstrumentand
acknowledged
tome thathe executedthesame in
hisner
heirauthorized
capacity(#s),
and that
by
his eir
signature
on the
instrumentthe
persong),
orthe
entity upon
behalfofwhichthe
person
a
ted,
executedtheinstrument.
I
certify
under PENALTY OF PERJURY underthelawsoftheStateofCalifornia that
the
foregoingparagraph
istrueand correct.
Witness
my
hand ad official seal.
Signature
4@
(Seal)
Commission
# 1790651
Notosy
Public
-
Califomia
Orange
County
0
197
007
04:
42,
943
Renested
Sy
[RECORDING
REQUESTED BY
K
shoe CE
NNIR c
0
COMPANY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL
TO:]
bry$16
OBuRP T
ader
Trustee
Corps
Page 1 of 3
2112 Business Center Drive
c':"A
92612
APN # 030-091-12
The
undersigned hereby
affirms thatthereisnoSocial
Security
numbercontained inthis document.
[SPACE
ABOVETHISLINEFORRECORDER'S USE
ONLY]
TrusteeSaleNo.NV0810732 LoanNo.3770195 Title OrderNo.H701261
IMPORTANT NOTICE
NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND ELECTION TO SELL
UNDERDEEDOFTRUST
IF YOUR PROPERTY IS IN FORECLOSURE BECAUSE YOU ARE BEHIND IN
YOUR
PAYMENTS,
IT MAY BE SOLD WITHOUT ANY COURT ACTION and
you may
have the
legalright
to
bringyour
accountin
good standingby paying
allof
yourpast
due
payments
pluspermitted
costsand
expenses
withinthetime
permittedby
lawforreinstatement of
your
account
(which
is
normallyup
to
thirty-five
business
days
afterthe
recording
dateor
mailing
ofthis
Notice,
whicheveris
later).
No saledate
may
be setuntil threemonths fromthedatethisnoticeof
default
may
be recorded
(which
dateofrecordation
appears
on this
notice).
While
your property
isin
foreclosure, you
still must
pay
other
obligations (such
as insuranceand
taxes)requiredby your
Note and Deed ofTrustor
Mortgage.
If
you
fail tomake future
payments
on
the
loan,pay
taxeson the
property, provide
insuranceon the
property,
or
pay
other
obligations
as
required
inthe Note and Deed ofTrustor
Mortgage,
the
Beneficiary
or
Mortgagee may
insist that
you
do so inorderto reinstate
your
account in
good standing.
In
addition,
the
Beneficiary
or
Mortgagee may require
as a condition to reinstatement that
you provide
reliable writtenevidence
that
you paid
allsenior
liens, propertytaxes,
and hazardinsurance
premiums.
Upon your
written
request,
the
Beneficiary
or
Mortgagee
will
giveyou
a writtenitemization ofthe
entireamount
you
must
pay.
You
may
nothave to
pay
the
entire
unpaidportion
of
your
account,
even
though
full
payment
was
demanded,
but
you
must
pay
allamounts indefaultatthe time
payment
ismade.
However,you
and
yourBeneficiary
or
Mortgagee may mutuallyagree
in
writing
prior
tothetimetheNoticeofTrustee'sSaleis
posted(whichmay
notbe earlier thantheend ofthe
three-month
period
stated
above) to,among
other
things,(1)provide
additional time inwhich to
curethedefault
by
transfer ofthe
property
or
othenvise;
or
(2)
establish a scheduleof
payments
in
ordertocure
yourdefault;
orboth
(1)
and
(2).
Following
the
expiration
ofthetime
period
referred tointhis
paragraph
ofthis
notice,
unlessthe
obligation being
foreclosed
upon
ora
separate
written
agreement
between
you
and
your
creditor
permits
a
longerperiod, you
have
only
the
legalright
to
stop
thesaleof
propertyby paying
the
entireamount demanded
by your
creditor.
To findouttheamount
you
must
pay,
to
arrange
for
payment
to
stop
theforeclosure,
orif
your
property
isinforeclosure for
any
other
reason,
contact:
ATO CONTROL # 222536069212
AAMES HOME LOAN
cloTRUSTEE CORPS
2112 BUSINESS CENTER DRIVE
2noFLOOR
IRVINE,
CA 92612
(949)
252-8300
If
you
have
any questions, you
shouldcontacta
lawyer
orthe
governmentalagency,
which
may
have insured
your
loan.
Notwithstanding
thefactthat
yourproperty
isin
foreclosure, you may
offer
yourproperty
for
sale,provided
thesaleisconcluded
prior
totheconclusionoftheforeciosure.
Remember,
YOU MAY LOSE LEGAL RIGHTS IF YOU DO NOT TAKE PROMPT
ACTION.
NOTICE ISHEREBY GIVEN THAT: MTC FINANCIAL, INC.dba TRUSTEE CORPS isthe
original
Trustee,
the
dulyappointed
Substituted Trusteeor
acting
as
Agent
fortheTrusteeor
Beneficiary
under a Deed of Trustdated
04/1812005,
executed
by
JAMES S. CARPENTER AND JOAN E.
CARPENTER, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS as
Trustor,
to secure certain
obligations
infavorof AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION DBA AAMES HOME LOAN under a
Deed of TrustRecorded on 0510412005as Document No. 3208651 of Official Records inthe
Officeofthe RecorderofWashoe
County,
Stateof
Nevada, describing
land
therein,
AS MORE
FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED OF TRUST. Said
obligations including
one Note forthesum
of
!|1170,800.00
thatthe beneficial interest under such Deed ofTrustand the
obligations
secured
thereby
are
presently
held
by
the
undersigned.
That a breach of the
obligations
forwhich said Deed of Trustis
security
has occurredinthat
payment
has not been made of:THE INSTALLMENT OF PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST WHICH
BECAME DUE ON 01/01/2007AND ALL SUBSEQUENT INSTALLMENTS OF PRINCIPAL AND
INTEREST,
ALONG WITH LATE
CHARGES,
PLUS FORECLOSURE COSTS AND LEGAL
FEES.
That
by
reason
thereof,
the
presentBeneficiary
under such Deed of
Trust,
has executed and
deliveredto TRUSTEE
CORPS,
said
Trustee,
a writtenDeclarationof Defaultand Demand for
Sale,
and has surrenderedto saidTrusteesuch Deed of Trustand alldocuments
evidencing
obligations
secured
thereby
and has declaredand does
hereby
declareallsums secured
thereby
immediately
due and has electedand does
hereby
electtocause thetrust
property
to be soldto
satisfy
the
obligations
secured
thereby.
ATO CONTROL # 222536069212
DATED: 4117107
TRUSTEE
CORPS,
as
Agent
forAAMES HOME LOAN
by
Chic t
ices,
as A
, by
Fi In e
pnay,
as
Agent
L
BY:
Skey
S. Si Ifsst. areta
Stateof
Nevada
County
of
Washe .
On
4-17-07
before
me,
the
undersigned
personally appeared
Stanley S. Silva
personally
known tome
(orproved
tome on thebasis
of
satisfactory evidence)
to be the
person(s)
whose
name(s)
is/aresubscribedto the within
instrumentand
acknowledged
tome thathe/executedthesame
DOROTHY J.
JOHNSON
|
Notary Public
-
State of
Nevada1 Notary
Public
AppointmentBecordedin
Wasinecaunly
No:01-66333-2 -
Expires December
10,208 I
TRUSTEE CORPS ISA DEBT
COLLECTOR. ANY INFORMATION
OBTAINED WLL BE USED FOR THAT
PURPOSE.
Assessor'sffax ID No. 030-091-12
Recording Requested By:
WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, FA
When Recorded Return To:
WASHINGTON MUTUAL
PO BOX 45179
JACKSONVILLE, FL 32232-5179
,
DOC II 3218398
eS/23/2ees e3:SBP F :19.ee
BKI
Requ ted By
"UTUAL BANK FA
no. County
I IIIIII IIIII lililI of [II iif ..
1IIIiUmlOlili
WASHINGTON MUTUAL - CLIENT 150 #:8014256302 "CARPENTIER" Len{ler
ID:N45/00118014256302 Washoe, Nevada PIF: 04/25/2005
Washington Mutual Bank, FA successor to Washington Home LaanscInc.
merger to Fleet Mortgage Corp. is the Owner and Holder of the
12/06/1993, made by JAMES S CARPENTIER as Trustor, with
COMPANY OF NEVADA, INC as Trustee,
CORPORATION as Beneficiary, which said r: the\Dffideofthe
County Recorder of Washoe State of Nevada, N/;"'Pa",:/Fc)lio: NIA as
No.: 174567 ReRecorded 09/22/1994 in BO'Jkl/il.ee\fLiber: \
1835021 wherein said Owner and Holder CALII'&FlNlU).
COMPANY as Trustee in lieu of the
Property Address: 2873 SUNNY SLOPE DR,
sucessorto Washington Mutual
MOl"!""'''' BA YMEADOWS WAY,
MAIL CODE F1020, J CONVILLE, F 3225 s owner and RECONVEYANCE
COMPANYC/OWA H GTONMUTUAL, FL 32232-5179 as
Substituted Trustee, h e c used this instrwnent be) xecuted, each in its respective interest;
Wa gton Mutual Bank; A suc in on Mutual Home Loans Inc. successor in interest by
rger to Fleet Mortgage Co
On May 14th. 2005
CEWCEW 5/14/200501: UQ1WAMUOOOOOOOOOOOOOO02567403" tNWASHO 8014256302 NVSTATE_ TRUST_SUB CEWCEWWAMT"
.
11111111111111111
SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE AND FULL RECONVEYANCE Page 2 of 3
STATE OF Florida
COUNTY OF Duval
11111111
1111111111111111
3218398
S5/23/2SQS
2 of 3
On May 14th, 2005, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for Duval in the State of Florida,
personally appeared M BAGGS, Vice-President, personally known to me to be the person whose name is
subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same in her
authorized capacity, and that by his/her signature on the instrument the pers or the entity upon behalf
of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand d 0 cial seal.

Notary Expires: // /
Yolandra D. Johnson
: Convnlllion # 00401903
\JJf Expire, March 1. 2009
1(.0.*,,701'
(Thi area or notarial seal)
CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY hereby accepts Sa! intment as Trust under said
Deed of Trust and as Successor Trustee pursuant to request of said and Hoi er and in
accordance with the provisions of said Deed of Tru oes hereb onvey without warr
or pesons legruly entitled thereto all estate now h d by it of Trust.
By CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE C" J1VIY A. N as Trustee
On May 14th. 2005
IDENT
EW*CEWW,Al;n __ =Hf:10 PM" U01WAMUOOOOOOOOOOOOQOO2567403* NVWASHO* 80142$302 NVSTATE_TRUST_SUB
"
11111111111111111
STATE OF Florida
COUNTY OF Duval
11111111
On May 14th, 2005, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for
11111111 1111 1111
3218398

3 CIf 3
personally appeared M BAGGS, ASST VICE PRESIDENT, personally 0 to me to be the person
whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to m that e!she executed the same
in her authorized capacity, and that by his/her signature on the instrument e p on, or the entity upon
behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my han fficial seal.
Notary Expires: / /
'al seal)
U01 W AMUOOOOOOOOOOOOO002567 403* NVW ASHO NVST ATE_TRUST _SUB CEW*CEWWAMT*
Assessor's/Tax ID No. 030-091-12
Recording Requested By:
GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION
When Recorded Return To:
JAMES S CARPENTIER
2873 SUNNY SLOPE DR
SPARKS, NV 89434-2645
GMAC MORTGAGE CORPORATION #:0307616752
Washoe, Nevada PIF: 04/25/2005
GMAC Mortgage Corporation is the Owner and Holder
1011911999 , made by JAMES S CARPENTIER AND JOAN E
DOC .. 322!59BB
.8/07/2 5 .2:.5P F :19."
BKI
Requ t.ed By
G"AC "ORTGAGE
U.anoe Count.y Recorder
Kat.hryn L. Burke - Recorder
111111111111

STEWART TITLE as Trustee, for the benefit ofMERI ORTGAE
OREGON CORPORATION as Beneficiary, which id Deed of {\/C'2Ili'OO,O
Office of the County Recorder of Washoe State 0
Owner and Holder hereby substitutes EXECUT E
above-named Trustee under said Deed of Trust.
Property Address: 2873 SUNNY SLOPE DR,
By:
ortgage COTP ratio
h 2005

Janice Burt, Limited Signing Officer
V 89434
the
1 HAMMOND A VENUE,
VICES, INC. 15455 SAN
CA 9 45 as Substituted Trustee, have
*SH RMGMAC"05/25!2005 08.10:29 PM" C01GMAC000000000000000056037S" NVWASHO' 0307616752 NVSTATE_TRUST_SUB 'SHE"SRMGMAC'
STATE OF Iowa
COUNTY OF Black Hawk
On May 25th, 2005, before me, M. CLARK., a Notary Public in and for Black Hawk in the State of Iowa,
personally appeared Janice Burt, Limited Signing Officer, personally known to me (or proved to me on
the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within
instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in hi r!their authorized
capacity, and that by hislher/their signature on the instrument the person(s), r th entity upon behalf of
which the person( s) acted, executed the instrument.
d official seal,
M.CLARK
NOTARIAL SEAL - St OF IOWA
COMMISSION NU ER
MY COMMISSION EX ES MAY 17, 2007
M.
Notary Expires: 05Jl7/2007 #728505
This area for n tarial seal)
EXECUTIVE TRUSTEE SERVICES, INC. hereb accepts said ap
of Trust and as Successor Trustee pursuant to e reguesr- 'aid Ow r and Holder and in acco ance
with the provisions of said Deed of Trust does ere reconvey . hout
legally entitled thereto all estate now held by 't u de said Deed ofT t.
By EXECUTIVE TRUSTEE SERVICES,
On May 25th. 2005
e
SH RMGMAC05/25/2005 08:10:29 PM" AC01GMAC000000000000000056037S" N\IV'IASHO' 0307616752 NVSTATE_ TRUST_SUB 'SHE"SRMGMAC'
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
STATE OF Iowa
COUNTY OF Black Hawk
On May 25th, 2005, before me, M. CLARK, a Notary Public in and for Bla awk in the State oflowa,
personally appeared MARY ANN HILMER, ASSISTANT SECRETAR ,pe onally known to me (or
proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whos nam (s) is/are subscribed to
the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they execute the ame in hislher/their
authorized capacity, and that by hislher/their signature on the instrument the pe son( ,or the entity upon
behalf of which the pcrson(s) acted, executed the instrument.
Notary Expires: 05117/2007 #728505
M.CL
NOTARIAL SEAL - STATE OF
COMMISSION NUMBER 728505
MY COMMIS MAY 17, 2007
~
)
(This area for
"SH * RMGMACOSI25/2005 08:10:29 PM" G C01GMACOOOQOOOOOOOOOQ0056031S" NVWASHO 0307616752 NVSTATE_TRUST _SUB SHE"SRMGMAC
I 11111111111111111 11111 111111 11111111111 11111111 1111 1111 g ~ ~ ; ; ~ ~ ~ ~
seal)

2141 5th Avenue
San Diego, CA 9210 1
The undersigned hereby affinns that there is no
0'1; co \/ f::>,:), 'T?5(,
TS # NV-08-141434-BL Loan # 0003770195
DOC I 3661497
06/19/2008 12:15:40 PH
Requesled By
Fee: $15.00 RPTT: $0.00
Page 1 of 2
IIII III
SPACB ADOVE THlS LINE FOR RECORDER'S USE
NOTICE OF TRUSTEE'S SA
YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 4/18/2005. U LES YOU TAKE ACTION
TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALK F Y U NEED AN
EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING GAINST YOU, OU OULD CONTACT
A LAWYER.
A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, cashier's check dra a state or national b
by state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings an ssociation, 0 savings
association, or savings bank specified in Section 5102 e Fin . code and authorized
state, will be held by duly appointed trustee. The sa will be made, but 'thout covenant or w ty, ex ressed or
implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbran es, to ay the ammg incipal sum of the not s) se red by
the Deed of Trust, with interest and late charges t er , as provid . the no (s), advances, under e t s of the
Deed of Trust, interest thereon, fees, charges d xp nses of the Trustee or the total amount (at the ti of the
initial publication of the Notice of Sale) re e timated to be set fo belo. The amount may be greater on
the day of sale.
BENEFICIARY MAY ELECT TO BID LESS TOTAL o NT DUE.
Trustor(s):
JAMES S. ANDJOA
JOiNTTE NTS
IER, HUSBAND AND WIFE AS
Recorded: 5/4/2005 sIns o. 3208 1 in book xx , fOfficial Records in the office of the
Record of ASHOE Co ty, Ne da;
Date of Sale:
Pia of Sale: the ounty Courthouse, Virginia Street at Court Street,
Reno, V.
Amo of unpaid balan and 0 er charges: $18 ,07452
T purported property ad 3 SUN SL PE DRIVE
IS: SPARKS, NV 434
This property is sold as-is, lender is unable to validate the condition, defects or disclosure issues of said property and
buyer waives the disclosure requ rents under NRS 113.130 by purchasing at this sale and signing the receipt of
sale. The undersigned Trustee iscl ms any liability for any incorrectness of the property address or other common
designation, if any, shown her n. 1 no street address or other common designation is shown, directions to the
location of the property may e ob ined by sending a written request to the beneficiary within 10 days of the date of -
t publication of this Not" e of ale.
If the Trus a Ie to nvey title for any reason, the successful bidder's sole and exclusive remedy shall
e return of monies aid to the Trustee, and the snccessful bidder shall have no further recourse.
3661497 Page 2 of 206/19/200812:15:40 PM
j ,
,
Date: 6/13/2008 Quality Loan Service Corp.
2141 5th Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
619-645-7711 For NON SALE information only
Sale Line: 714-259-7850 or Login to: www.fidelityasap.com
TS # : NV-08-141434-BL
Reinstatement Line: 619-645-7711 x3704
NancyW
Rutile,'
I certifY under PENALTY OF PERJURY
true and correct.
I ws of the State
that the foregoing paragraph is
(Seal)
)
.... [j':"A .. W .. S .. ON ........
Commission # 1628086
z .... .,! Notary Public - COllfomlo
,.. . San 0:390 county -
" MyComm. Expires Jon 6.
2010
1
pt y, you may have been released of personal liability for this
he te holder's rigbts against the real property only,
THIS NOTICE IS NT FO PU OSE OF COLLECTING A DEBT. THIS FIRM IS
AT EMPTING TO COLLE A DEBT 0 EHALF OF THE HOLDER AND OWNER OF THE NOTE.
ANY INFORMA TlON OBTAINE R PROVIDED TO THIS FIRM OR THE CREDITOR WILL BE
USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
As required by law, you are her y tified that a negative credit report reflecting on your credit record may be
submitted to a credit report age cy i you fail to fulfill the terms of your credit obligations.
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
Mary Ann Carr
P.O. Box 815
Glenn Ellen, CA 95442
MAIL TAX STATEMENT TO:
James S. Carpentier & Joan E. Carpentier
2873 Sunnyslope Drive
Sparks, NV 89434
Escrow No. 06003613 MF
DOC II 3423!5!57
08/08/2008 03:4SP F :18.00
BKI
Requ ted By
ho. County Recorder
Kathryn L. Burk. - Recorder
1 111111 11111 lilil(llf i
APN 030-091-12 SPACE ABOVE R USE
SECOND DEED OF TRUST WITH ASSIGNMENT
THIS DEED OF TRUST, made this 8th day of August, 2006, b ames S. Carp Joan E.
Carpentier, husband and wife TRUSTOR, whose address is: 873 Sunnys 0 ive, S ks, V 89434.
Ticor Title of Nevada, Inc., TRUSTEE and Mary Ann Carr, arried worn , ENE ClARY,
whose address is P.O. Box 815 -Glenn Ellen, CA 95442.
WITNESSETH: That Trustor grants to Trustee in f sale, that property in t e
Washoe, State ofNEV ADA described as:
SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO A PART HERE F
Together with the rents, issues and profits t ere f, subject, howe r, to right, power and au ity
herein after given to and conferred upon Be c ary to collect and apply ch r ts, issues and profits.
For the purpose of securing (I) pa ent 0 he sum of $25,000.00 w th in erest thereon according to
the terms of a promissory note or notes f even te herewith made b T stor, payable to order of
Beneficiary, and all extensions or renewals th eof; an' ) the perform ce 0 each agreement of Trustor
incorporated herein by reference or contained he . ; (3) pent of ditio al sums and interest thereon
which may hereafter be loaned to Trustor, or to his s essors 0 en evidenced by a promissory
note or notes reciting that they ar by this Deed 0 rust.
To protect the security this Deed of t, and with re ect to th roperty above described, Trustor
expressly makes each an all 0 eements, d adopts an ees to rform and be bound by each
and all of the terms an pro'" ions set fo 'n subdl ision A, and it utuaU greed that each and all of
the terms and provisi forth in subdivisl B of e fictitious Dee f T st recorded in the office of
each County Recorde e State of Nevada on anu 30, 1968, in the b k and at the page thereof, or
under the document 0 umber, noted below 0 osit the name of such county: namely:

Clark
Douglas
Elko
Esmeralda
Eureka
Humboldt
Lander
BOOK
39 Mortgage
850 OlT. Rec.
57 OlT. Rec.
92 Off. Rec.
3-X Deeds
22 Off. Rec.
28 Off. Rec.
24 OlT. Rec.
GE
363
DOC.N
11538
47
40050
652
195
138
I
35922
45941
131075
50782
ineoln
Lyon
Mineral
Nye
Ormsby
Pershing
Storey
Wasboe
BOOK
37 Off. Rec.
II Off. Rec.
105 Off. Rec.
72 Off. Rec.
11 Off. Rec.
tis"
Mortgages
PAGE
341
129
107
249
249
206
300 Off. Rec. 517
DOC. NO.
45902
100661
89073
04823
32867
66107
31506
107192
the pies hereto, with respect to the property above described. Said agreement,
terms an p .. ons con . ed in said subdivision A and B, (identical in all counties, and printed on the
r rse side hereof) ar y the within reference thereto, incorporated herein and made a part of this Deed
I 1111111111111111111111
11111111111111111111111111
3423557
98/99!2996
2 of 5
The undersigned Trustor requests that a copy of any notice of default and any notice of sale hereunder be
mailed to him at his address above set forth.
Trustor
STATE OF NEVADA
COUNTY OF WASHOE
} 55:
re me on ..
A. T PROTECT THE SECURITY OF THIS DEED
(I)
(2)
(
(4) To pay at least ten days before delinquency all taxes and assessments affecting said property,
including assessments on appurtenant water stock, water rights and grazing privileges; when due,
all encumbrances, ch g and liens, with interest, on said property or any part thereof, which
appear to be prior or s peri r hereto, and all costs, fees and expenses of this trust.
Should Trustor fail t m e any payment or to do any act as herein provided, then Beneficiary or
Trustee, but witho t ob gation so to do and without notice to or demand upon Trustor, and
without releasin rust r from any obligation hereof, may: make or do the same in such manner
and to such ent a either may deem necessary to protect the security hereof; Beneficiary or
ThIlSt<:e-ileiimg au ized to enter upon said property for such purposes; appear in and defend any
action or proce mg purporting to affect the security hereof or the rights or powers of Beneficiary
_Ll'rlllile<>t;-piay, purchase, contest or compromise any encumbrance, charge or lien which in the
I 111111111111111111 1111 1111111111 11111111 1111 1111
3423557

3 of 5
judgment of either appears to be prior or superior hereto; and, in exercising any such powers, pay
necessary expenses, employ counsel and pay his reasonable fees.
(5) To pay immediately and without demand all sums so expended by Beneficiary or Trustee,
with interest from date of expenditure at ten per cent per annum.
B. IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED:
(1) That any award of damages in connection with any condemnation for public use of or injury to
said property or any part thereof is hereby assigned and shall be paid to Beneficiary who may
apply or release such moneys received by him in the same manner and with the same effect as
above provided for disposition of proceeds offrre or other insurmce.
(2) That by accepting payment of any sum secured hereby after its due te, Beneficiary does not
waive his right either to require prompt payment when due of all other ums so secured or to
declare default for failure so to pay.
(3) That at any time or from time to time, without liability therefor and WI out otice, upon written
request of Beneficiary and presentation of this deed and said note for e orse ent, and without
affecting the personal liability of any person for payment of the indebte ess ecured hereby,
Trustee may: reconvey any part of said property; consent to the making of an map r plat thereof;
join in granting any easement thereon; or join in a an agreement
subordinating the lien or charge hereof.
(4) That upon written request of Beneficiary stating that all sum red hereby have been aid, and
(5)
upon surrender of this deed and said note to Trustee for cancellall d retention 0 other
disposition as Trustee in its sole discretion c and upon payment o' es, T stee
shall reconvey, without warranty, the operty then he hereunder. The recital in s ch
reconveyance of any matters or facts s 11 be ive proo f the truthfulness ther f.
grantee in such reconveyance may be d scri d as "the p
That upon d ault]j Trustor in payment f an indebtedness secured hereby or in performance of
any agreemen hereun r, Beneficiary y d clare all sums secured hereby immediately due and
payable by deli ry to T e ofwr' n n Ice of default and of election to cause to be sold said
property, which n 'ce Trustee s all ca e to be recorded. Beneficiary also shall deposit with
Trustee this Deed of said note all documents evidencing expenditures secured hereby.
After the lapse of such time as may then be required by law following the recordation of said
notice of default, and notice of sale having been given as then required by law for the sale of real
property under writ OL ecution, Trustee, without demand on Trustor, shall sell said property or
any part thereof at th tim and place fixed by it in said notice of sale, either as a whole or in
separate parcels, and n su h order as it may determine, at public auction to the highest bidder for
cash in lawful mon of e United States, payable at time of sale. Trustee may postpone sale of
all or any portion of s 'd property by public announcement at such time and place of sale, and
from time to ti ther after may postpone such sale by public announcement at the time fixed by
prece<!inl( pos nemen!. In the event that any indebtedness secured hereby shall not have
been--runy satisfi by said sale, Trustee may give notice of sale of any property not previously
noticed for s in the manner set forth above and sell the same in the manner set forth above.
I 111111111111111111 1111 1111111111 1111111111111111
3423557

4 of' 5
Trustee shall deliver to any purchaser its deed conveying the property so sold, but without any
covenant or warranty, express or implied. The recitals in such deed of any matters or facts shall be
conclusive proof of the truthfulness thereof. Any person, including Trustor, Trustee, or
Beneficiary as hereinafter dermed, may purchase at such sale.
After deducting all costs, fees and expenses of Trustee, including a reasonable fee for the attorney
of Trustee, and of this trust, including cost evidence of title in connection with sale, Trustee shall
apply the proceeds of sale to payment of: all sums expended under the terms hereof, not then
repaid, with accrued interest at ten per cent per annum; all other sums then secured hereby; and the
remainder, if any, to the person or persons legally entitled thereto.
(7) That Beneficiary, or his assignee, may from time to time, by instrum t in writing, substitute a
successor or successors to any Trustee named herein or acting h e er, which instrument,
executed and acknowledged and recorded in the office of the recor r of e county or counties
where said property is situated, shall be conclusive proof of proper su tituti of such successor
Trustee or Trustees, who shall, without conveyance from the Trustee p dece or, succeed to all
its title, estate, rights, powers and duties. Said instrument must contain n of the original
Trustor, Trustee and Beneficiary hereunder, the book and page where, or do men or file number
under which, this Deed of Trust is recorded, and the and address of t e ne Trustee. If
notice of default shall have been recorded, this pow of substl cannot e ex cised until
after the costs, fees and expenses of the then acting shall have been 0 suc Trustee,
who shall endorse receipt thereof upon such instrument of su . tion. The proced herein
provided for substitution of Trustee shall be exclusive of all other pro .. s for subst tion,
statutory or otherwise.
(8) The following covenants: Nos. I, 3, 4, . terest 10%) 5, 6, 8 d 9 of Nevada Revise Sta es
107.030, when not inconsistent with 0 r Drovisio s herein contained, ar hereD
adopted and made a part of this Deed 0 Tru : V
(9) The rights and remedies hereby e sh II not exclude any 0 er ri ts or remedies granted by
law, and all rights and remedies t h reunder or permitted by la shall be concurrent and
cumulative. A violation of any the co ants herein expressl set forth shall have the same
effect as the violation of any covenan erein ted by referenc .
(l 0) It is expressly agreed that the trust create
.......... /:J
ssigns. The term Beneficiary shall
d hereby, whether or not named
Escrow No.06003613 MF
I 111111111111111111 1111
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
1111111111 1111111111111111
All that certain real property situate in the County of Washoe, State of Nevada, described as follows:
Lot 6 of LEWIS HOMES-SPARKS NO.5-A, according to the map thereof, file the office of the
3423557
~ 8 f 3 8 2 9 f 3 8
5 of' !5
County Recorder of Washoe County, State of Nevada, on July 19,1976, as Fil No. 17319, as Tract Map
No. 1587.
APN: 030-091-12
[RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:]
Trustee Corps
2112 Business Center Drive,
2
nd
floor
Irvine, CA 92612
The undersigned hereby affirms that there is no Social Security
number contained in this document.
o 2.....
DOC # 3564893
08/13/2007 04:48:07 PM
By
FIRST CENTENNIAL TITLE COMPANY
Fee: $15.00 RPTT: $0.00
Page 1 of 2
[space above this 'ne fo recorder's use onlyl
Trustee Sale# NV0810732 Loan # 3770195 Order # H701 61
NOTICE OF TRU
YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DA 4118/2005.
ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY. IT MAY BE SOLD AT A P SALE. IF YO NEED AN
EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PRO GAINST YOU, Y OUlD ONTACT
A LAWYER.
On 08/08/2007 at 11 :OOAM, MTC FINAN
Substituted Trustee under and"p .... u""r'""su.:..a .... n
7
t
3208651 of official records in the Office
S. CARPENTIER AND JOAN E. CA
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION D
L 6 OF LEWIS OM -SPARKS NO.5-A, ILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF
HOE COUNTY, EVA ON JULY 19, 1 6, S FILE NO. 417319 AND AS TRACT MAP NO. 1587.
The street address and her com Ignati n, if any, of the real property described above is purported
to be: 2873 SUNNY SLOP RIVE, SPARK ,NEVADA 89434.

The undersigned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address and other common
designation, if any, shown herein. Said sale will be made, but without covenant or warranty, expressed or
implied, regarding title, pos ssion, or encumbrances. to pay the remaining principal sum of the Note(s)
secured by said Deed of Tr st, ith interest thereon, as provided in said Note(s), advances, if any, under the
terms of the Deed of Trust, sti ted fees, charges and expenses of the Trustee and of the trusts created by
said Deed of Trust. The t tal ount of the unpaid balance of the obligation secured by the property to be
sold and reasonable est" ate costs, expenses and advances at the time of the initial publication of the
Notice of Trustee's Sal IS: 81 ,022.02 (estimated amount). Accrued interest and additional advances,
re prior to sale.
ur ases ro ert ursuant to eve sale made under the rovisions of
is not a bona fide urchaser and the sale ma be declared void if the
1
3564893 Page 2 of'2 08/13/2007 04:48:07 PM
. .
Trustee Sale# NV0810732 Loan # 3770195 Order # H701261
Trustee or other persons authorized to make the sale does not substantially comply
with the provisions of NRS Chapter 107.
If the Trustee is unable to convey title for any reason. the successful bidder's sole and
exclusive remedy shall be the return of monies paid to the Trustee and the successful
bidder shall have no further recourse.
The Beneficiary under said Deed of Trust heretofore executed and deliver I Ihe undersigned a written
Declaration of Default and Demand for Sale, and a written Nolice of De ult a d Election to Sell. The
undersigned caused said Notice of Default and Eleclion to Sell to be recorde in th County where the real
property is located and more than three months have elapsed since such record tion.
DATED: 07/18/2007
TRUSTEE CORPS, as Successor Trustee
By: LAYNE LAMBERT, Authorized Signature
State of CALIFORNIA
County of ORANGE
On 07/18/2007 before me, personally
known to me (or proved to me on to be the person(s) whose
name(s) isfare subscribed to the within ir to me that hef executed the
same
Notary Public
'T STEE CORPS'
2 BUSINESS ''''1"''''1> 2ND FLOOR, IKN'INlol 92612
FOR SALE (714) 573-7777, (949) 252-8300
FOR REINSTATEMENT 1 . (949) 2528300
DOC #4046455
10/03/2011
08:46:33 AM
Electronic
Recording Requested By
LSITITLEAGENCY INC
Washoe
County
Recorder
Kathryn
L. Burke
-
Recorder
APNNo.:030-091-12
Fee: $15.00 RPTT: $0
Recording,requested
by:
Page
1 of 2
When recorded mailto:
Quality
Loan Service
Corp.
2141 5thAvenue
San
Diego,
CA 92101
Space
abovethis line forrecorders use
only
TS No.:NV-08-141434-BL
OrderNo.:WS60369
Itis
hereby
affirmed thatthisdocumentsubmitted for
recording
doesnotcontain thesocial
security
numberof
anyperson
or
persons. (Per
NRS
239B.030).
YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 4/18/2005. UNLESS YOU
TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR
PROPERTY,
IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC
SALE. IFYOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING
AGAINST
YOU,
YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER.
A
public
auction saletothe
highest
bidderfor
cash,
cashier's checkdrawnon a state ornational
bank,
checkdrawn
by
state orfederal credit union,
oracheckdrawn
by
astate orfederal
savings
andloan
association,
or
savings association,
or
savings
bank
specified
inSection5102totheFinancial code
andauthorized todo business inthis
state,
willbeheld
by dulyappointed
trustee. The salewillbe
made,
butwithoutcovenantor
warranty, expressed
or
implied, regarding title, possession,
or
encumbrances,
to
pay
the
remaining principal
sum ofthe
note(s)
secured
by
theDeed of
Trust,
with
interest andlate
charges thereon,
as
provided
inthe
note(s), advances,
underthetermsoftheDeed of
Trust,
interest
thereon, fees, charges
and
expenses
oftheTrusteeforthetotal amount
(at
thetimeof
theinitial
publication
oftheNoticeof
Sale)reasonably
estimated tobe setforthbelow.The amount
may
be
greater
on the
day
ofsale.
BENEFICIARY MAY ELECT TO BID LESS THAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT DUE.
Trustor(s):
JAMES S.CARPERNTIER AND JOAN E.
CARPENTIER,
HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS
Recorded: 5/4/2005asInstrument No.3208651inbook
xxx,page
xxx ofOfficial
Recordsintheoffice oftheRecorderofWASHOE
County,Nevada;
DateofSale: 10/21/2011 at11:00AM
PlaceofSale: At the
Virginia
StreetentrancetotheWashoe
County
Courthouse
locatedat75 Court
Street, Rene,
NV 89501
Amount of
unpaid
balanceandother
charges:5229,225.57
The
purported property
addressis: 2873SUNNY SLOPE
DRIVE, SPARKS,
NV
89434
This
property
issold
as-is,
lenderisunabletovalidate the
condition,
defects ordisclosure issues ofsaid
property
and
buyer
waivesthedisclosure
requirements
underNRS 113.130
bypurchasing
atthissaleand
signing
the
receipt
ofsale.The
undersigned
Trusteedisclaims
anyliability
for
any
incoractness ofthe
property
addressorothercommon
designation,
if
any,
shownherein.Ifno street addressorother
common
designation
is
shown,
directions tothelocation ofthe
property may
beobtained
bysending
a
4046455
Page
2 of 2
-
10/03/2011
08:46:33 AM
written
request
tothe
beneficiary
within10
days
ofthedateoffirst
publication
ofthisNoticeofSale.
IftheTrusteeisweableto
convey
title for
any
reason,
thesuccessful bidder's soleand exclusive
remedy
shallbethereturnofmonies
paid
totheTrustee,
and thesuccessful biddershallhaveno
furtherrecourse.
Ifthesaleissetasidefor
any reason,
thePurchaseratthesaleshallbeentitled
only
toa returnof
the
depositpaid.
The Purchasershallhaveno furtherrecourse
against
the
Mortgager,
the
Mortgagee,
orthe
Mortgagee'sAttorney.
Date:
4 t(
Quality
Loan Service
Corp.
*
2141SthAvenue
San
Diego,
CA 92101
619-645-7711ForNON SALE information
only
SaleLine:714-730-2727or
Login
to:
www.1psasap.com
.:NV-08-141434-BL
Rel to tLine:619-645-7711
li Servic
Corp.by:
Ronald
Alonzo,
asAuthorized
Agent.
StateofCalifornia)
County
ofSanDieso)
On 9 /ZA /2.01
1 fore
me,
ChrisThurman a
NotaryPublic, personally appeared
who
proved
tome onthebasisof
satisfactory
evidence
tobethe
person(s)
whose
name(s)
is/@
subscribed tothewithininstrument and
acknowledged
tome that
he/shp/thqy
executedthesamein
his/hqr/th@
authorized
capacity(ies),
andthat
byhis/hir/thetir
signature(s)
ontheinstrument the
person(s),
orthe
entity upon
behalfofwhichthe
person(s) acted,
executedtheinstrument.
I
certify
underPENALTY OF PERJURY underthelawsoftheStateofCaliforala thatthe
foregoing
paragraph
istrueandcorrect.
WITNESS
my
handandofficial seal. CHRISTHUIWAN
= commannNo.1925343
0
5 NormerPla.lo-CALIFORMA
g
---
sauEcocculaY
Signature (Seal)
MyCom
Eqaes Febusy12, 2015
ChrisThurman
If
you
have
previously
been
discharged throughbankruptcy, youmay
havebeenreleased of
pesonal
liability
forthisloaninwhichcasethisletter isintended toexercise thenoteholders
right's against
the
real
property only.
THIS NOTICE ISSENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF COLLECTING A DEBT. THIS FIRM IS
ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT ON BEHALF OF THE HOLDER AND OWNER OF
THE NOTE. ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED BY OR PROVIDED TO THIS FIRM OR THE
As
required bylaw,you
are
hereby
notified that a
negative
credit
report reflecting
on
your
credit record
may
be
submitted toacredit
report agency
if
you
fail tofulf ill thetermsof
your
credit
obligations.
F I L E D
Electronically
01-04-2012:09:40:21 AM
Joey Orduna Hastings
Clerk of the Court
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Kristin Schuler-Hintz, Esq. Nevada SBN 7171
Christopher M. Hunter, Esq., Nevada SBN 8127
Las Vegas, NY 89117
Phone (702) 685-0329
Fax (866) 339-5691
Attorney for Defendants:
CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs
vs.
)
)
)

corporation; WINDSOR MANAGEMENT )
)
Defendants
Department No: 7
INC. AND QUALITY LOAN SERVICE
CORPORATION'S REQUEST FOR RULE
11 SANCTIONS AND OPPOSTION TO
TROIINJUNCTION OR IN THE
ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO SET
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
COMES NOW Defendants, Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. ("RCS") and
Quality Loan Service Corporation ("Quality" and collectively "Defendants"), by and through its
counsel of record, Christopher M. Hunter, Esq., of McCarthy & Holthus, LLP, and files this
Request for Imposition of Rule 11 Sanctions against Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs' Counsel and
Opposition to Plaintiffs Emergency Motion for TROllnjunction or in the alternative Motion to
Set Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment.
- 1
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Las Vegas, NY 89117
Phone (702) 685-0329
Fax (866) 339-5691
CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs
vs.
)
)
)

)
Defendants
Department No: 7
CORPORATION'S REQUEST FOR RULE
TROIINJUNCTION OR IN THE
ALTERNATIVE MOTION TO SET
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
COMES NOW Defendants, Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. ("RCS") and
Quality Loan Service Corporation ("Quality" and collectively "Defendants"), by and through its
counsel of record, Christopher M. Hunter, Esq., of McCarthy & Holthus, LLP, and files this
Request for Imposition of Rule 11 Sanctions against Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs' Counsel and
Opposition to Plaintiffs Emergency Motion for TROllnjunction or in the alternative Motion to
Set Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment.
- 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
This Opposition is based upon this Notice, the attached Memorandum of Points an
Authorities, and upon all pleadings and documents herein, as well as any argument that may b
presented at the hearing of this, or any other motions/matters; the Court is requested to take
Dated: 1I4/2012
Is/Christopher M. Hunter
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
BACKGROUND
This action concerns real property in Washoe County, Nevada known as 2873 Sunn
Slope Dr., Sparks, Nevada ("Subject Property"). The Subject Property was financed through the
execution of a note and deed of trust by Plaintiffs promising to repay the sum of $170,800 in
monthly installments to Aames Funding Corporation DBA Aames Home Loan. The deed 0
trust was recorded on May 4, 2005 in the official records of Washoe County as document
number 3208651. A copy of the deed of trust is attached as Exhibit 1.
Subsequently, on March 10, 2008, Aames Funding Corporation DBA Aames Home Loan
assigned the deed of trust to Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for Aames
Mortgage Investment Trust 2005-2. The assignment was recorded on May 9, 2008 as documen
number 3648603. A copy of the assignment is attached as Exhibit 2. At all times, RCS was the
servicer of the loan.
Plaintiffs defaulted on the above referenced loan. On April 18, 2008, a substitution 0
trustee, dated March 10, 2008, was recorded as document number 3641716. The substitutio
was signed by Deutsche Bank National Trust Company as Trustee for Aames Mortgage
Investment Trust 2005-2 and appointed Quality as the foreclosure trustee. A copy of this
- 2
1 document is attached as Exhibit 3. Quality then connnenced a foreclosure by recording a notice
2 of default and election to sell on March 12,2008 as document number 3629741. A copy of the
3 notice of default is attached as Exhibit 4.
4 Plaintiffs filed this action on July 8, 2008. On June 23, 2010, Defendants filed a Motion
5 for Sunnnary Judgment and served the Motion on Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs did not oppose the
6 Motion and on July 15, 2010 the Court entered an Order granting the Motion for Sunnnary
7 Judgment. Notice of Entry of the Order was filed by Defendants and served on Plaintiffs on July
8 15,2010. Plaintiffs never filed a Motion to Reconsider the Order and never appealed the Order.
9 Thereafter RCS undertook a lengthy review of Plaintiffs for a loan modification. During
10 this period the foreclosure was placed on loss mitigation hold. The loan modification was no
11 successful and the hold was removed in October, 2011. On October 3,2011, Quality recorded
12 Notice of Sale as document number 4046455. A copy of the Notice of Sale is attached as
13 Exhibit 5.
14 Shortly thereafter, Zach Coughlin, Esq. entered an appearance on behalf of Plaintiffs an
15 indicated to the undersigned that the pending Motion for TRO and/or to Set Aside had been or
16 was going to be filed. The undersigned, in conformance with NRCP Rule II, forwarded to Mr.
17 Coughlin a copy of the letter dated October 21, 2011 attached as Exhibit 6. At Mr. Coughlin's
18 request the foreclosure sale has been continued twice and is presently set for February 6, 2012.
19 On December 31, 2011, eighteen months after entry of the sunnnary judgment Order,
20 Plaintiffs filed the pending motion. Plaintiffs seek an injunction barring the foreclosure as well
21 as damages in excess of $10,000, treble damages and sanctions under case law developed by the
22 Nevada Supreme Court relating to the Nevada Mediation Program.
23 All exhibits referenced herein are attached to this Motion. QLS respectfully requests
24 judicial notice of the deed of trust, as well as the other exhibits. All exhibits hereto should be
25
26
27
28
judicially noticed because they are a public record in the Washoe County Recorder's office. NRS
47.130; NRS 47.150; Jory v. Bennight, 91 Nev. 763,766, 542 P.2d 1400, 1403 (1975).
- 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LEGAL ANALYSIS
A. THE STANDARD FOR GRANTING INJUNCTIVE RELIEF.
A preliminary injunction is designed to preserve the status quo and is normally only
available upon a showing that the party seeking it is reasonably likely to succeed on the merits
and that the defendant's conduct, if allowed to continue, will result in irreparable harm for whic
compensatory damage is an inadequate remedy. See Dangbeg holding Nevada, LLC v. Dougla
County, 978 P.2d 311, 319-2- (Nev. 1999); Pickett v. Comanche Construction Co., 108 Nev.
422, 836 P.2d 42 (1992); Dixon v. Thatcher, 103 Nev. 414, 742 P.2d 1029 (1987). "Equity will
... restrain tortious acts where it is essential to preserve a business or property interests." State
Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Jajros, Inc. 109 Nev. 926, 860 P.2d 176 (Nev. 1993).
The Nevada Supreme Court has generally held that four (4) factors must be satisfie
before injunctive relief may be granted:
1. The threat of irreparable harm;
2. The relative interest of the parties;
3. Plaintiffs likelihood of success on the merits; and
4. The interest of the public.
See e.g. Sobol v. Capital Management Consultanis, Inc., 102 Nev. 444, 726 P.2d 335
(1986).
B. THREAT OF IRREPARABLE INJURY
Where injury is likely to be irreparable equity will always interpose its power to protect a
person from a threatened injury. Champion v. Sessions, 1 Nev. 478 (1865). The Nevad
Supreme Court has recognized that it will restrain conduct "where it is essential to preserve
- 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
business or property interest." Guion v. Terra Marketine a/Nevada. Inc., 90 Nev. 237, 240, 523
P .2d 847, 848 (1974). Moreover, in Nevada, a foreclosure on an interest in real property is
irreparable injury because "real property and its attributes are considered unique and loss of real
property rights generally results in irreparable hann." Dixon v. Thatcher, 103 Nev. 414, 415-16,
742 P.2d 1029, 1029-30 (1987) (concluding that a preliminary injunction to stop a foreclosure is
proper where there is a reasonable likelihood of success).
Here, Plaintiff is not entitled to a preliminary injunction because Plaintiffs' Motion is
procedurally improper and does not and cannot establish excusable neglect that would warran
the setting aside of the summary judgment Order.
1. Plaintiffs' Motion is procedurally improper
Plaintiffs' counsel has failed to follow the appropriate procedure for obtaining
temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction. NRCP Rule 65(b) typically requires the
filing of a petition for a temporary restraining order in which Rule 65(b) and local rules require
various procedural assertions and descriptions of what efforts counsel has made to give notice to
other named parties. Counsel has simply skipped over this step and instead has filed a rambling
and largely incoherent 43 page document which contains long passages relating to counsel's
personal eviction from a commercial office and unsupported quotations from a book. Counsel
also attaches the full copy of the book ( 115 pages) as an exhibit as well as a 41 page documen
relating to counsel's irrelevant eviction.
The Motion repeats verbatim the entirety of Plaintiffs' original complaint, incorrectly
alleges that the substitution of trustee was never recorded and incoherently suggests tha
Plaintiffs were creditors of the Delaware Aames Home Loan bankruptcy estate. The fact tha
- 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
this Motion has also been filed against Aames and requests damages is a blatant violation of the
automatic stay for which counsel could be sanctioned by the Delaware court.
Finally, and most importantly, the Motion is completely lacking III any supporting
admissible evidence. There is no affidavit and no allegation from Plaintiffs regarding any of the
requirements ofNRCP Rule 65.
2. Plaintiffs have no likelihood of success
Another factor that must also be considered, assuming harm is proven and the interests
tip in favor of a plaintiff is whether or not the Plaintiff is likely to succeed on the merits of the
case. The plaintiff bears the burden of proving that he enjoys a "reasonable probability" 0
success on the merits. Christensen v. Chromalloy American Corp., 99 Nev. 34, 656 P.2d 844
(1983); Republic Entertainment, Inc. v. Clark County Liquor & Gaming Licensing Board, 9
Nev. 811,672 P.2d 634 (1983). In this case, Plaintiff is not reasonably likely to succeed on the
merits.
Here, again Plaintiffs cannot prevail on the merits because a judgment has already bee
entered against Plaintiffs eighteen months ago. The judgment was not appealed.
3. Plaintiffs cannot establish excusable neglect
The sole basis in support of Plaintiffs' claim of excusable neglect is that the Motion for
Summary Judgment incorrectly contained Clark County in the caption of the Motion instead 0
Washoe County. In addition, several filings correctly citing Washoe County incorrectly refer to
Department 4 instead of Department 7. This argument is completely unavailing. Nowhere i
Plaintiffs' Motion is there an allegation that Plaintiffs were somehow misled to their detriment
due to these scrivener errors. Nor is there is a single allegation that Plaintiffs were unaware of 0
- 6
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
never received the Motion for Summary Judgment and the Notice of Entry of the Order granting
sununary judgment.
In addition, Plaintiffs cite Pasillas v. HSBC Bank USA, et aI., 127 Advance Opinion 39
(2011) and Leyva v. National Default Servicing Corp., et aI., 127 Nev., Advance Opinion 40
(2011) in support of their Motion. These opinions are inapplicable to the issues in this case
because they are concerned only with the requirements for producing documents and
demonstrating standing in mediation cases conducted under the Nevada Mediation Program and
the Nevada Supreme Court Foreclosure Mediation Rules. The issues set forth in Plaintiffs'
original complaint related solely to deceptive lending practices under NRS 598D.
Finally, and most importantly, even if the Plaintiffs were misled or were unaware
Motion to Set Aside under NRCP Rille 60 must be brought within 60 days of the relevant
proceeding. Here, the Motion to Set Aside is brought eighteen months after the relevant
proceeding and is, therefore, untimely.
SANCTIONS SHOULD BE LEVIED AGAINST PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL
The Motion filed by Plaintiffs calls out for Rule II sanctions. The document is wholl
frivolous, indicates a disregard for the spirit, intent and processes of the Court system and
sanctions may be the only manner in which Mr. Coughlin will be deterred from such frivolous
filings in the future. Please see generally, Greenburg v. Sala, 822 F .2d 882, 885 (9th Cir. 1987
which holds that a violation of Rule II is complete when the improper Complaint is filed. Please
see also Circuit Judge Goodwin's concurring opinion in Headwaters, Inc. v. Us. Forest Service,
399 F.3d 1047, at 1057 where, in a case involving issues of res judicata, the Judge stated:
"I concur in the majority opinion, but write separately to remind the district court
on remand that if the factual record developed after remand shows that a party or
counsel were, as suspected by the district court, in fact gaming the system to
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
prolong unnecessary litigation, the court has discretionary remedies in the nature
of costs and fees to protect the court from imposition."
That Mr. Coughlin would write an unintelligible motion and attach 40 plus pages of a suit
involving his own personal problems and a 115 page unsupported and unauthenticated book is
sanctionable conduct because it is frivolous, totally improper, unprofessional and known by Mr.
Coughlin to be completely without legal support. Further, the undersigned complied with the
Rule 11 safe harbor provisions by notifying Mr. Coughlin in October, 2011 that sanctions woul
be requested if the pending Motion was filed.
CONCLUSION.
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants request that this Court deny Plaintiffs' Motion and
award sanctions against Plaintiffs' counsel for the cost of defending the Motion.
Respectfully submitted by:
IslChristoher M Hunter
9510 W. Sahara, Suite 110
AFFIRMATION
21 The undersigned affirms that this document does not contain the social security number
22 of any person.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Dated: 114/2012
IslChristopher M. Hunter, Esq.
- 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I hereby certify that on the 4th day of January, 2012, a true and correct copy of the
foregoing Request for Imposition of Rule 11 Sanctions against Plaintiffs and Plaintiffs' Counsel
and Opposition to Plaintiffs Emergency Motion for TRO/1njunction or in the alternative Motion
to Set Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment was forwarded by United States Mail, postage
prepaid and by fax to the addresses listed below.
Henderson, NV 89074
Zach o u ~ i n Esq.
1422 E. 9' St. #2
Reno, NV 89501
Is/Joni Rispalje
- 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Deed of Trust.
Assignment of Deed of Trust.
Substitution of Trustee.
Notice of Default.
Notice of Trustee's Sale.
Rule 11 Letter.
- 10
F I L E D
Electronically
01-04-2012:09:40:21 AM
Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT "I"
(Part 1 of6)
I lUlllllIII 111111111111111111 jill
Assessor's Pa,cel Null1!lcr:
OJO-On-12
Rewm'fo;

DEED OF TRUST
WilIll$ _ m mlillijJle' 1M !Ills <lelineiI MhJw allIl Qt'l!lr words ate (!griJIDd ill SecliDll"
J, 1 i, 18, 2lllmo 2L role!! rnsm<liflg !he of Wl:l!ils in !IUs IlGt"" __ t am iIllro
Ill,
{II} "Stfltrl!llPitrlml!!llt" _ um dr:<"'''l':!li, wlW'.I1 is daIJ:d lll, 2005

(B) js <Ta!llt\\$ Ii!, .. r enG! ikiatl iiI. C<>rp",nder, h""mn\! an"
?s joint t;fmaI}'t$
a Corpora t ion
'I'll" State of California
NEV ADA-Slngl. ,
CIt,.j)(NV) (Om)
l'Ilgelof15
VMJ' (000)521 m)J
;OC' itl5.7'7!z1
Jg!t;l$ \itO; 'J:;
"'",,:;r.iptiQl!; lfM1:iO'l,1i/V 32f!8G51 p_: 2 of' 2f!
'rcl<!}r: ,2 Cc:mnne:."lt:
EXHIBIT "1"
11111111
111111111111111111111111111111111111111
350 SOtlti1 Gr.aoo A"Vem.1e. Floor. lea Ange-les! CA

LoOO()r is lIJebcncflcla!y uoocr mis Sllwrily rn_k
(D) is Windsor M1lnag<ernent CO. A Caltfornia Corporation
April 2005
The Nw Ji'<!lIS !lml ll_I,HI"'"" i.endor One Sevent l' 'fI'lml"ond i! j ghL
_651
S5?'4t'i:'tilj$
of 1(;
liunoreo .nil lIo/100 Pollars
(U.S. $ 170.800. nn ) pJ ... ;''101m!. !)m;",_.os jOORli>ed 10 pay !his deb! in l"1;rlrn!ic
l'a:rm""1$ tWl In PIl!' IlledGl>1 in fillhlol!a1er lIJIlli May 1. 203S .
ll? "l"rope;i,)'" !Ile WI!! ls !kxnlled ooJr,w !lIIder !he blllillleg 'TUIlllife< or In !llo
PrqlMy.'
({1) "LillI!!" me:ms !OO dell! evi!lI!llllO!lUy lbe NCJ!e, Inlo1m!. il!ly elwge, 'lld _
tiH tho NDt!\.1!!i!l oa!l SlJIrul dnn lWler lIJls pili.
(Il) .. all !O ibl$ !!wI are !1l!-a by llOOO""Ilr, The lolWwmS
Rldm min"" e=ntoo by 1:liIm>w", oox ""
ro "JIWIl"",I;1l _ 11!>
!l!ld tl" {11m! """" tho

SI!IlllO!l liQl!ll;l Rid",
M FIl!IIlly l?m

00 "C ... ",tdII!1 D<I<l3, """ """"" WI 00"," . fOOl!, _II tWl Oll1er
dlll!'@'5 11m! !lr.i "" BOlin_ or !lm by a wru1omi>l""" !mmoo"",ors
tl$$OCiaOOll "" _ito: O'i!OOiz;JliCll.
(l() FWlds _!l!lY of fmlIls. ll;mJ 8 by ""etk,
drolt. lJI" simihrr l"'i"'" wM<h is l!l"l
fJf .., i!S '" ",doL, m u l!J <lomt Of Ill1
_I, 8""" _ !lm ,.. ""! fi}, poinwfrol\> 1tlmI1'_ UllleT rnwItiH
..
(I.) ... '-" _!rose 1n SooOOn 3,
1M) P,1Jd",&" ".....".", ""y a"""j <Jl: l!Ilmllg"'. or pilld by
l!IIY llliro rmy !hm Jll'OI'<OO:s p;W Iho in smn. ./!}{: (1)
\1;>, or Os3!mcUoo or. tlI. (iii __ '" Oil"", Illl<mg of!l!l OT "": Jl"'" ,,"!lll:
lao III 1100 or oonrlomoob; or (h) m'!i1OI""'OIl!lIIiDoo lli. or "",,"'Ql1' .. 1<>, !lie val"" "'ld/c;
"""dilll)!l of me
(N) _1n __ ."",_iIlg
UJOO,
(0) _5 1I!Il0lltlt &Ie rru' {i) jriiclpill illld \llIlIliir 1M
N_. p\!lli {ll)",,:>, _1:8 \llIlIliir 3 of lllls Sllwilljl Ill_I,
(P) "am",," _ !lIB R.m Aa (12 \.l's.c. 2001 '" R<iJ I\1lU jlE
bnjl100IDllU<lil regoltlticm. X {,24 C.l'.It, !'!lIt :1500). il3 "" frum limo I$!ltmo,
tll' allY OIldili_1 or m IIli!! Il!e _ gubjvcl n;Ilillll', A. m tl,ltJ
S-rily hw.mrnen!, "R:sll?A' refers Il) all tWl 1h..: OI"J) impnwd m
DQt:Ut'l.mlt-,l)ocW 3208651, Page! :3 of 20
Ord&r: 2
: 1111111111 1111111
32006'it
is&-'84;i;lJOS
Jl 9; .t:n
lQ a "fWm1lly rela!e<! lolln" _" if !lie Wrul <locs no! qlJ'llify os a ',OOn!ly relale!l JoWl'
1!IX1er lUlSPA.
I'll In Mm:st m 11_"'- I!'It!lIl$ my I*'il' !hill 00. tnIron IllliI '" !lie I'rDI*'il', 0< n01
Mp5r!Y 00. llSlll>lllOO EtlmlWor's !he NIlle dll$ S""""IY [ll>lf1lW=t
TIJ,,\NS1"'.Jl IN'fHBPROl'IEkn
Tbl!I Snoorlly Irul_' se!::_ Ul (I) !he!'!l!lll)'- of: !lietmn. III>lI Jill _.$100& arnl
!M<llfltllllons 01 !he Nore; iIllil (,;) ll;e lJIl1b_ of oove_ mil ag_""ls .m il'f,s
SOOllrl!y 1__ III>lI !lm NnIie, Pm Il>io imlY_bly III>lI Cbnvey. ill
'fmSleO, l. 1nI!l1, wl1l! !'OO"I uf ocll>, Ill<> Co1l!lw!.'tS *",li!leO io 1lw
COWlty of W8sllO<l
! e! Jurij,ljidkin! vi JmltiH-e:tiooj
Woc 6 Gf LmlIS !!lJMl!1!l-S"AAKS 110. 5A, Filoo in 10M oPU"e of ohe CO\ll'lfJl
O'f W!l!100!l O>uncy, St"te of N<;v"da 011 July 1ii, 1976, m. rue
NO. 417319 l1li0 aD Tract MO. 1567
ill NllrniloJ:
2673 S_y Sl"'P" iJrj;va

("l'IIlpmy
Wl'11I Jill !he ""100- fi(JW or _ltd (Jlj !he lllld .u 0.,,="'1lS.
OO!I "ow or hcroo&r u lJIl1I Ill! lWA oo.ll!:iOM slWllilso
be roverot\ 111 !!>i. Se<ru!Iy All ill !he ill mfilrn!d IV &, Il,iliI _y I_IllS Ibo
"ProJl'lll7 '
!1l!Ill'l_ is laWwlly ill !he _ bOldly MIl hw
r"" of
_tllood ",iii W> litle !<> me clIiim._ demondS,
:robJ;ro! I(i!lilY __ oos of
THIS SBCURITY ll'lllTItUMBNT u"ifmm oovcnlllll< frn: 1l!Jll<mai _ ",,{j nun._ilflll
W\<tOI'l!Jlll! willi IIml!1lil IJy !Q COIlSll_ u ll<!ilOIm ino_t oo""rinS y."j
propony.
CO'lENM-rs,
1, i'lly",wt Pi
!kJu.o_ s!t!IlI l"'Y whcri. <lW !lie <JL !l:JII' !l!l, !he 1h< NQ!O !IllU ""1
p!jl!Iym<m IlIllIrp tl". \IJl""" N!JlI>, Ii!>lro""" s!t!IlIlIIoo P!9' for I!sclVvt ,_,
we arYl<. tI-1QiQ)71'*U1' f&
__ {lIlt:?; ?M;-""* '2 !il1'8 . ,-
ffasho3.rNil 320855% 4 ci 20
O;::.cfe,:::: 2
: 11111111_11111111111l1li111111111111111 tlllllll! 1111
EXHIBIT A
.tEGAL DESCRWnON
ALL THAT REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA,
COUNTY OF WASHOE, STATE OF NEVADA, BOUNDED AND DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS;
LOT 6 OF LEWIS NO, ACCORDING THE MAP
THEREOF, FILED IN THB omCE OF THE COI.J'l>,'TY RECORDER OF WASHOE
COUNTY,STATIIOFNEVAOAONJULV 1916, FiLENO. 1319 AND AS
TRACT MAP NO, 15$1,
lD# 0)0.091-12
Dmncr;tptiQ;n; Wa(;ho:f1!}NV Do-oUlHil);n't-.ooo.rV 320&651 i?JJge: ,5 (;f 20
1rd*r: 2
1111111111 III1 1111
323%'51

f; bt A
Plil1io<!nt I;;J Sl)C!ion >, <hie _ !lie MOle and !hi. Soc!lJ'ily I __ t &!loillle """'''' in U.s.
_cr. if ""Y ct.""" or """,, recci"l by lIS P'lyfll"'" 1lle Nom or !!Ii..
S<:<:",i!y is returned !!) m:Il' require O!ly or oil JIIlJrlll(l!>f8
dlre Cll00! "'" NOI(; R !lll:s S'-'Cllrily !le IfWIe II> """ or lOOl'e of 111. fOOl<), as $!llooltll
by LeOOllI: t:mll>; (1;) _:; 00lrJt; (t) c!lcck, 1mnk c1lr;d, _'$ or ... 's g1lr;d,
j)ro'Ijilei! my -m 01lr;d l!: 1lmWll "P"ll "" wllOOiO are ,,,.,,..00 by a fod1;!n]
or ""lily; or (d) l!iTJi:lronil: Fml1ls TIllWkr.
Payment! W'" dumOO "'j wilen .a! me l=11l!;m u,....slgnawl in Itte NoIe ora!
"'@ """" t"""tioo 813 _ I;l; dos!jjml1OO by l#IIlM In wIIh !be """"" jl1'OWolls 10 Seclioo IS.
Lc!lW ""'1 mllffl My p!ffl''''''1 or PUl''''''"' l! L'lo l'llymon! or p_ poym<llltl "'" """"/''''''''110 em,
Ill. eme1\!. <M1 ""Y at 10 l)t!olll!l1l!.AJ;m _I,
wlillOO! Wlliv",", of My .!!I oo..oOOC llI' pwjudi", ro 'lll rlghll1lo ref_ JIDct! Dr pmllIl P'lY"""''' in
lite roMe, is n/4 Dlllig<lOO Iv lJ!!ll1y P"i'rt'i""'" 21l1le 1l1Im ""ell i"'JrIlliM!1ii If 0Il4lll
PmOOle II l!JlPlW<l' m; of II> 00. daro, Ill"" M.wler .m.t! l!tM I"lY ml_ "'" UlllIjP!Jll,::a
fRB' !Il!lY !l!jIrl I!ll<h Ul1!ll1.p!le<l fornt un.@ BllmJ_ !"Jl'lllOO! ru briJ>;llilo UJoo CJl1I1:JlL If
dIlcn 'O! 00 lID 1Mil!lln e n! Ilfflo, M.wler clltli !I@Il' flllJ<le fit .11lIllm
I;J B1ll'ro""'" IT 001 ",,,,,Ii will !O!l!!l 1lll1lru'
!l!!l Nme to J'i/!) IlIflID! fIl' !Illglll !len 001< or In !I;l;
Lc!lW i'rom 4ue lI<l!l!!l !I;l; N. MId !lIis
rllSll:I!llWilIlll'!J"'f""'mglllil 01>_.00 118_ lly Wll 'IlRIlmlml,
., Alliil=- ,,1 l"otmelS '!lx"'!ll"" III lhls 5iIl:l.lOll 2, ill! JIIly!l!l""18
(J.'Ili "Il!'lil:d sllllll ". Qp!i00 m IhIl 01: pOOIily: (.j _llue _or!l;l;
No!\l; (liI) dw (c) _ 00. _ 3. S_ <hal11ill"ii'JlllM III
_11 1m !I;l; !'ll'&, ill il 000",,", due. _ slmll .. Qp!iell fll'l! to
Jant to MY "",,,,,,'1> dw!lll<lo<!lIt; !flU llloo !Q ilJe prtm;,.,llI
l!aJllo oflllil
if Ull!lilr mm_ a froXIl Ihr a dolilllj",",1 I'ilriooi;: ""rmbllt l'IIIil;h ilc.cludos a
wm<$;nl !liOOIm1 Ii> Il"l' w.y lal dill'. IhIl P"""OJll mllj re ol'jllloO !D !he 1"',""""'1 .00 Ill.
J.2le li mete II"", 000 PaY"""'! !!l o_dWg, Ilmy ,,!,ply /lOy froXIl
lk>aower jj) !II!l 01: 1m l'eriO\!!<: Pnymml> Jf, ""d ID !II!l i!l<J!. """" poymem """ ilf p;lld In
mil, T<I Ill<: 011(,111 111m any ""ism !lIl:cr !I;l; l"'YIMIlI " awlicd ill til;; fulJ af _ &. Wft
PI;l'lO<lllll'\lY'll;m!ii, iJ!L"Il _ 1l'li1}' i)e IljljlIie!I to JIiiI', lalli'llmrgw We. pr"l"ymel" ..
!lJlll!ied lim ro Il!lY .. 4!llil lh"" "" io !he_
Any lJ!!lllllmlioll "I poY""",,",,-",o or 10 pripcljmlllue un<lcr !he
No.,llball nol e .. M p!Jliljll'm" l!w dale, or cm.tl!" !Ii.
3, !>l' ItDl& 13000""" !J1!l' lil on !!l1; dl!y "'" lille uilder
!he Nom, 1Jl\!1l !he Note 1> void m IiJD . ""'" {1hIl '''lllldIll '" pm,ld. r", jlIlym"'" 01: """'''''IS due $or. (0)
1".00 4!llil .i!ofru! G1'l priurl\y "''''' rlli!J l!n_! Wi a IioG ()f
ffi'
W __ oil
!If m, Sl!I!Iil p;l)l. by III I!! I!::u "I lI!e of 1n
;vi!li IDll jl!QVlsioM of SOOlio" II), i_ IJ10 ,:ai!ed Al Qf flIlll1Y
tIJno <!tJrlng ""'" of Wall, M.wler _ ""ll>ire DIlC$, "'""', _
Iio BDuuw",,_sucll oo.s. _.nnII __ riliJ;,hIlll 0."" liiI;l:row JIom,
E=_ BIlmlI pIDPlplly III Ill! of _iii !Q "" paid ..oo.r lhis SreII!m, l)ll1roWllr
shall p;>y Under l'ullils rar Escrow B_'g OOi\gJllloll to I>'Y m. l'uOOs
!m <my or Il!l Bserow Illm1:l, Lender ""'l' wlli1lll o'ilR.>;JltI"" '" jlJiY to lender Funlls {'" ""Y ro: all
Efil:I'1)W lIi:an, !ll My Ilmt Arly ""ch wo,- ""'l' ""Iy Ix: in millllg, J" !lie 4:'"",1 of SIIlJ waiver, ",mower
Was"J?04'/lW' 3208652 page: 6 of 20
2 Comment:
I 111111 Iflll IlfJ11I111 111111 1IIIIIIfli 111111111111 1111
3200(;'-1)1

7
sholl pny and wlwrl; pnyli;, !ll!: _II do. fur llllY &trow ,!emS fllt ",1W;h paym<;ll! of
FuOO. hIlS \ie<. wffived oy Len<l", and, if Le!:tdcr .lmll flll'Tlm \0 t.eoll", .i<lti>cillg sw:h
paym ... ! willlill sucll 1ll0 pt:!loo lIZ Le!:tdcr ",or fClIllm:, D<JmJW<lf'. 1e!1li!l: sor.4 [JilYm0lltS ""d
preville EI!!lll rnt !lll "" d_ 1IJ !J< ",,."""'! oml in IlIis S<wtily
IMti"llJt>,oo" lIS !1m and is W<:<! m S\J<1lIio 9, If lkm_ fu; t:l JllIY
I""". !O " oml [nils \!l pill !1m _1,1"" lW l)!J II"",,
I1l!!Y 9 IWd J'l')' JiIlIDIll!! illl!l Bmo"",,, .!mIl tOO" 1>.
under Seotio!l '1 to 'llfll'lY ill Wff .aclJ OIllllllllt lllilj' !1m Wftlw llS !() My Ill' 11111l8.m",
lll:mo 1i1! My ""'" '()y ",1m il.'1C1loo IS oo<l, opil<l """" "",,,,,,,;;on, !ivrrowOf slllll!
pay 10 Le!:tdcr ell FW1!lo, l'!llll ", t:ld\ runooOllS, IlmIlIf;! !lien requlrOO M<ler lilts S<ell"" ],
1'I1ll', III ill1y llIlIt. W hold ll> l!ll !!lmlllll (II) suf'iiclllll! m p1:mll! to
ill_ III !he time ilJle<liIlDd lllJ!loit IUi$l' A. !I<ld (I)) no! to !he llmllimll.'" _I a lcwlel <!lJ1
nnd"1 FlllSI'A, Lon!!ilr !l!!cll !lie ""'Olllli of Fullils dill> 00 !lw "f illI11! ""d
t<:ruiOllow.. of ,,[ fulma I!s1:row 1m. f1f in =_ willl Applloable I"ow,
'l'!w l'lmdll EI!!lll "" Ili:lil in Oll iOO!ful1lrnl w1looe !lm iruiIm:J by dm:lGml a!i"""Y, ,""_lall17,
01 C111ily (lru:lualJlg if JAJIIl!er ill llll mSlimlj<;," are "" """""",) at ;11 ""Y Homo
Lo." 1001;. Lond", !iliil! OWl!, me "ood, !j) )!Ill! !lie 1_", tJ<) !me, m!m !he lime specifiod u""",
1U!5!'A, .ba!! rot fur OOMmg <lMl "Wlymg the !'twa;., _olly 3!lru'l..mg tllO
O/lOOW l!CCOO!ilI, Of 'ffllhl'illg tim lWw.:;, Umi!er I"'}"ll llmrowm iII_ on !lw F!MlIls H!)tl
A\Jp!WiIb!'e Il) mo!:e S'Jdl a elm'ge. U.li:m; 00 JlI!lde lrt _M!!II)f Alfll1li!:llblll
1."", III IJe pIlid on Laooer ",.111;<1 In m ooy
00 CM ftJll'C!l '" 110_, lh!!! !l!!cll be
I.Imdw $IlllII !() wliimd '" mmllO! =11l!!UlJIg of !he Fllnds M ",.timI
IUlSPA,
If Ill"'" I. e <:If Fullds Ili:lil !J! "'"""", .. <lollllW lI'lllor l<l'iSPA, Le!:tdcr l!!l "''''''''Ill '"
Btlml!Y"" tor !lIg ",ce,w fl'!lllls '" V1i1h ImsPA, if IlI= " of Funds !will ill "'"""", ..
1lll00r R!!SPA, LW<la !lll mB'y i:!OO:o- "" ""lllimd by RllSFA, .nnCll!l\ly pilJ'I"CCIS, Iflh<" ill a d!1ficiem;y or F!I<lds bold in ei!CroW, os <lor. ""'"" RES!' Ii, under oomi
oonfy 1'> RESPA, i!OO i:!OO:oww s!&! I"l' III t.eru!r llm l!l mo!:e "I'
lll"OOfIC.i(;!l(lY ill il!J!;"'OO;-.J;ewil!! '" 00 _lilu IlllMllli1r __
paymml illliiil of lJIl_ s_1Iy mill 10--., <ll:!!ll reru."I(J III
ilI!Y 1'!l;1d$ hclrl.1:iy Lon&:!,
iI. Lim>, IlonoWOT pay il! .... "", _OllIS, r_, .00 il11pooi!loo5
1<> !he wllich "on prictiIy OVII< !his SeeMlY lo_mem, "",,,,,,Imkl 1"lJ'tl'""1S or
grolJOO mlil Cll !he I'ropc:rly, if any, l!!ld Commlln,ty A=smi!lliS, if any, 1'0 !he
""""'. !hill lh= \tom$ _ !!ms, B_""", s!&! !lOY <!;em in <!;e provWed '" 3.
Booower .11 Pl'ollljlilJi ""JI !len wll!!:ll lms priOOly "'""" Ihis 11lm.J",,",1
llOITOM:r: (a) ml'l'li!hJg ID paYiOOlIWI'!lw D'IlJle Iil:l> In .- w
lAm"'", DI1g, &Q loog!lil B<l!m""""", !ildI (Ill_11m lim l!! good Mill by, {if
aptlim!t <lll'm",,_ of Ihe licn la, logtil "",ell in t.eru!r's ro 1""_1 tile
?llf\Jro)lnem lim ""hoo mose "'" "'_$, !lm llllly oolil Sliell *
or eel from !he 00l>im" of tlw lim lID to lila m w!lll$
$(M!url!y lrultmmcm, ,I/' _ "''II jlilI! of !lw PI'!ljlmy ill !o 8 liM wllieh em llIIIOO
prinrily lhis s-lt'l !I'l!lml!llm4 Le!:tdcr IlI"l' gm a '"""'" i<lmlifyillS lila llw, Wl!!iln j{)
my. 01' Illll I'llire on wllicll .lI 00!k:. is giWJll, n_ slmlJ lila II"" "r mire orre Dr "'''''' of lhe
aeJ:iooo $C4 ff1fill ill lhi. Sec1Joo 4,
aBhofJ,Nfl 3208651 '1 Q 20
:Jrdar; :1
11111111111111111 UIIlIIIWIIIIIIIIIIIlllllllillil Jill

.. 1 M"'
u",de;r ""'Y require OOffilWCf 10 pay \lIIl7!imo dlorge for recl_ Wi vooficatioo arnlIor r"""fling
""",I"" ux.d Len!ler in wiO,1l\i$ 1=1.
5,l'l'<;j><'l"1y llQrrowcr slllllllreq> 1hz irnproVOIW'.ll5 new !)Xi.ling or l>=f',cr tlC<:!OO on the
Propen), loss by !lIe, IlldlItlod wllhin !Iw IMIl 'wcrulcd ooverogc,' !lllO any olb",
im:lm!iIlI, 1>111 limMd U), /l.llil floods, Em Thls
>I'.Jl!I !J<l Ito tlIe mOllllls levtJ;:;) !lIl<l for tl!e rnm Lena",
le<juiIcs. Who! L!lmkr feqlOm !O = _= <lllI """- = ""'" I!tf mo LOOll,
The ca'l'lcr """IOinj Il>i: sllllll be chI)3\)!) by SJj!)joot III wd<:r'$ ro
l)prmwar'g whioll fltbt simi no; llo """"""'" w!l<r
Borrow", III i<l cOOlIooOOn ",JIh tills L.oo:ll. til!1,,", ooo-lim. """"Ii" fm = M('.fIlla;"".
ill {ll) n rm Iloo!l crul ""mfullioon
soMoo!! !lila ab 1im. Gf <ll\I1IoJ' OCOOil' ",igb!
",,'foet 1l!IIl1! fIt ghllll mso be fro< 100 m ""Y !bel
imjID!i\itl t>y 1M Ajjoney '" .".3llcd3ll willi the !'IWa or lllly Boru! """"
!'l_,
1f ll<!ffflwcr ID jlw .1l1Wll, Ler.<l", fflIlJ ctla WlIrooce
q,Y"'iI!:!l, III Len!l<r's ;;on Len\lw l:! Ul!OOr fiO '" ""l'
pnrlltlllar I)'l'l<> fJt Ilmnt,JI, d ""ell <mml!" sha!! to_ bill mjpl Dr mlglllllll!
prol(+t BGtroWtl, 1l0000000" "'I"lLy ill Il>i: 1'I:\:!porty. or iJ>., cool!llll3 of lb. illlY
Ill' llOOlIiIy roilll>t proviilo Qf leSS!!< OO_<'4;e mIDI W1lS ill
mlll IJm <M iif Ill. mlil!fl!!!lre W obl>iru:d might llipIIica:11iy ""ccro IJm jjf
Ihill Jl.'lm.1'ill<lT cwld b1J>'e /w'1 omoooI!l !>y LtIJOOT !lOO<.!r a-.l5 Sl!OOoo , slim!!
dobt..,r llc.....oo illla 'n-!Ill'I_ = <'t
tile Now rol. fulm /l.llil willi writ !!p!>ll !)o!lte!rom
III a(>rn)WII!
All in""""",,, fllljoitOO by l.tm!<i: ",'lC\ vI be ID
ritlll 10 sooll ./mll iOO!ullo a "":"\gage om! sIlllll oom. JlS
mortgagee Wl\lI!' as an oooiooool Lmdor shaI! h!we lb to Imld !he arul r.newru
If it>,jWil;lS. llorWl>'" $ll!lll g'm1D W:n1!et oJ! ill !'fli!! premil>mI! and
renewal If BOlT_ 4Ill1l fi.'l9ll OO""'llll"'. no! olllll,..,"'" by fur
lfr. or <l!', mID $ll!lll 3
oome
In IIJ "",,1 r:I 1_. llQrro_ sI;!l!l y.., pr;;1lil>! Mlic. Mll Loi;,m .,y
proof of lms if "Ill pr;;mpt/y by U.W !.t:m<l& !lIl<l llQrro""f in
wrl1i!lg, 1J!l"l wfdtI m OOIllle atIDttlylng """" silllll ""
III [YI l'<'jlw of IIlo If m. or b rn:;OlWIIlmly Md
Le1\!lo!". seruri!y ill nOl """,""",DuOOg ""'" >ll!'illr ll!'ld res!m:a00l1 pc:riOO, .!;alI _ "'" right !a
"Old SIlcll mlill1i\1lOO Illllil IIru! "" ew<>rt"!\lIy 10 ill"ll""l_ !'roporty 16 ""'""" II>< "'oil<
hall boeII rollllll.1CIl I:ll.ooi!.... .!!II1'fflfdcm. ptOl1itkd IlIil! $'.!el! !IboI! 00 ... l'fl'll'Illly.
1mIli:r ".7 ill1imow trn Ilm ll'l() __ tioo '" /I l"1l'''''''''' or ill c! 1""11"=
payl!ll$ll IlS 100 w!l1'k Is oo .. jJII:>tIlli LIlw
I!J "" !'1lli 00 llUclt 'n.<t11'llll1'il Lomlcr: ;:boll nol be III l'l'Y I3=.oWCl lillY in_ or
\1.Offimg; 00 .. I'eos for pOO!l;: wlj_ {)l' W.er lltjl'!! by Bnnvwor !iMlj be
puiil Ci>I (If 1lI OOGrIlliCll /l.llil >hull be !1m ool. ofl)"",,_. If m. """,,,",,,n or "",orr is
nO! eaJIlOl!lI;;ally flmjbla c< -001)' WQllIrl 00 ="""'" "'" m.1lllIll,* 500ll bo swlll%llC
Ill? ... ",S .oo"""" by Soellllly lllli!nl1r,ent, wh_ f)t '<01 lhm &,m, will> = if l!llJ', ill
0"""""". S.cll shull 100 in !lie OrON proviOO! for '" Seclloo 2.
W<;sJ,oe,'iN 3:20fJ651 1'''9'': 8 0" 20
2. Comw..oG<Ot;;
, nm 11111 UII110lllllli 111111111111111 !1!111l1
If !.l_ oIlMd_ lire "'lIl' md MY lW",1eble iP",",,",ro chim
"'" "'allm, If lmmlwer d<m no! wl!.'Ik; 311 days !J> 3 J""" L?mler iJlIl! Illt
hilll offcml \0 IPtt!" a claim, !!lClll.oodilllllOY lIIlS_ md seIDe !I:!o clltim, Tho 30.007 poriOO will
bogin whtm Ill. uo!lce is In ci!l:!o< fJ!t If ooqW<:Ill'" m Eo"""",,'s
IiShlll {o!I:!or !llOll me ri!;h! lmrow;;;) ,iOOCr all ""M"''''''
pol"""" overing m. l'ropeny, imrolllr U3 U<Il rlgh!s me 1J) !he of !I:!o f'rop0rty. LeIlOO'
IfIny .... !I:!o in_o \:) "'!J'iir <II _ !I:!o Propmy or !O PO)' a!OOUIrt! ""poid 1."'"'" lho
Nnti: or !!>is SecOOiy cr "Ill m d"",
Ii. Bo_ sMIl """'"PY, 8ll!lJml>, .00 U5(J !I:!o "" BCrl'l'<W!u, princij)a! mid=
wlll!llI 00 ru.I'S af!er !I:!o c;wcu\loo 1Jf llIlt; Sccnrlly InillNmont illiG shall In octIlfY ille l'rojlUiy ""
!I_er's r<irnm"" tor "I I!m! "n. J'= l!fw !I:!o ru;re of OOOl.lpancy, Lend", oo,,,,,,,'&>
III wr!ll!l& vilIicl1 conSMl liOOli lro\ be Of ""-Ilhli I:i1!:M1,trullmll
wl>l1:1. i1."l) _Irot
7. MllIlItl!II"""" IIDl! of lim fllmllOl1vl mlpll 00'
!Ire all"", lire lQ or _mit _ 011 !I:!o
m <mim' ill
l!ro f1pm w
SOOOOl! 5 Illil! '" i!!ll!tl_ shall if
JlmllJl!lml Ii:> ."o!tl I'!II:lllet or ru.w,,c. If ins..- m
I>'Wl Ill, or !I:!o tll<ll1E ()f. illIll'mJli!'!V, ll!ln(l_ sMIl bll
JlJe lfLoodor 00s
fur !b. .00 m 1\ sl!iglll l"'}'i!IMI !'if in Df l"'l1JIl'SII
If ., ilmJrlmro or ,,'''' 001 suff1i::len! III t)f _ .,
illllOl rolleyejJ (Jf far !he OOl!lp!l!lioo (Jf U<Il <!f m!lIJ..oon,
Umdor or i\!; Qe!ll !my """'" _Illille up:m _ of Ill< If iJ; 00.
_bI;; "'0)' of me ilnpm"""""'" 011 ., Lerul"".MIl give
lknr,,_ oo:ke !he tim. of or prim '" t!Ml> "" we""r <p".J:ifyillg Slltil """",,,
1).11"""""""'8 Lo"" be ill if, dlllins lire Lom!
BOOU.W1:f'" ""'7 por""'" '" I!ct!ng ,,' !be dliremIoo cf D=o- l!J1 "'lrll ll<lm>,,';"'s knowlCllg. Qf
!:!l_ go", fllIse. or lilftlmlotiOO m ._ 10 (at l'2Jilt>! lfl
provill. Lomltt wlll! !Il!lllodlll In !he U_ MH:rilIl ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,aoo." 1:,.1
oot JlmIIJ>j ,g, B<ll'I'Qw",'s of !lie 1'm!Ji!!'lJ' '" B<JffiI_'s prirlsij)a!

l'rlim:1ioo of ill am! Ri;\1t1!; Unda fIIig J$_t. If:
M lmmlwt:r fllil< liO peJ:f<mrt !be __ m 1M (hi "'ore ill
& llu mig'" lll_ mill< .13 !!lis
Sl!fori!y ll!l a lit flJt m frx
of 3 b pri!lmy ""'"' llii!l S!lO!!rlly 1M !ll 1nW. '"
rogulillioo.), Of Ie) lmmlwor llas a,');m_ tho !l$l L!:rnler m!IjI 00 m pill fur wlIllW1<!' .1.
-..Ill. '" 'Jl!lI'ilIl'1ol<l 10 U:ml.,'$ inltlvst ill tho Fmjle<Iy _ nullor ll>,is SeA;!lfi!y
mt;loolng ll!.Oi\:lr IDO valn. of 11>. Pro;:rnrty, IlruI sew...;"g 1!!ilIw
!he Prepmy, !.oo<ll!f'Ut'io1l1lOMlm:l1llle, 1m, are!lOllimilOO \0; (oj MY by 3 """ wlli<h
... pflOO'Y ,,-"'''' !nstrumClIC (1)) in nruI to) "lying """"""ble @1lOti1cys' ! .... 10
jtJ Froporly rIIldibt ri!;hl8 IlOOIlr !hls In_I, ill! "",wOO
,. ill Pf""cedinll. Scollrl1'lg 'mjj.des, bu\ !< not I!ml!t\d 10, !lIlIering 1M Propony to
Dasc-=.ipt.i-on; W&&nOc@,.WV 320$)$51 Pnge: ;; of 2{)
o.miX'; .2 CamIlIan t::
\ 11111111111 tlill IIII1I1I11 HI 1111111 11\ tlllll 1111111

(}5c t;:r./&;flS
lfl n{ ZV
"""" repm, cl>t\!)ge l<x!:s, or IJ<=j up dooo liIld w.I;\Qws, dm.m waltr frQm
building or cOOe viWllions Of llooll"'OU$ crn>rlJcioos, tIIld llove mililil:s !lml<d "" or off, ilJilIDugh
lAmIO! moy uctloo WIler Illls Suctloo 9. a- '"" 1m"" 10 ol<l $<I MIl is no! _ ""Y <l!IfJ' <If
oolig;ltioo lOtio 00, II rom im:!m 00 llohlIlly fO!' 11!lIlI1!tiilg llIlY or l!llll!:llmm WJmoo
_Illls g.",,,,,,, lI.
My _ .... Lml,,,-e:: _ lllls Scctioo 9 llMll llooome ill:bt of !kl!rowcr
ll)I !I>ill S"""""y '" _ lil:stIlloar 1lI !!:Je NOIt< _ frem tl>e 001$ of
ctlllblw_en! """ sllilll 1m wilh =l! inwom, ujlOO M'!ice from Lernlor lo OOm.'Wer requmlng
pnymoot
If Illls S;:wmllMtr"m,,,,, ls on . lll:lmlw!lr IlImlI """'I'IY w. Iill mo proviskmo of II",
If 1l.000000Of 1IC!jlJID::sfj,o iillillC tile il>o loas .. 'mld roll tl>e reo tilk shall !IO' ... LMoo
113 !I!I) I!l$fgor ill wrlimg.
111. ... If Ltlliiler 10_ I!$ ooM!rloo !If !1m Lpru>,
!lie m mllimllrn me MOOgage 1"_ '" e;lfccl If, fw any 1lIilOOD,
l>y w be avvllallll!!:rom tl>e rn$ruW Ihll!
l!llG Iklmlw<!r ""'" ro !lliIke ""YEllllIlIS
j:lUY il>o Jt\ql!lred Ib $Irffi (lo"""'tt
in .. "'l\Iiv<Jll;llt !Q
In Ii@m WI iillmllllll
nO! lJoomI'!>f >hill!
auc tfm
u" m
is roquire4 by I\pplic.'\bl!l

!.:>W, N.;,!hlng ill """ lm_a llIlllie _ pI\l>1dI:d ill !he NQre.
(or ilny eml1y !IIat pnre!l_ 11<& NIlIi fill ltOlaY
i!!!;\It ij "'l"'l' me Imll lll:lmlw!lr b1IDl n m tm M0ft8oge _co.
Ml>Ilj;oge J_s !hew will! $l: on a.1 3ll!Jij iIIsmlmo. in from II",. 10 tIIld !ruljI
_ mIQ agr_ will> plI!Iies lP-A"""", Of mcmiy lim" risI;, or rotllift fuss!:!t Th"'" ....
on _ ",,<I !hoi _ '" !he mo!1!;agtI """"" me mlK:r pony (or P'fIles) to (lmse
'tI1ese mli!)' ""1m", rue mD!1!:apfl. in= '" mal:ic ""Y"'''''G uslr;g Ell)' Sf"""" !)f limds
_Ill. ='llagtl t,n"" U""'_ (which "mN iru:1u<l<: _@ __ I from l .... rnt!oc
Wll>i-),
All;! mull of -u,q It_. 01\1 my
olOOr JII!ID!ll!Ill mil! ooove
from
.msuret, amm:gmrmt
Ca) MY llIIi' '1!'Il1llm! fqr 1'11-.,., ""II MIl !!Ill iIDtlIll! __ Ib any ..m!!'
(II) kill' llIIi ro 000
l\Ilvl1i)llg.l/l_ .. ,,, ""*" 000 Hlm __ iff f!l9il fir 00:1", law, rigl1l'l may
IkO""rlpUm::, W',uJb,CXJ.NV iJol:!'=ent-"""I!;I 320865;;' PIilg<l' 1() Q!: 20
OTdiJ."
Pi'!Jt:COlls ml!
MY,
1k:llIlmi 1.
I Willi ltilillfli Rlilltilllllillijill \1\ 111111 !IIIIII
1 nlhu <vMi flf " !<llI!l !i!klllg, 1lt kli;j; ill ,..ruG nf !II!> i'm_v,
slml! be l'jlj11,<;;jJ II) 1ho 51/11)1; b:r !Ills Seturl1;f --, "'_
:my, '" 00mIW!'f,
"""'" of " i. ",Moll U>e fair ","'*"I
WlI"" of ll1e before iIle li"'llol .,.,lng, is UJ 0' ST<><1l<r
11>0. Jhg _ or me """,8 by !his mll".reIy oorore p;ll""" mklllg,
(J! kli;j; in ooloss !)crroWCl" aod lmd", in ,,'filiIlg, IIie ".m, _tifro lly \lll;
S""uril'jl llllilm"_ ,s!lIIII llli redOOlld ",,,,,'JIll. of t... by jl\c
lollowWll llJel'""'illI mloll\g.
Ol' l!i'l;3J1l b mng,
Of loss in.
In Ill. _ of lI! whV;;h lh. falr marker
of ll1e is lea:l Will Ill.
",,"OWl! of lIle SIlIDlS fj[ l<ma in vlll!w, lI'1lCllS
OOmIwcr ;rn!;l !..crlllC3' otIIuwise W "lll'llet !O !II!> sums
tmll'OO DY illi. "'" lI>e:n due.
If !IJe '" 0)' ii, alltlr D.,oo, ll;t 10 D_1lfi @;
iJll! de!iltlrl! in <>liD "* 'IilI II' ."lIlu cl:;lm fer BarrowI;!!' (;ills
!!l resPQl1!l W WIlli!!! 3!;l dhys'/Dlr !.lie ., ll1e &.,00, ill Ili-. woe; ill It) O$IlWI Mil
OW M:isl'<l!1an1l<l'.!S elM 16 mmmloo (J!. repair dL're l'ropi,llI:y q,. T!) _lIfClIfm by Gri:!
S""lIl'ily IIllilmIllml, 01 OO! lOOJ _ !lie 1lm!llllllt, lMI.
". tile I'"fif "ll"""" Il<>fmw'" _ of .tlioo in "'P In M

shan be m default if at'JY .ot w.bat.hrrr dvil or m$L. rn
C<lI>ld """It .. fu;feit"'" lOr me Qr ollmr "",\n1 of Lm1.ler'. in_
in m !his s.:-ll;t 1_enl.!kmoW\lf COll oore $illlll. ",BIJI If
I!llS ""'"""", ",."toIl> IlII pm.,dlJ;! in $ootion 19, by !lie OX 10 be disml$!<l1l wiu, 3
Mll, ill .. <>f or Glllilt 1IllIUi;>! imjmilmonl of
lmd",'a m !be w rightll 'I11dr \!!I$ :roo of ""l' ;;pn2fll ,'" "slj0lailllp>'",'
roc 1.IlliIlllSe<! !iI'I "'" I} !be Gf Leruler'. mlofl1>l '" !be are tJtTel)y ""
!lIiG $ilfllj be lD Lllltk:t,
All Ihal "'" m! "Wlitd !D ,_ 0< f<!1'\If Gf Ihe Proprny 00 fi[llJlld
m pm".ru; f", "' Se;Jtioo 2.
11. Eor_ Nm 5y Lom!nr Nat Waive,'> Nimmo"", of ill. lime fnr
or <If of!lJe _ by l __ t by Uini!er
lJJ l!Qzro ... ", '" ll11Y Sucm,_ In l_ '" BvmJwtf "",,1 no! !(I ller liol>llity Df 80mlwet or
Wasiloe.NV 32013651 PlJ.Q<!' 11 <;x 20
Ordar; 2 C_t:
011111111111111111111 \\11111t11111111
r1i8S51

!f' r:if ,'fj
""Y Sn=ml'S in lnl<:m.'! of ll<lml_. sM!I OO! be ro<!ufm! !Q """'_ My
ill of Il()lIl)Wer or III ,,:r_ ID <X!lmd time for I"'y-01 <Jl!j0l'W<!ie mOOify amo."!l2ruivo
of tile $l!00 s=rJ%l try Ihis lnslmlllOlll by .woo of "'Y m_ IIl' lIle origloal fl<n1Q"'ef or
lJlly 19 Inrerem of Any try ill M)' rigbt or mody
im:l1Illi,,!!, of P"JI!lillIIS from IDirll or in
In_ of llmro,.., or in lC2 111"" lIIo ""'001II dye, shall 00< a wl!ivcr ol or ll""'luae the
of My rl.gII! Of rem<1Jtly,
13, Joint 800 Sfl'<nl! L1a!>1IIt1; mill Bcl!l'lll. l3oIrower 00_1$ am!
Umt Jl.m<owur's uOO liOOlIity llIl!dI l1e joinl am! ileY<i1IIl, ""Y ll=_ whu
bill 001 "'_ Ill. Nnlt (l> (Q) is IhiJl
IQ gF!IIIl ""d """"OJ' 1110 C<Hlignor' 5 inl.""", i>l !ile I'ropMy ","1!1er Il1e !!mU or ml,
S' (b: ls o!Jlijjmd If! P'SY IDe'- IIlls s-my !lila
LuOOilf me !l!lY 01)"" ll"",,_ _ ro ".JliIify, frnl>OOl' UT mly
litioool!ooaallol1l ""'Ih ro illc rer!IIS of lnu:rom<<ll <If NQIe wilhootllle ",,Blgrn:r',
0011Wll
Mji;cl \l!e r_L,lAl!a,o; S_ m I_I Df Ernm_
ob!4;ati1lm< mlet Ws. ooli is
t1j:liI$ !llI!! fi5
Borrower's o!Jlig!lll!l!ll! l!:l\l ali,,;:;
<I'l'iIlIlg, The '!llI!! 01 llrils
20) 4!1(l lIi;l_ .ilmllBip$cl
14. Il'IIl' !loo'o!l!e!' em rm peIf\Mill1li in __ .llln willa
llmr"",lif" <I"Ii"d, fllr _ of m-ill lIle llI1il righls Ilii$
l'Iisl;n;me:llt, l1Ic1n,tillj!, Il",ilod In, -l"" feu, mll1 'Jill". fll"S. In
regnr!l1O Illl)I foes, Ih of In IhiJl I_QIeOI II:J <lllITgo ;!!;1)C!Ij(:
I!J sflnli nol1Je as" 1"nilihili!m <m JiJ< uf su::b r,,", -t 001 d>llfll" fcos
IImlam jlfll!iibil/lli I_I (Arby .4j1lllitdble LIiw,
If _ L<l"" ill trub}::1::i. to Ii laW __ im_ !<mIl am lIle! laW lsi ,mally mre'l'l'lIOO
IiIm llle lll_ or WIer IDl!ll "bMgt\l <:w 10 l1e in c(mIllll;l:lM _ Ille l.mi!l
j>';l'!IlillStlllml!S, th ... , {;;) lllIY I'1l<iII0000l o!Jergo
10 tlle 1'!:ll1li1l?Q limit llI1il fO) "'Y ""_
will im rdOO!JOO ill B!)I'lUW<lf, l,""",,,, may cllIilm ID .ms
the lime or by a dhet:! ll"YQIeOl '" IlOO1JWI'%, If a wID be
l11:<l1Od !l.'l a IRPIl;:r!llillll tmy t1>!JtJI)fl or m>! a J,
ptOYkimH!lr 11m """"l'-Grolll' uoct. ""WIll "'* oy 1Neo1 pay_t In ll!lrrower
will OOIISl!\l.lte Ii _VeT til MY rigo1of 13_"" of ,,'i(lha!g",
15. l'Iclim. IUl sit"" Il, Bmm_ in wJm Ibis SOOIlllIy [p_mllSl
oollJ wrilll4g, MJy oolkf: 10 llooowcr ID "'is J_ s!,a!l b;;. 10 1m, ..
l1e4!1 glva, m lIllImwer II'ililII m:rl1OO b)' filS! olC2 mBll {If !J;l ilIlmlwor'll
if _I by mIwl' _, Ni)!Fd> 1<> 00$ u"",,_ t!m!l IQ all
Appli TIl. !lOOce
1llltrow
Lender
;;JeI.Jcri.ptton: W"tfJloo, NV 3208651 Pag" , U of' 20
Qrdt>r: 2 C_t:
i Illllllllll IIIIIII!IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII !lIi
Law might l}xplidtly or lIl!ow dle !"lfIlD3 III by ooonn:t Of it mig", w 5llcnl, but
.uel1 >lienee sholl 001 w ll$ 1lgoJust by <mml!:I. In lhe ""!'SIt Wi! .. y
pmvislrm '" cIswJ. ol!hls See!llilyl_ Gt dle MoDO oooflitl!! wi1II L<lw, =l1ic,
rot nl'fect or Illm S""""')I or !II!l No!< whicll _ Po g._ eLfecl wi1.!JO<l' 1M
,,,,,Ilng
A. in !his ln$lr"""",c (.0) 'vo,ll$ of IDe __ pmlcr clulll _ all<! inl:lude
_w IJ1: Wll!OIlI or !hi: pdI\r; (lJ) w<:mls iJl Illo :ihall mil'll! arul
inoluds lh0l'lWlllllfld 'II;11lfl; mm dle 'rM;v" gl= ro1l> wlt!!ool ""Y ID I!ll:.
!llly ""noli.
11.I1,.,._'s (;"1>1' ,"",,100 given "'"' "",!,yor ll!. N<JlO ood <If !:Ili.
Iii. Trn,,(If ... or 1m or ill A. 1lSt4 ill IDiz Sl:<1loo 18,
"fn'- In Ibe m_ ""Y lIlpI or in ilao!!IJ!jllg. hili lID! llmliOO 1tJ.
Iho!;e ttOlIlIftl'rCl! in 1I 00Jld IUrdo<;!, for roles CO.1m(:! or tBC1QW
lire mtrilll or whioh is me _r"" ol'!;ltle by Illlmlwot Jill " fulm> dB II>
If &1 Of !Utj' pa1!. or Illo Propmy Of ""Y _I!&! i. dle l!l ooM Cf mmsfoo:lld (tlr !11l,,!I'lW!Cf i.
nOi a nl'lUtlll ptNlOO M<I 0 In lJaro_15 snJd 01 ttOlIlIftmil) wllirom LMl!er's l"''''' wIillLm
00IIil:!ll1, Leooer ",ay fo)fj""" immeOOl'" !Jl')'I!ltllli '" rIDl or rul S\IllIS bw !Ills Inmml'lII.
IJjlIltlll tlllallllm 00 by jf ill !l'obibilOO by Law.
If Lerul", tJ,h optiC!!!, L.eOOllr slmll 11m "f The OM.'" .1111U
l'mvlde Iif lID' lllllil tIlilll 30 !lays f!tJlIl the !lnIe dllJ !U)Ijoo is '" "ill! So:!lon 15
willlin wbicb ll_ "-IIDY aliI.:roms lly til", II Bl)m]Wl'f (<Ill. III lll,,"""
'""'" pOOr 10 tim \))'.jT.!'Il!loo ot IDiz l..,*", lnv<h "'1 remcill$;; p:Mli!IDd bY
!rnl1rllm<Jl\! wlillou! flriltrr 1I01lce ()t dCllllllll!! 00 llmm1W@I'.
Ill. Il_'s iligM to Ak if lIruowtt .mllCil3 OO!llli11Dll$,
sImlIllilve dllJ Ilglll tI.> of1ll" ""Y Illl1fJor
1!'l tim mes! 0; [l!lll\'e <lay . of B !D !l.lly III . ooo!lli!J1.ld In llIis
SumMy 1_: (OJ _it!llOOr a!lIlPJlOOWlo taw mii!llt b: \!J<> ImliIIIIIioo "r lJarowllf'$
rii!Ilt 10 (J< elm)' Of l> jmlf!llllillll ilIllmillg IDiz 1'II<>s& "" !hi<>
(0) 1'ii)'8 fill _ whlct> !Jmll WlJ;,lU b;J ".,. under IilI$ 1_1jlId L'w !II"", lIS
if 00 bad .(0) """" '&3'J III tilly 00>0r ",,_IS fit 1\!!",eillmlE; Ie) \lilY"
ill emon:ing this Srellri!jlIIlSlP_. inelOOilig, lJ;.1 I! Iimi!Cl! _"hie _ys'
... Jl'OIlI'!1y lns;rectloo 1jlId ='""" f_ m<:il/Wl fur dle of proIOOlillg Lem:!cr's
l!l_ jn flle Gild "" .. nooer lIm 1>ocurily """ (d) _ ",U,," Il:l ma)'
rem;oMlJly !l) f4'SIlre !lilll iIIItrm in Ilro U rigIll< fuiil bl$_l.
ll!lIllJaroww,', '" Il"Y 1l!J<> rums bylltis _ ooolln"" \lIIClOZllgoo.
!.AmiJer mar B<lfmWer Il"Y _'I! """ in ()lie tlt _re of th following
fOl7l1S. as by Uml',{:f: (1l) reJlll: (hi mooer (c) oonll'lcl! _, ""'"' clleclt.IretOOrer'. 0'
clm.ll'V"idOO "",suo" i. dmwn """" "" _, .,r"'so _ in .m fedarul
ll!i<I'<J', fK enllly; or {ll) Fwll!! T_or. UpOn (mm.".ll""l till.
SelZll{:ily lJm!mmel)! ""d (lblil\lioom Wctly _ fulij' eIl'e<::lve "" if 00 tjj!!J
!:lilI\'I>oer, IilIl righllO rei_ clulll ilCl1lWl) ill th Cf lB.
rIl NoK; "r tom NI>!! iJl' Tru\ 1'1* '"' e i_ '" lI1c
Note ('!osWu wlll! iliis I!oolirilY IM_> "'"' re ""e or _ 00... !!'llJDlID"'''.
A to!<> miglII resuI! in iIlll1c mil .. ll!e .L!:>i!ll !liill
due mdo> Ih? Nete ",,"" loon omv'cip.l! obllgali"".
",,"or tile Now, SooutijJIltlStrUlnOlll, """ lJIw, '!bern zl"" Illigll1 ba ruro or more <1t!lr1ps of
\hIll,.- Scrvicer III a !illle o! Illo 1'1_ If ll= ;9 A Ille L.c4\ll Borrower wW ""
Wl'iilmI !U)Ijoo IIlll1c will Blt> _ ;m<l lI1c _ Loon S(lTVlctt, !lie
III willth !ll')'I!l_llhooM!>t m. _ !lilY Dliw m ",'Ill b
a! \lllllllf",ot If lire Now 1$ s(JIi1_ !lie L.c4\ll i ..,..loon IlY Lam n1IIllf
%Jsl1l=:tpt;1.cm; Wlil"'hoe,1iV 32Q855J ii_, J3 9' 20
:1 c"","""'t,
1111\
3..000ilS!

14 Df ffi
II'an me pumllas of lite Nore, tm !,,"" "",icing oWismitlos lO B!JrnJw", will """ail! wim me
Loon Servi'l)r or be l1!msfl:lw.A 10 a "\lcc=or Loon Sc,vi-cr arul ",e oot osromod by 'tm N(lll; pll7Clw"..,r
UIll<:rJ olllww!s<:: provi!.led by ill. Now 1JIlldl!l=,
fiOO'Gw", nOf IIlllll _, pn, or be jciIlod !<l ""Y aaiOl'l (02 ,illlo, ""
indlvUlllilllillSMlor I./lu of 1!laI_ !rom "*" party'. ID \hi> Se;::l!J'ily
lus!l1Jm;m! or mm llroIllls oth", pmtj' lIDs llrw..!!lrlooy Q/', {)! l!lIY !!IIly by _ of,
Illi. !l1$I!tl_ ..mll>lrell \Jt 00. I!lIl 01Iwr 'party (with such rotire &h'Cll in
oomp!laJwJl WilhIDe f"'l"ireme;J!l': of Serooo l5) of $I)"" t.1:Ilch i1l!d al11:lf1lod llie llIIler jlilIty hWll
perl"" "'!<lr "'" giving of >l.ICh ndike III m= f1C1lIm, II 1Il>l'llca1)lo Law pl'Dvillll<! " ilinn
perlQd which mow !J<lf ___ aai"" \WI !J<l !l':lOm, lila! lime wlll be !O be
fOfl!l!lf!!O=ot IIlw ThI> of Md 10 IllVCllIO
10 SCCllo!! Xilllll!l1ll\l of """.lmlIioo giv(;1! It! 130m!""'" W SwJtm IE $Ill! be dtlMlfllllO
saIIsl3' 1II\IIlllD l!llIl <!WO1Il'*' 10 odItI !li1lIl!llIl",,'_ lOO',lmol<li wiill>lI:Ii<l!I
za. lm!lBI_.M aim, il> Iil:iB 1..1, (a) are !!we
uS',"""""" lIS 1",,1< or or 1'1_ by Emvirrnl""",ta! La .. lim) Ills
Cooow!ng =-, llIIler 1lI!mm!fule or IOl<It j}:;:r<l!mml prodll{;la. !l:JXic 400
__ ""'-Ii '" md (b)
"Efivllxm""",,," Law" "_ feOOrill law, a,ld l<r/,'ll of!lre jm:lmllOOoo 1Vll6re W. is j",,_ tml
ill at eilv!roOOlOOmI pmreotiOD; (c) 'En.oo""","tlll lIllIlOOOil ""Y WWDElilO
""lian, '" femo"Ol i\,.,ron, lIS tlIi::IIDod ill EnvlmllmCfflill IAJW; end (d) lII'l 'Il1lvlmllm.,illll
m_ a mnOOlrn !OO! CM _, coolIilllltel:\l, or "" Clo<!mIp.
Elol10WCf 5hlll! Il<lI _ or !lie 11"'" -., '" ill $j!Y fMmic''''
Su"-". I!ir ID f\fly Sub_. 00 <If '" )3Q""""" lllI!llIll<lI do.
nor IlilOw l!!lytll'e Illse ro 00. enyIDing !he liiJIl vinlmioo of ;my Em'''oo_1IlJ
l..nw, {Il' ,;;'!>ich !l!'OOl.e;$ !lJIlEmiiI",ll'OOl@j Com:iIticn, at Ie} due !D me -. OJ or S
a coollil1<m liiJI1 mlvOJtil' ilffi:<$ tl>e <}llI>c 'IlIe _
SCl1!<l!lOOS 1iIwllI I!J !lie -. ilt -. o. !he of ljIiIIIl!:\!ics of HovlrOO<l,
SUlJ_ lIwtare 10 5e W IIIl!HilIl _ 10 d
llla 1l!llll<lllimhYil III :p1(ldt!:l!i).
1l0lT0'i\Ier slJij!l wrioo. 0011"" d (a/roy claim, JllIVSIli! or
mher !!C1loo I;y __ or "'4l"1ilwy or pdWlW pmy IIwol>inB lire ,,00 ""1
Hw.!ltOOiJ2 Sul>l>\.","", Qf =vO;ilOOlOllni Ulw of .. ilkll lWlIDW<I" lim at;IDol, l\l!I"",letlge. (b) ""Y
Envirnml10llni ConOOirn!. jl!ldOOl),g bm OOllimhYil 10, ""l' spilll.g, r<:loose Of If"","' of
relf;i!Sl!> of rmy Subs"","", l!llIl !mY COO(jj1loo by me 11D'G$"""", use or
wjJjd> lI1w"",,"y lire 1!Im: of If 13_"" lo!Jms, or !;; IIOOfm uy
any or au!lwey, or lillY 1'Ml'. !OO! Ilfll' """""'lIl '" DlMr of MY
mW!lAg tile Propmy llilJroW", s!lall pl:MlJ>ll1 !l!loo all """""5llfl' J\lIl!OOW
Il!>Iions in Law, NOIl>iog !!Wtl.'1l liOOll ""'010 ""1 olJJlg,OOl' on Lemler rot ill'!
mlroiIMOllni
De<-scr.i.pt.iOtl: 'Wa..wbo.(.l!-,W 1;k)aum,z:,nt-DQeID 320$.051 Pagfff: 14 DX 20
2 "_ne,
1IIIIIIIIIIi 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 ,200851
ll- slllIlI Ill" Ii) l)Q:rr"",,,, J"'b' to ",,,,IIl.,..,iloo r{J!l""ibg
B_. (>f ony "''''''IIlI'll "" in tim! $t:m<111 1_ {but nOl jll'lOl ,
"""lm'l!iloo II""'" lI5 t.aw TIl. $UlIlijlecll'yl ,oj
!lie <l<fullll; (bll!!;! ffillllrH W ......, !Iw !Mll11it; !<l " "- loss fbnn 3!l from !Iw !lal.
Ill. '" g._ !l) llt)""O'"'tr, "1 wh!rh Ibo !MllI1it mml II. ""J!dl (<I) Ibat 1<JII!m: I!? "'"" Ibo
I)f> w lief"", 1m: I'IfIf<l in t!lIlWo !lillY HSIIll: III of Ibo IiImll< SfCWro by
tills ll_riIy fml1!!mOO! 1iOO sal" of Ill, The HIlt. r_ iIlf.mn fl\&mJ,.." ot !!,.
I'i<Jltt 10 .n.. _m"oo.. .,,<l1bo rlglll llrillg to "''''''1tIIll! 1I<l1l_1<1"""" cl'
IJI' otbllf limn"" of fQ _-..1"" ami If II!. <I-.Jt "' 00' _00 00 m'
b.'M mm nOI""" 'Is 1!00 fuTibet J;l!!r.nmd, IIlaY lnffilre
I!lll )J<l- of sal!% IIldmlilAg 1M I'il!lIt tw .. full )J<lY-' of NIIt., any o:!bu "",,<iii.,;
I>y Appliolblo Law. lMIiIIT simi! .,.li_ W ""J>!W'>eS In I"'mJlllg
",<iIIIlf pmwlJlOO ill am n, bJdmIillg, Imt oot ,,,. IlttOl'll<Ys' 1m ,,:rnl '(1$1$
Ilf lIm.wllltii ...
rr ilm!!<re !Pe 1)1' sol", .. {iT """"" '1',,,"'''''' m _II> wrll!"-"
$I' W __ $I'lm .wmi <If' OO!ilIlfLlmilllt's elil!lWl f& Imt III !W $1>1.>,
a:rnl mill li1I!iRlI!I<'l! 10 "" llJ fiII III wll!<ll ""1 jW'I Is
s111l1! llUlil 00jli5 o1!1w by Allptilllll>w Law '" IUd to IlW
by s!la!1 '" W alld IllIlW ""<1'_
by lAw, l!.1'iill' lilt tim, by Awi<llllie Law, w1thOOl *,-not
!lIl Bl)rto .... , glll!ll d II>!: Prnpeli, lit pul>ile "",,111m to _ high..:! bl&ler 2t the .. lid p;Ia<. linG
Illl_ Ilw """'s In t"" '" SilIo Ii; """ 01'_ l'arn:ls lind '" '"'" (lrder
'1' .. _ -J $ltv, ur '" I%T"'Y pm-m $1'_ by pM!le .. __ 1 lit
llw ti'Jnv1ml! or _y LII!o!<r w w tIl!jg_ """y !l;>
saw.
slid d<lI_ 1M !he 1'1'll'm.... <Il!i!d """""1ilAg _ l"ropI!F!Iy wilhrnr! "ny
wvewllt or "'''''_'', or imflllOO. The re<imls m _ "",,!lb. fltim. fad"
.vl&nm,ilfll!i;'tl'lIIb of Ilw T_ mill "PI'iy Ilw of tho '" th..,
oro.,.; (a) II> all 01 sal .. lntIlldillf, lmI tmt lImilid W, 1' __ Tm!I""". !lIld
ollomilY"' ill) to nll ___ bJ' ibi>; J __ ; 00!il Ie) Ohy !(J Qr
""'_ l1li:011)' {nil.
01 oil_ goourea by iT,!s Ul!lt!tr!ilmll re:jU<S!
1'rnz1eo 11l 00!il sIIa11 \hi, J_ """ nll _ lI;11;!
by S&curil)i IfISIlUffiOm W T_re simi! T<OOll"'Y IIle wi\hoUl wamiilIy to .he
llefllOn 01 lJ$g!i1ly "nllll<:d \(l it S- l)C!S<lh <>r Jl"/Ill:Iq, l'"Y !l&y =_ cm<s. 1.<,,<1# may
oIJru:!!e mm, i" perroJ'!il B f.., fll< r=nv!'l'Wg L'Ie bIJI oo!y jf t!Je roo is p!!Id 2 fwd
(""ell til> Wil'ruM} for Qflhe Law,
14. LootIl!r III iB I!lllY from lime 10 lI;ild "!lpoIDl a
III "'" Wl!Ilo:!i $I' Il>e _
_ Il) 1II1 p_ mid _ ",'lll by Low.
15, lice. 'If Illere " "" -.mplh)n Ilf tlJm m, Lmb ""'l" ""Mgo IlIl r"" Qf
u.s, $
w.aahooflilY 17agtn 15 of 20
c-t:
!IIII 11111 1I111 11111 1111111111 1111111 I!I 111111 1111111

\1;.
IlY SIGNIND BlilDW, !3OffiW1tr M4 Ul 1lle """"" M4 _1$ l:ll<llG!W In lhis
ood in !lilY Ritlo: CZ"".IW llJI BOIrower "",d willl iL

""",l:\oe,WV 3208651 l?_, 'lI'i o 21)
:),rowr; 2
(Seal)

STATE OF !'I1i:V ilJ)A
COlJNTY OIt
11111 Dlilltllil DillnOlllllllill tIl 1111
This w"" OOfvre "'" o. f\f1K
Same" S. Carpentier, JO"-ll E.
Ml;ll Th:< !lw!?_1$ Te:
Aa"",& jjO\lliil wan
35tl South Gr:an-s Avenue
Floor
WS CA 9(}on
,t;l;e$(!.t"ipMOll; W'aabQ1#I'NV 32'0$651 Page; 17 o 20
-lA::'dlDr: ;f CcJ'm'Zl.en t:
;NB851

17 ",r "Cfl
by
, \ 1111111111 111111\\\ 111111111111 01111111 1111
ADJUSTABLE RATE RIDER
iUOClll '" M!I1Itb lDcl"" (As l'llblolmllp Tho Vl'l>!l !lInoI Jlm'mIIJ ' Caps)

$.5, '13<1. "coos
H);,..,( :'<1
THIS AWUSTAl>UH,ATERIDER iUMi!ellli!! lSth oi April ,
20f)S , ""ills into llOO sllllli "" ci=CI! ttl _dllOO tJw
:!'lllOO of Tt1mI. '" (!Ill; Qr 1M _ <lale IlMrtl lito llOOmignlltl (We
_B<3l'1_'S NI)2 (Ill. t!!I "',,""'"
LEA M_ LOOn
jllW "Lll1fd:j"j of """" mlo I\lJ4 lIl$ III IlW In_ Mil

2S7J $u=/ Driv", H\i'
I"""'"", Ad""",!
THE HOTE Cotn'AIml i'RO'IISlm1S Al.lOMNG "OR Itt TH
IN'rEmlSl RATE AND fHlii PAlfNENI, THE NOTE UI\IIITS Tm;
ANOIJtf'l' THE I.\I09BOWal'S AATE CNI CHANGE AT Am
ONE TIM!!! AliI:) 1'mlMA)(lI\IIWIl flA'f'l' THE OOI'!!roWEi'f !\lUST PAY,
ADlJImONAL COVENAN'l'!/, In lIdmtioo I<l hO" CQ""'kmlJ; ilild a,,"""''''''1< 1l1i!!lz in 11m
lnlllnl"""", 1l1J"(lWilJ' llOO fm!l!rx llOO IlglB os [00,,",'5:
A, INnlll1;,,"lT RA1l! AND MONl'Ht Y PA YMEl'I'r mANGES
TIl$ Nt>re. jll:IlVZde& ii:Jran w4lia! iIl1lJ,P"st .. \Jf
ill IlIW m!Jll!illy os folio"""
4. 'i'l'tflml!S'l' liAnl: A-"ID Mom'HLY fA YMENT {:HAlIIGEl>
{Al 1JIl""
Thll nI'''1lW'JllmY1llllyol:ooll''oolloe 1st &"yof ,201)7,
mIl\e, my i1I __ will "" Oil 1m "I'M 'lEll!'>,' 1$ !he
{If Ql'fl:1!!d mro;,. lW < !li1l'IlIIi 1$,$, ill !be LllOOoo
('UOOR"), "" published in The \VElI Sit""! J DumaL 11,e _ 100.,,; fIgme IZ .l!f !!11' fu,!
Mll!.;Tl:>l}" r ADJUsr"",lill/l:'l'l' 1lloE1MJaoll MONm IliDa Iii!! PiJBUllIlElHI;! mE WJlll, 5'11liEET
JOURNM} -Sk"l{ttt;J
(t;..A9BSBU jfl()!)j wn
f'3)l1l;l1 ol:lt
E15JOTflOtitt UV2fiR fIliWS, m
TiT"";'",,,,!!? _t-!79a:W 32GS65:1 P"Sl'i'l It; <>f 20
0>X!GJt:; J?
111111111111 fll 111111 III 1111
l.?8BS51
,-
l'l
day of k mtmlil Ill<: JIl,;m111 III wllioll k l1!l!ll OO'll'!$ .. ,Alllw me
'C!>m:iIi
tt u.. " /lQ !!mg", Ill<: W1>ll\ will n ""'" l!lila _ is ll..oo llfl!l'l
inIDmmicm, Th<l NOIll Ho!1lw wi!! g7ve"'" llOIioo of l!>ls dmlce.
(C) CIlk"l!ItlJm !If C!uulj:1!5
l>ofOl't cool1 CIilIllse me will c:;Ioo1ol& my ""'" = !Jy a<l<:ling
S"l< ""0 ijSli Tho"""wtl:ls 1-.;'l;W j!lcim(.)
{ 6. 6'1& %} tf} Cum:l'lt !nllillt Tho NcIi\ HOOlirr will tillll'ld Ill. ",'iUl\ of
10 !llll UC1!f1ffit Or""" pOOJl ro Ill" lln\il$ in S",\lQn
4(1)) lleJuw. _1 will hi! my !leW m_l"I,,,,/llil J.bI! UC)lt DIi1o,
The NO/!.l 'Will lhn ""'JlIIlll of "'" O\lm!iilj' mrn; -* be .. "mom 10
.y Ill? lIlllI r l!n! $:\pwrud w """ III me in full <lil k lM
new __ 1 "'Ie eqI!l!! m tl!ls wlll hi! !l!i; """" _I Dr my
m1)1l1ll1y lhlymtml.
(1'1) LimYE ... 1111_ Raw
The 1'!00 I om ID lhlY 1lI1!J<: fl!'lll Cl!!i!lge DII!O will 1ID1 lle E-!l!!ln
10.905 % m Ie:l, a.m 7. 90S %. 1'0)' in!J;f<-';;l'l(;C will
ne_be 00 MY Dale Of more One
( L 'ill};""in t!;ll rom oi' I lIlWe
My "- Will """1;Jr bl> 1.3 . 905 %
{Ii) I;)ew m Chanpi
palm!s)
filf 'l'OIIih11,
7.9U5 %.
My IIfffl IDW'1 ,all! will t!kCll"" 00 l;JoJo.. I will !Jar "'" jjj!lQll1l! of ';1Y !laW
ll>OO\llIy I"'ymmt OC! me fiJ$! if.O:le llilO< Ill<: l}llil1 d,e l!II!OO1l1 1'1 "Y
rooomly
() of a-ges
TIlII NIW> l'Illltl<:r ;lim doIiVeT '" m;Wro lIl\l n of 1Ui}' in
my mtmIilly ""{rue \!l(! cffrelle dale of ell)' TIlIIlMllloo Will by
mw !:l be Biven me Ilild illS!) !lu: Of a wilD w\1l ""l I I1lIlY bave
t<1!II'lli>ls Iltc
J}, ttAN8M!1I. 00 mil: mOl'lllnY j\ II\mi:Ii.I5ST IN OORII.OWl'Jt UuUbrln
C<lverinin 11 "r!lu: lwmm_ is __ ro WIlI!!S illlOws;
Wild"" &f Il>o Ci!t
any lnlllm:lt in ,I lS tilM or {;;r if a 1
is nO! a ,",rum! wilhll1ll
imllllld!ll!O l"'lffll'lI'f ffl fijU 1'1 afl __ 1Jd
""""'-by <M:el'*" 1$Il"<JlliWI\ld!)y ';i"-i;;;;;;
'I4n. IlIItiIl IlOl IIlis opDOll if: I,
;-31l11 !1!'''''
POe
De.,,,,,,,:l.pt,i<m.: lfMi'.o .. ,lW 321)13.!!1 P41g"; 19 at' 20
O:cder: :2
\ 111\\\ I1I1 1111 1111111 III Iftlltlll! 1111111 II lUI
infOOIllllJoll "''!lli"llli 10 1W.ru1lle "'" as jJ a llW k>rul were
(b) lM>t1er lOOt 11ll<W'il)' will 001 llo,
""".",p\im, MIi tt.. of 0fI)' <m_1 '" m !lUiI S< is
III weer.
To tM M\lmt by UWliClible l:\\w, may .d;mj!\\> " itt.. 8!J "tl,ltli\!$a 1il
CIlllIGlI !O tt.. mn _lIlIIl'!li:n aloo Il!!!jf "'" 1m!!:3f_ ro >'lgnJllj
lOOt I1l ro mZl .I!>at "'" \l;J 1<""1' oil Ute jJI!lmm lll'l1l
ll!!'!l\1iMl1l1ll1!lllle ill Ilti: iii 1IIi> will """.!mID !IJ be oIlligillOO l!lIOOr
llle N<110 ooHlIlill lloln>>Ftr III wrltln,;;.
H LoOOer !!,,,, '" pllym!ll1!: ill I',ri!, $1llItl g'1II; Borrow<:t
j!!:al"",llM. 1M1lO!fue sIlIJllpm'l;oo" d llGI less _ JIl dOll's fro1illlw llle ,,<rlicll jj; iicllvert!l
'" ll!IIlled VIlll:Iill llll _ by .m Soorrll)' H ll<Joo_ 10
!xl mal' jD'Il:ib pY br !l1is

"'"' :l'XlC A?I!:!#
32()fl5S1 :mge: 20 9 20
Order: 2 O_"t:

on_Qf
j,_Cllrpo

t1111 DI'iw,
:fKlllClOl'
11'1100, CI\
11III
&J \Y 7
SUBSTITUTION OF TRUSTEE
tOO T!WI\!$, Md
1" was JAI\'II!S $.
CARramEFLMID JOAN 1':.. CARPBrnER,HUSBAIID AND WIfe AS JOINT TENAt!II_ 100 oriSil1l!l
T!lJsIOl(s) l.ifldl _ <*lmn !JeeIj pf iNS! I;ia!d 04l1l!!2!!!!5. Recorded. M! 1l5IW2!105 ,,'" fig.
l:!1iIlll51 ofOlOOkll ]!IEl/AtlA,_
I1D!!!lIji WI4'I me !mdBnilg/lBd. Is !he oolll ofTMI,
WHEREAS, Oeslres to ""f#! TIUSt"" umlel' "e\!l Deild of Trust i>llha ..00
of sal'; olIgl!!!ll limJtee or 8 __ TI>l5l""" In tOO merBlE!r ll'l "00 of Tffi5I
NOlN, 1HE!'FOF!Ii1, tim unOOmigned herebV whsl,Mas MTt: fIt!AlG'M,. !l$ !II!!! Tj'!!.!I>JI!E
CORPi. wno ... address Is: I:!.1l QtS !l!llIl/E 2t&.f'!,DQR. WtIfi, CA . fI2Il1t as
Iftillr said Oeoo ofTM;l
lhe wt'tl!l<\ l-r $0 mtjI.!irm, lha geld!:< lire WiG/or re!III;r, md 1I1!1.
lilnguim P:l1lc.lha pIumI.
BENEI'IOIAI<Y;
AAIIIEll HOlE
m._,NV 3;544.13!i 1 0;; :/
Q.rd<>", 2, Cowmen t :
3544135 Page 2 9f 2 (j6/14/2007 04:28;01 PM
, , '
a m
D<l_JJ?U<m; Wa,vh.,,,,lW Po_t-lX>qlTI 3544135 Peg"" !! De 2
4! c-""t;

{IlECORD!NG f'N
AND WHEN RfCOFIDl:ll MAIL TO:1
TMi'WI CorpS
, 2112 S\I$iness
2""IIOOT
1rv1M, CA 92!11::!
l'.m; IN DEi'"AUlT IJI'IDER A DEED mOOT DATED Q4!1ll12O{}S.UlIItES!> '1'00 TAKE
AC'flf'lN PROI"EI'IT'f, lilliAY BE SOU) AT A'pUBUC SALE. iF '\'00 I4EED AN
"'''"''''''>C Of THE AGA1N5TYOIJ, YOU SHOULD CDI'ITAm'
an 9810812007 at
&tl>S1itolw 'T\!$l<le urn1er
Of teooro;,
WlllSEl.l.. AT PIlSUCAll',,"'Ill;l1il TO nilS I3lI:li:l!i!l< 1'0fI CAI3li ti!OO of ill
money of I!><; UnlIllll Slate,;, !;i!J ""'"" """"et" sIa!a or fe<:lef;ll amffll",',iCn, II
ci1ool< dffill'ffi !;i!J " .!BIB Ill" l'el:!er": and loon """"'!l" or !JaIlk
$pecliied in 51{)2 Ie !he and llilIOOrlzoo !o 00 111 -l. AT: THE
SOOTH VlRGIW<A ST. TO THlS COIJI'lTY COOIm'lOOS, 75 CDllRT sr" RENO,
NV
ThJj property lv;welC'!!lr! Is tl<!!119 s!l!!l'". is". An Iiglll, enG In al1Il now held
by ij IlIldfn' Dasd i1t Tmot III I!><; in 1!i!/!.l Counll' ami $l;i!le 1:an1
A,I'M, 11 009'1-12
LCiT S 01' NO, s.A, FII..W 114 T'ri!! 0l'i'lQ:. OF TNl!! 01'
WAaHOli! COUllIT'!, I'Il!VAi)A 00 JULV 19. AS FILl: NO. 4in19 AND AS 'TRACT MAP NO. t!i!l7,
Tha .!rool alklt$ru! ana o!!rer ccmmoo If "fff. {)f I!!i! mal 000", Ii P"'POIIed
!o ber ilS7SlIrniNY stOPe ORNE, lie\<'AVA 1lll434.
The !lIIMmigoorJ T",.llsedlwclal"", any !iaIlJ!i!y f\:Jf arIY lnootfl?ObIQBIll ()f f"" stmet add'_ end uOww <.rommon
II sny, sOOWn 1m,,,,", &l!d lKl>i., will 00 mr;de, bul WiIl1<>lJ\ """"""", I)f -Ilt, or
implled, ""lIaftlin lllP. or 10 pay 1Il11< ""'" of me Na!w{s}
by eai!l Daoo in_'" Ill""""" 'lS In fikl N(JI<l($/. aOlT@ncm, i! any. pndllT llil3
1e1l1!& of lim Daoo ()f T<\lsl, c/1Elfgf):$ and {)f the Tmstoo 8m! {)f In" WsI!;
Slli!i D_ 01111./51. 1ha _lllmOOl'II olille !li1PaIll bel!in1::e of 1M """"red by the ill be
$ol;:l and e.limaloo cos!s, __ l!I<I\ImlOO\? III !he !l,"llI! of I!><; lmt1!lo1 pC%llicailll!1 i1t !he
NoliCO of Trustee's Sille 1$: OO,DzU;q <_1lHit<!<l am!)Uflij. mod addIll!>l\!ll adwOO9$,
If any, j!lC_ this fi!lll'" prior to ,,..In,
WiiMOJD,BV 3564iJ93 Page: 1. of 2
2
,
3564893 Page 2 of2 00113/2007 04:li8:C7 PM
, '
Trustee Clf moor QI,lffions Iluthorizefj to, !I!!i!I!! lie saw d!:Ies oot coml1!lll
with the @\fisiOl'l$ of NRS Chapter 107,
Ifttl& u!I@blett)conY!Ytit!!fore r&i:IOOl'l,tOO lIIlIccessful blclclel"\Ii!p1Ii! Ii!!ld
<?l(cl!l\liive 1iiI'lii1l be tOO mtumof moE alel to ttl, Trustee Ii!!ld till!
bldg!? shlilllhwe no further recoufee,
""" l3enellt;:lary UIlOOr $SW DMl:I of Tro", !rere!l:>fure am! _tml \(lim Und<>f1llgnOO II w!l!lm'>
tl<l<:l<J.remm of ailII, TIle
undllrelGJllad causlld 00ld NQlioo of li1\O ElIldkln !O S1lIl to 00 fOOQf(lW in he CoofiIy wllilm the m<!l
i3 Md l\'ri'lrll !han !!ltUl'Ilomm $""'"
State of CAllFOigM
County d
01'\ ITmMOO7 before me, Sl:!>lOON $EI\IG tAttlE tAMBE!!rr petsooally
!<r,own 10 Ille (or to me 011 too baSIS of to 00 the pemcm(s)
neme{s) is/l;!1;l sl1llsc!1lled 10 too WilJlill aM to me lila! he/e>CeCL'ted the
samE
OORI'$'
:li1l! cerrER IlMIlE, 2'" FlOOR, !!WIN!!, CoA
POR SAl.!! COl\lTACT: 1714) !i?l!-1llM, 1114) 57H1T!, f,l<I&l
I PAY OFF WNTACT:
WaMo",l!1V no"""",,"t-PaoJ'D 3564/l93 J1'_: 2 of :2
omel:S!>;, it:
[RECORPfMG REQUESTED 6Y
lIND WHliN RECOIU)ED IIWl TO:l

2112 611$l,,_ Cmlif>f Drive
t'dfloor
1M!'!!), CA 92612
IMPORTANT MOTICE
NOTICE OF DEFAULT AND ELECTION TO SELL
UNDER DeED OF TRUST
IF YOUR PROPERTY IS IN FORECLOSURE BECAuse YOU ARE BEHIND IN
YOUR PAYMENTS, IT MAY BE SOLD WITHOUT ANY OOIJRT ACTIOW !linil \'00 may
have tile If)gal right 10 bri!l9 your _rn ill by all of }'Ow past 000 paymoolll
plU$ pM'nitted w!!M1 tile lime pe:rmittedby lew '!Or of your
_A! {wI1ich is OOrmaily up to tIlirty-fi\Fe da}l$ aft. the d\1IIIi! i:lT llll'lllil19 of this
Nollce, Is 1aIef), No date ll'!'ilY umI! IOOIlms from date ltM OO!loo of
{wI1ich cieteof 00 1m oollOO),
Whlltl your property in foreclool.!!e, yoo !!l!lI mIlS! pay i:J!hor obllgallons {soo!1 !md
required byy.t:rur NlJfeaoo Deed ll'jI'OIl fail 10 make fIlIure paymanlli on
!Ile 1oeA, pay on the properly, proI!ioo 00 lI'oe property, or pay other OIlii@slionsEls
raqull\ld If! tile Nole al'!lJ Deed of TI'I.'S! or MeI1gage, the or ll'!'ilY !!\$lst thai
,00 do so in erdor to yOllr _Ill In good stendim!, III 00dI1lon, tlw or
!MY as a COf1d!OOIl to relnslilt!lmeffi t!mt you pro>Jide Mite!!
tmltyoupa'ld.l>ll! _lor 110ll!>, and Imw!d premiums,
Upon your III!'lt!ml tlw BenefICial'! \l'f will giVe yoll a mil!erl of Ill!>
emOllllI yOll milBt pay, '{0lI me'j not !Jee to pay ill" antire unpaid P"..rtiOO 01 your 00001.1"1,
Ililell !\1o!lQh full pa}ll'lW1! was (jernll"lOOd, but)'JJu mus! pay afl amooots ill oolilUl! ST file limll
paymMt is made, Howi'l\1et, and yollf S-floiary or may mutually in wrlflfl9
prior to tlle tlmo !he of TII:I!ltee's &lie Is pastad {wIliiJh may 1l0l he ear!ierthen ernl of !he
perIOO 10, among oblr lhing!>, (1) pl'O'ljOO llmo In whklh 10
cure the by Imnllft/!' of me props!1!l or aIt.ertll$e; or (2) a 01 p!lyme!l1!; ill
order to cure your demull; or both (1) and (2),
Followlflg Ill!> '*PimIIO!! oftlle time pariOO film this of mi<; dee, 1111_ !Ile
oll!!gactlon 00i1lg lIpon or a \!I!l!ll!Jlagr_oolhelween yoll ami yoor
permillllllionger pariOO, yOII II!:!<) only lr." If)gal right fiI !I\I:lp the of by payjIlg lIle
<ll1lire amount by your credb,
70 f!l1d OIlIlne EffiOlI!1t you mIlS! pay, 10 fur to $lcp il1fJ or if
1,> l!1 fl:Jroclo!>uro for eny 0!Ile< '-,
W_hoe,NV 3521,94:;1 Page: 1 of: 3
oro_; ;;;
3521943 Page,2 of 304/171200704;06:54 PM
TNal,,", $?Ie No. WOS11:1n2 loan No. 31'10195 Tille Order No, 1l7ll12.51

AAME3 HOE LOAN
clo TRU$TEE CORl'S
211! auslilEss C!DITER 0Rl\IE
r'I'LOOR
IR'llmE. CA *12

If !{OIl nM II!'lY \IOU 1lll0ll!!i tOOW1lt OJ ffli1IY
haveln2ured facttllBl yrnlf il> in i'W may
yoIM proIIldet! the llala is pf,orto the
YOU MAY LOSE lEGAl. RIGHTS IF YOU 00 NOT 'fAKe PfIOMPT
ACTION,
NOTICE IS Glvel THAi: me fRlANCIA!.. 1Nq, mUSTa! C.ORf>S II> the
Trusiel';, the duly Trustee or <I!i Agent for lhe Trustee or
tmder aD!l!I!! of Trust rI!lleli il4I112006, el!OOUled by JAMES S. CARPftNllER ANR. JOAN E,
CARPE!f(lER, HwmAND AND WIFE AS JOINT. TENANTS fi5 Trustor, ttl 600_
obilgiiliOlls IF! favor of MMES FUNDING CORPORATION DBA AAMES HOME LOAi\! under a
Deed ol TMt Rtm>*d I)n 05ii)4l2005 m; Ommen! No, 3200651 of Offlllial In 111"
Oflice olllle Recmaef of Washoe Goon!y, S'&>te nt Nevada, o!il$Ol'iblng larnl AS MORE
!=UU.Y DESCRIBED IN SAID DEED OF TRUST. Sajd obligations lnclut;lloo. ooe for the sum
of 1170&00.00 tht;! tM bimalielal tll'Ider S!ilC,'j DeOO of T p.!l;t and llle 00!ls!edcm$ Sfi'C1J1'GO
th_by arK! !laid by !'1m
That Dread! off tile obligations for wliiOO 5ctd Deed nt Trust is IJ.;m ill tht;!
paymoo! IJ.;m nllif bfln of: THi fNST AU..Marr Of PfIINCIPAI- AND il!iTERmT Wfl!CH
ElCJWI! DUE 0 .. I)tll'l'tnoo1 Aml AU 01' PRINCllNl AND
INTERe$1', WITH LATE CHIIRIlIE, pUIS COOTS AI lEGAl-
FEES,
That by tMroof, !l'I$ presoot under SIrl! of ,MIl, I'm e;(eouied !lOO
to CORe!, $ld TI"l$liI, a. OsoIarmion of OEli'alllt and Oamand for
S"Is, and has S!illI'OOdSffid to Baid T roams socII Daed of Trw! arnl ail 00c:ulMl'l1$
seO\lred iIlel'el:Jy arnl declared aM doeiI horeb}' decI_ all $llmS thIiIfl;!by
Immedlillely Otl5 find IlllSmec!Bd and does l1efllby elect 10 ca!.!SU tlJetnml to bt ooltl to
satisfy thl! obligEJllor1$ $OOIJI'?d !t\areby,
ne"""",'pt::loo: W""hoe,NV 3521943 p_, On]er No H'ffl'I2!l1
ATO CONTROl f; 222531!OO9212
nmSTEE CORPS. IllS AJ,JMt for LOAN
by
On ,1-'17-07
Stan1sw $, s;JJ.- to ms (or proved to m" m the b?$!s
of Iii'ltisiaClOlY !O be the whof,e name(t.} is/are 10 II'le Within
li1lltroment end !O nw !he! he! II'le same
""'''''''-"",XIV DDm.s_t-VocIV 3521$(43 '?"fl'" 3 oft ,3
Om'd.er: '2
,------------------------,
i ntTJSTB:E CORl"S m A DlllIT
\ CQU.l::CTOR ANYINl'OlMAT!ON
J OBTAINED WILL aE USED POR '!'HAT
PURPOSE.
F I L E D
Electronically
01-04-2012:09:40:21 AM
Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT "2"
(Part 2 of 6)
Copy he;s 001 nes" COmpamd
willl!oo noOOmeni - WCR
Residential Credit SoMlons
PO Box 78954
Phoon'J<, AZ. 850$2-8954
TS# NV-OO-14i434-8L Ordar /I WOO0369
CONFORMED COPY
Loan # 0003770'195
Imester 1'>10.0003170195
Assignment of Deed of
OEIfrSCHE BAAK NATIONAl TRUST COMPANY in il$ ilS Im:leoo.re for tIw
IIIotmoldllll'S of AA!1.lIE5 MOI'{TGAG1! 11'M:!5TMENT "m1J5T a Dw._ @lllMonr trust
811 bMIlllGial1l1ler&.ll under ilia! ronalf1 of TfIlS! elat@D<lI1l112oo5\,xIII00ree! by JAMES $,
CMl"I'lR(iffiERANO JOAN E, CAAP!!NTIER, KUSSAND AND ,wiFE />Ii, JG1NT TEI1IIINTS, as
TruiSlor($) to MANAGSMEIIIT CO, A CAUFClRNIA CORI'OOAnOf<!, ll$ Trooloo lWl
as 1l1lltrumen! No. 32l}8651, on in Bool\=, P6{)Il ltltx iaf Officlal Records, in the 01 the
Gounly Recomer 01 WM!iOE Coo!lly, IN tnge!her w!tl! the Promissory NoI" SI>OUfeO by sald Dood (If
Tl\I$Illl1d also ail rights Sl)crwd orID !l!IDW!l UMIlr"Bid DUld oITrusI.
Dated: 3/1012000 6:31 AM
On ;s.- -0 If !laID", ifill,
NGlary ""'bile.
"' me on IIle oo5lS "" ro_ooj!!l 00 me _ n8l1l<l{s) is!m; 500.l;nOOd ro lh&
!n$in.'1Th'Jin! Md 30im<>wlmlgOO til mI'hiclJ
tn. ill" Instrument
EXHIBIT "2"
F I L E D
Electronically
01-04-2012:09:40:21 AM
Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT "3"
(Part 3 of6)
Q"alhyLoon Cmpo
2141 -em Aw:mu6
Snu CA 9-2101
$'l.s-84fi.-n'i1
DOC #3641716
D4fHli200s iJ4:OCi:1l7 PM

TlCOR Tl1ll2 - RENO
Washo0 Coull!y R=_
K1l!hf"\ L I'l\l!'"" , Reoon:1!>r
F$ii: 515.00 "PiT: $0
<>12
wtlE!<Ei\s, IDtJ Oes1reS to aubRtituttT is OOW TrL'3ro ulidst:s8:id 01
TrtJDt in pi&oo pnd of said u; S1Jf'.ceBSOf T rttfi1J:lO, 111 {he
ptO\'1ded for in said
NOW, THERtFXJRc, tlw
COR.POAA11CM)'3s iru'too undat 3ald Deed
the comiaxi so requires, too 900<1$"; 'the foo:1irJfI& $.ficiior
f'looffir, end ih3 riiJtnOOr lnth)OO5 the P!Utal,
EXHIBIT "3
11
SOOstEuikm of NV
TSit

SWIB \;1 }
of Los 1-",:,"'\<>
DEUTSCHE BANK NATiONAL TRUST COMPANY in H8
aaiui,.ntu,,' kwl-OO !or the NOleM!i5tMS o.f
,,",,;nco,,,,,, !NVES1MENT TRUS-r a
F I L E D
Electronically
01-04-2012:09:40:21 AM
Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT "4"
(Part 4 of6)
When rooorooo mea Ie:
DOC #3629741
12/200803;57;05 PM
E!i2ctronk Reccrdif1g Re.que1ted '&;
T!COR TlTLE - RENO
Washoe County RocGrder
Kathryn L Burke - Recoroer
$16.00 $0
Page 1 (If 3
Notice of aM Derd and of EIm:1ion Cause 9ai& of REm'
Under of Trust
You may have riI;lfli In oura !he ami lelI1S!l!@ one MlCIlfruj l)!y
01 True! liOOvfl Seob NBS 1 ijf ,000 oortuil1 OOkdls to be <lIfiVd Ill" """"m\!JIl!
amoulllll 01 _t ,,,,,,",
ooe hat! flO dellaul! fOOlSI1,1_.enl
!o!l,"';!Cifl '""oro!'", wod 01 this NoIicfl to r rustor Gf _>Soc ill
!.!l@ rlriIhl 01 wW !ermlnaie aoo may !l!eroal!er bs!l()!d The T IlJllior
l1el11l!' Vll!' !'1gb! In 'it roIl!'I ",,1100 10 asec!'llilll " ooilluft 01 '*"'1 0llM)r of
iruJl!ollO Sal<!,
EXHIBIT "4"
3629741 Page 2 of:3 03/12/2008 03:57:05 PM
TS No.: NVC1l-14148H!l
Loan No,:
No\lce 01

L"IIl Ql Ne_ )!$,
COl.-mv 1-1 Cl!rl!{ )
741 Page 3 of 3 03/121200803:57;05 PM
I cOOllY PENAL 11' OF PERJURY UI'iCIIlr tM ollM 01 Cfijilol1'li!i i:llat
It'", psml;ll'!l\lh ill tnlf) ElM
F I L E D
Electronically
01-04-2012:09:40:21 AM
Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT "5"
(Part 5 of6)
APN No.: 030-091-12
Recording/equested by:
2141 5th Avenue
TS No.: NV-OII-141434-BL
Order No.: W860369
DOC #4046455
10/03/2011 08:46:33 AM
Electronic Recording Requested By
LSI TITLE AGENCY INC
Fee: $15.00 RPTT: $0
Page 1 of 2
Space above this line for reCOrders use only
It is hereby affinned that this document submitted for recording does not contain the social
security nwnber of any person or persons. (Per NRS 239B.030) .
. NOTICE OF 'TRUSTEE'S SALE
YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 4/181200S. UNLESS YOU
TAKE ACTION TO PROTECT YOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC
SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OF THE PROCEEDING
AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER.
A public auction sale to the highest bidder for cash, cashier's check drawn on a state or national bank,
check drawn by state or federal credit union, or a check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan
association, or savings association, or savings bank specified in Section 51 02 to the Financial code
and aulhorized to do b\l!>iness in this state, will be held by duly appoimed trustee. The sale will be
. made, but without covenant or warranty, e:xpressed or Implied, regarding title, possession, or
encumbranees, to pay the remaining principal sum of full IlOtc(s) secured by lhe Deed of Trust, with
interest and bill: charges thereon, us provided in the not<l{s), adVm:lCtlS, und<!r the terms of lb. Deed of
Trum, interest thureon, fees, cba.rges and CXJlCllSOO of the Trustee for the totaJ3II1Ount (at the time of
the inilial publication oflbe Notice ofsaIe) reasonably estimated to be set furth below. The amOOllt
IIl8Y be greater on the day of sale.
BENEFICIARY MAY ELECT TO BID LESS THAN THE TOTAL AMOUNT Dut.
Trustor(sy. JAMES S. CARI"ltRN'flER AND JOAN E. CARPENTIER,
HUSBAND AND WIFE AS JOINT TENANTS
Recorded: Sf4ll005 as Instrament No. 321)8651 in hook xxx, page lU o[Officiai
Records in the office ufthe Recorder of WASHOE County. Nevada;
Date of Sale: 1012112011 at 11:00 AM
Place of Sale: At tile Virginia Street n t r n e e to the Washoe Coonty CourthouSl:
located at 75 Court Reno, NV 89581
Amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $229,225.57
The purported property address is: 2873 SUNNY SLOPE DRIVE, SPARKS, NV
89434
This property is sold as-is, lender is unable to validate the condition, defect!! or (iisclosure issues of said
property and buyer waives the disclosure requirements under NR.S 113.130 by JlIII1'hasing at this sale and
signing the receipt of sale. The UIlderslzued Trustee disclaims any liability for any illCOITllcl:nCli5 of the
property liddress of other common designation, if any, shown herein. If no liIl'iltlt address or other
common designation is shown, directions to the location of the property 1M)' be obtained by sending a
EXHIBIT "5"
4046455 Page 2 of 2 - 10(03(2011 08:46:33 AM
written request to the benefici3Iy within 10 days of the date of first publication of this Notice of Sale.
If the TJ:ustee is unable to convey title for any reason, the successful bidder's sole and exclusive
remedy shall be the return of monies paid to tbe Trustee, and the successful bidder sball have no
further recourse.
If the sale is set aside for any reason, the Purcbaser at the sale sball be entitled only to a return of
the deposit paid. Tbe Purcbaser sball bave no further recourse against tbe Mortgagor, tbe
Mortgagee, or tbe Mortgagee's Attorney.
Date: <:t( Uit Iw It
2141 5tb Avenue
San Diego, CA 92101
619-M5-7711 For NON SALE information only
Sale Line: 714-730-2727 or Login to: www.lpsasap.com
: NY -08-141434-BL
t Line: 619-645-7711
uali Servic Corp. by: Ronald Alonzo, as Authorized Agent.
On w=. . - m .. e., C. b. Tis Thurmon a Notmy Public, personally appeared
__ who proved to me aD the basis of satisfactory evideru:e
to be the person(s) wIIose name(s) subscribed to the within Inslrm!Ient and acknowledged to me tItat
executed the same in authorized capadty(ies), and that by
signature(s) 011 the instrmnenl the person( s), or tlte entity upon behnlf of which the person(s) aGted,
executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of CalifOrnia that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my Iland 8Ild official seal.
Signature __ (Seal)
Chris Thul'IIllIn
lfyon have previously been discJwoged through 1Amkruptcy, you may have been released of pel'$Orul.l
liability for this 10IlD In wIIicb case this letter is intended to exercise the note holders right's against the
real property only. .
ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT ON BEHALF OF TIm HOLDER AND OWNER. OF
TIm NOTE. ANY .TNFORMATION OBTAINED BY OR PROVIDED TO THIS FfRM OR THE
CREDITOR. WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.
As required by law, you ate hereby notified thot .. negative credit rep<lrl reflecting on your credit ,,",om may be
submitted to 1\ oredlt rep<lrl agenoy ifyoo tail to fulfill th ternlS of your credit obligations.
F I L E D
Electronically
01-04-2012:09:40:21 AM
Clerk of the Court
EXHIBIT "6"
(Part 6 of6)
TIlomas J, Holf!uls
Kevin it Mc:Cmthy
P<\1iIM,LeYkw
Matthew SiJITIlmlIm
)aVonneM f'fullips
Matthew E- r-odmenik
D.wid C $roll

AngdaMM"l(b9l)I.

Gayle Ja,mesQ(I,
"""-
Jmnei Htl-w:
o.-allcll

An>;kew K. Hall
Seth l Moons
Sasan MiIkatimi
Ract>.et s.. Opatlk
.Mcll$Nl Ratihifl$Coutt;

Krl!ll"m. Zi1bersleJ.rl
-"",-
"""'" """"'"
Merd&1d Jo1iM.nta

CANVNli
CA
/<.ZCA
AZNM
CA
CA
CA
CA
WAOIUP 1'''
CANV
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
""
NV
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CAf!)
CA
CA
CA
October 21,2011
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
121 River Rock St.
Reno, Nevada 89501
McCarthy + Holthus
A Limited LiabIlity Partnership
9510 West Sahara Avenne, Suite 110
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Telephone (702) 685-0529 Ext. 3748
Facsimile (866) 339-5691
www.McCarlhyH"lthus.c<ml
Email i'U "lJ pcmmmcl:
fiHlt initial arui1asl nOlme@JT..cao.rttlyhoi!;ht.:s.com
RE: Carpentier v Aames Funding, et a1
Dear Mr. Coughlin:
CA
CA Mro\hcw D<.lwte
C.A ru:.sMi v. PaWl
AZ Je!:S.ia R. K=.ey
CA Rroer:w L Umg
NV eli. O1li$tcpl=' 1(.. Lezak
CA
WA
CA etIclynC,Scsko
CA
NV Kili FcxMIDer
CA. lmca L. Klkk .. a
CA
CA Ml.i:bclle Ann
CA
OR to tiQlger: Uhl
NV ft. (1tri$tophex Hu..,ter
CA 1-00}' lcfws
CA Lamiot,a.dj
NV $fteny A.
<:.A AYMA o.-Guy
CA PmdH.K.mg
WA A.IllCIlUrl
WA
Cl'\.
NY Itf:lktJacovjoo
NY 6t\nty Looat'(II)
I represent Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. and Quality Loon Service Corporation with respect
to the above referenced matter. I am in receipt of your Emergency Motion to Reconsider the
Su:mmary Judgment Order entered by the Court 15 months ago on July 15, 2010. Notice of
Entry of the Order ",'lis provided to your clients on the same datc. The purpose of this letter is to
advise that we will file a motion for sanctions under NRCP Rule II if the referenced Emergency
Motion is not immediately withdrawn. Your Motion is entirely without merit. It seeks to
relitigate matters that are now res judicata and is untimely under NRCP Rule 60. In addition, a
substantial portion of case law set forth in your motion is either inapplicable or is based on issues
decided by the Nevada Supreme Court long after entry of the Court's Order in this matter. We
will specifically request entry of sanctions against you personally if the motion is not withdrawn.
Please direct any fUrther communications regarding this matter to my attention. 111a:!1k you.
Very truly yours,
Sent by regular mail und fax to 949-667 7402
19735 10*- Mw Nti,. Scite N.;mo
Pw:!sbo, WA
{2niS)3"19.9100

1770 Fourth AvtlftIle
S,m Dl%O, CA mill
(519)""'_
FiX$l111.lle (619),6&H&U

;wo S. Sth floor
j(eno, rw S;)S)i
(7tI2) -&15-<JW 3748

MmMQfkt
S636 Nmth Cen!1'il.l t05l)
Phoenix, AZS5D11
(6OZ) 2!fl.S'12.6
Ii'M'MlJt (J.i02j 23()..9277
EXHIBIT "6"
REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR
TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN THE ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET ASIDE
ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Now some of these lenders/servicers/trustees and opposing counsel (which are all owned
by the same law firm in some case, like, apparently, here) like to say my stuff is incoherent,
but what about all their documents and papers and Notices and Assignments and all that? Is
that stuff any more coherent?
REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'SEMERGENCY MOTION FOR TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN THE ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
!ocument "ode# $%&'
(ach "oughlin, )s*+
N, -ar No# &.%$
.// )+ &
th
0t+ 1/
2eno, N, 3&'4
5ele# %%'6//&67%$%
8a9# &.&677%6%.4/
(ach"oughlin:hotmail+com
Attorney for ;laintiffs <oni and <ames
"arpentier
<A=)0 "A2;)N5I)2, )5 A>,
;laintiff
v+
AA=)0 8?N!IN@ "A2; )5A>,
!efendant

"ase No# ",4364%4&
!ept No# %
REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFF'S EMERGENCY MOTION
FOR TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN
THE ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO
SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
IN 5B) 0)"AN! <?!I"IA> !I052I"5 "A?25 A8 5B)
05A5) A8 N),A!A IN AN! 8A2
5B) "A?N5C A8 DA0BA)
F I L E D
Electronically
01-11-2012:04:18:26 PM
Clerk of the Court
N2"; 2?>) 74+ 2)>I)8 82A= <?!@=)N5 A2 A2!)2+++
E(b) =istakesF InadvertenceF )9cusable NeglectF Newly
!iscovered )videnceF 8raud, )tc+ An motion and upon such terms
as are Gust, the court may relieve a party or a partyHs legal
representative from a final Gudgment, order, or proceeding for the
following reasons# () mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or e9cusable
neglectF (/) newly discovered evidence which by due diligence
could not have been discovered in time to move for a new trial
under 2ule '&(b)F ($) fraud (whether heretofore denominated
intrinsic or e9trinsic), misrepresentation or other misconduct of an
adverse partyF (.) the Gudgment is voidF or, (') the Gudgment has
been satisfied, released, or discharged, or a prior Gudgment upon
which it is based has been reversed or otherwise vacated, or it is no
longer e*uitable that an inGunction should have prospective
application+ 5he motion shall be made within a reasonable time,
and for reasons (), (/), and ($) not more than 7 months after the
proceeding was taken or the date that written notice of entry of the
Gudgment or order was served+ A motion under this subdivision (b)
does not affect the finality of a Gudgment or suspend its operation+
5his rule does not limit the power of a court to entertain an
independent action to relieve a party from a Gudgment, order, or
proceeding, or to set aside a Gudgment for fraud upon the court+
Drits of coram nobis, coram vobis, audita *uerela, and bills of
review and bills in the nature of a bill of review, are abolished, and
the procedure for obtaining any relief from a Gudgment shall be by
motion as prescribed in these rules or by an independent action+E
Apposing counsel BunterIs . / Apposition is e9cerpted here (with the undersigned
interGections in bold# E5hereafter 2"0 undertook a lengthy review of ;laintiffs for a loan
modification+ !uring this period the foreclosure was placed on loss mitigation hold+ 5he
loan modification was no successful and the hold was removed in Actober, /4+ (And
"n!l" d#$%o&rd &#dn%" o' 'r()d #n *+#$ lo(n ,od#'#%(*#on $#*)(*#on -*+r #$ (n
(ll.(*#on *+(* ( l),/ 0123444 /(",n* !($ ,(d b" J#, C(r/n*#r onl" *o +(&
5LS/RCS /)ll *+ r). o)* #n b(d '(#*+3 (nd $)%+ ( %l(#, 'or rl#' *+ C(r/n*#r
no! $6 *o (dd *o *+#r Co,/l(#n* (nd +(& rl(* b(%6 *o *+ 7*n* /r,#$$#bl
-%on$#dr#n. *+ r)l$ rl(*d *o "$*,,#n. 'ro, $(, %#r%),$*(n%$/n7)$3 *%" (nd
8)d#%#(l %ono," '(&or$ (llo!#n. *+ C(r/n*#r$ *o do $o #n *+#$ (%*#on r(*+r *+(n
%lo)d *+ *#*l !#*+ $o, n! %($ n),br9 An Actober $, /4, Juality recorded
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT /
Notice of 0ale as document number .4.7.''+ A copy of the Notice of 0ale is attached as
)9hibit '+ I$ #* no* ( &#ol(*#on o' NRS 142:4;4 *o +(& ( No*#% o' $(l r%ordd l$$
*+(n <4 d("$ 'ro, *+ d(* $* 'or *+ Tr)$* S(l= IF $o3 C(r/n*#r$ !#$+ *o
(,nd (nd ($$r* *+(* %()$ o' (%*#on +r#n3 $o #*$ no* lon.r 8)$* ( >?;D $%n(r#o9
0hortly thereafter, (ach "oughlin, )s*+ entered an appearance on behalf of ;laintiffs an
indicated to the undersigned that the pending =otion for 52A and/or to 0et Aside had
been or was going to be filed+ -(%*)(l3 *+ )ndr$#.nd +r#n D%l(r$ )ndr /n(l*"
o' /r8)r" *+(* S%+)lr@H#n*A (nd H)n*r n&r (d,#**d *+ )ndr$#.nd &r %()$
(n" o' *+ &(r#o)$ Tr)$* S(l$ *o b r$%+d)ld or /o$*/ond d) *o +#$
$B)(!6#n.3 b)* r(*+r3 H#n*A (nd or H)n*r (l!("$ &(.)l" r'rrd *o
%#r%),$*(n%$ *+(* r$)l*d #n *+ Tr)$* S(l b#n. ,o&d 8)$* ( d(" or $o b'or
*+ )ndr$#.nd !ro* *o *+, or $n* *+, $o, /ro/o$d Mo*#on3 &r" %)r#o)$
#ndd9 5he undersigned, in conformance with N2"; 2ule , forwarded to =r+ "oughlin
a copy of the letter dated Actober /, /4 attached as )9hibit 7+ At =r+ "oughlinIs
re*uest the foreclosure sale has been continued twice and is presently set for 8ebruary 7,
/4/+ -Mr: H)n*r'$ %+(r(%*r#A(*#on *+(* *+ 'or%l$o)r $(l !($ %on*#n)d *!#% ($
*+ )ndr$#.nd3 Mr: Co).+l#n'$ rB)$* #$ %(*.or#%(ll" '(l$ #' H#n*A (nd or
H)n*r$'$ (rl#r $*(*,n*$ #n *+(* r.(rd (r *o b bl#&d: T+ )ndr$#.nd
%o,,)n#%(* *o H#n*A or H)n*r 7%l)$#&l"3 + bl#&$ &#( ,(#l3 $o3 (ll o' *+#$ #$ #n
,(#l$ (nd ($#l" /ro&(bl9: An !ecember $, /4, eighteen months after entry of the
summary Gudgment Arder, ;laintiffs filed the pending motion+ ;laintiffs seek an inGunction
barring the foreclosure as well as damages in e9cess of K4,444, treble damages and
sanctions under case law developed by the Nevada 0upreme "ourt relating to the Nevada
=ediation ;rogram+ - A /ro.r(, *+ C(r/n*#r$ ,(" +(& l.(ll" bn (''ordd (
r#.+* *o /(r*(6 #n !r #* no* 'or *+ ')nn" b)$#n$$ o' $nd#n. #,/or*(n* no*#% (nd
$),,(r" 8)d.,n* ,o*#on$ *o on no lon.r (**orn" o' r%ord3 (ll *+
GINORMOUS "$%r#&nr'$ rror$" o' !ron. %($ n),br3 !ron. %o)r*3 !ron.
(ddr$$ on *+ %r* o' ,(#l#n.3 !ron. (ddr$$ l#$*d #n A(,$ Dl(!(r C+:11
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT $
%rd#*or/db*or ,(*r#7 -'or,r (**orn" o' r%ord C(l$+ (nd +#$ '#r,'$ (ddr$$ !r
l#$*d9: F)r*+r3 *+ C(r/n*#r'$ !rn'* B)#* (bl *o /(r*(6 #n (ll *+ bn'#*$ o'
*+ d#$%o&r" r)l$ #n D(n6r)/*%" %o)r*3 &#$ ( &#$3 !+*+r RCS/5LS C#nd$or/A(,$
* (l !r 'r()d)ln*l" ($$r*#n. $*(nd#n.3 or ( r#.+* *o $)3 *+(* *+" !r ( r(l
/(r*" #n #n*r$*3 *+ $)''#%#n%" o' $)b8%* ,(**r 8)r#$d#%*#on *%: !r *+ !r no*
$r&d #,/or*(n* no*#%$ (nd /l(d#n.$ rl(*d *o *+(* b(n6r)/*%" (nd *+ $*("3 (n
()*o,(*#% $*(" *+(*3 #n%#dn*(ll"3 d#d no* $*o/ H#n*A 'ro, '#l#n. ( J)l" <44? Mo*#no
'or S),,(r" J)d.,n* -no* *+(* *+ C(r/n*#r$ !r &r $n* #* or r%#&d #*
d)r#n. *+ rl&(n* *#, /r#od9 D($#%(ll"3 5LS/RCS no! !(n*$ *o $("3 "+"3 !
*r#%6d "o) or %on&n#n*l"/(%%#dn*(ll" ,(n(.d *o ,(6 $)r "o) .)"$ d#dn'* 6no!
!+(* *#, *+ .(, !($ or !+r #* !($ b#n. /l("d3 (nd *+r'or "o) d#dn'* .* *o
do *+ 'or%lo$)r ,d#(*#on /ro.r(, (nd $o .o (+(d3 ($6 *+ %o)r* *o *(6
,(nd(*or" or /r$)($#& 8)d#%(l no*#% o' L"&(3 P($#ll($ (nd *r" *o (r.) (ll *+(*
"For%lo$)r D'n$ Doo6" $*)''3 b)* #*$ *oo l(* .)"$3 $orr"E" D(lon"3 (nd *+
C(r/n*#r$ do !(n* *o (dd *+ %l(#,$ (nd %()$$ o' (%*#on (nd rB)$* $)%+ 8)d#%(l
no*#% b *(6 ($ ,n*#ond #n *+ 7%r/* 'ro, $o, #n*rn* b(%6(ll" $+(d"
"For%lo$)r D'n$ H(ndboo6" *"/ *+#n.F " Pr'%*#on o' C+(#n o' T#*l In
J(n)(r" <41 1 3 *+ M($$(%+)$**$ S)/r, Co)r* #$$)d ( d%#$#on #n U:S: DANG
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION VS: An*on#o IDANEH #n !+#%+ (l# *+ J)$*#%$
)n(n#,o)$l" (.rd: In ordr 'or *+ b(n6 *o b (bl *o 'or%lo$3 *+" ,)$* $+o! (
/r'%*#on o' %+(#n o' *#*l3 bo*+ #n *+ Dd o' Tr)$UMor*.(. (nd *+ Pro,#$$or"
no*: I* !($ (l$o r)ld *+(* ( bl(n6 ($$#.n,n* !($ no* (%%/*(bl /roo' o' /r'%*#on
o' *#*l 'or *+ /ro,#$$or" no*: T+#$ #$ HUGE: Yo) $+o)ld b r'rr#n. *o *+#$ %($
(nd ,o*#on *+ %o)r* *o *(6 ",(nd(*or" 8)d#%#(l no*#%" 'or *+ r)l#n. d%#$#on #n
"o)r %($ #' "o) (r %on$#dr#n. do#n. (n" $or* o' l#*#.(*#on3 !+*+r ($ ( d'nd(n*
#n ( J)d#%#(l S*(* or ($ ( Pl(#n*#'' #n ( Non@J)d#%#(l S*(*: Hr (r *+ #,/or*(n*
/(#n*$ "o) nd *o )ndr$l(nd 'ro, *+#$ S)/r, Co)r* d%#$#onF 1 9 A D'%*#&
T#*l %(nno* b '#7d: T+ M($$(%+)$**$ S)/r, Co)r* r)ld *+(* *+ b(n6 +($ *o
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT .
d,on$*r(* /r'%*#on o' *#*l (* *+ *#, *+ No*#% o' D'()l* #$ #$$)d: A d'%*#&
*#*l #$ l#6 b(d 'ood: On% 'ood +($ .on b(d3 "o) %(n n&r '#7 #* T+ $(, .o$ !#*+
*+ Dd o' Tr)$UMor*.(.: T+ "lndr" %(nno* r*ro $#.n or "r&r$ n.#nr"
*+ C+(#n o' T#*l ('*r *+ '(%*: D)* ,o$* o' *+ *#, *+#$ #$ *+ %($ !+n #* #$
+(ndld b" ( 'or%lo$)r ,#ll: T+" +(& rob(@$#.nr$ !+o$ 8ob #$ *o $#.n bo.)$
($$#.n,n*$ (nd r&r$ n.#nr *#*l$: I* #$ "o)r 8ob *o %+(lln. *+#$ /o#n* !+n
"o)r lndr /r$n*$ $)//o$d "/roo'' b'or *+ %o)r*: O'*n*#,$3 *+" !#ll br#n. #n
( /+o*o%o/" o' *+ Dd o' Tr)$* ,(d "(r$ (.o (* *+ l#, "o) %lo$d on "o)r lo(n:
T+ /+o*o%o/" do$ no* (nd %(nno* (**$* *o !+o *+ % )rrn* r(l (nd bn'#%#(r"
/(r*" #n #n*r$* #$: <9 T+ D(n6 ,)$* $+o! ( /r'%*#on o' *+ C+(#n o' T#*l 'or *+
Dd o' Tr)$*/Mor*.(. T+#$ ,(n$ *+(* (n" ($$#.n,n*$ o' *+ Pro,#$$or" no*
,)$* (l$o b r'l%*d (* I+ %o)n*" r%ordr'$ o''#% -(nd no* !#*+ MERS@I !#ll *(l6
(bo)* MERS #n ( b#l9: I' (n ($$#.n,n* o' *+ Pro,#$$or" No* #$ no* r%ordd on *+
Co)n*" R%ord$3 *+n /r'%*#on #$ no* (%+#&d: C+(* *+#$ ,(n$ #$3 #' "o) %(n /ro&
*+(* "o)r no* +($ bn $%)r#*#Ad or $old *o (no*+r /(r*" (!(" 'ro, "o)r or#.#n(l
lndr3 (nd *+(* *+" d#d no* r%ord *+#$ ($$#.n,n* (* *+ Co)n*" R%ordr'$ O''#%3
*+n b#')r%(*#on o%%)rrd:": A**(%+d #$ $o, SEC '#l#n. *+#n. *+(* $,$ *o #nd#%(*
*+(* *+ C(r/n*#r'$ Lo(n !($ $%)r#*#Ad (nd ( $%)r#*#A(*#on ()d#* #$ %)rrn*l"
b#n. %ond)%*d *o ')r*+r 7/l#%(* *+o$ #$$)$: 9 All e9hibits referenced herein are
attached to this =otion+ J>0 respectfully re*uests Gudicial notice of the deed of trust, as
well as the other e9hibits -O' %o)r$ 5LS rB)$*$ *+(*3 *+" !(n* *o $6#/ *+ /(r*$
!+r (ll *+ /robl,$ (nd $lo//" !or6 *+" d#d3 -(nd HIn*A (nd H)n*r'$ l(! '#r,3
M%C(r*+" Ho*+)$ OCNS EITHER 5LS OR RCS3 OF THIS I HAVE DEEN
ASSURED DY LEADING NEVADA FORECLOSURE DEFENSE ATTORNEYS93
*+" 8)$* !(n* *+ (,l#or(*#&//(ll#(*#& ''%*$ o' "8)d#%(l no*#%" b#n. *(6n *o
($$)(. (ll *+ *rr#bl d'%*$ ( *+oro).+ r&#! o' *+o$ do% ),n*$ !#ll r&(l3
!#*+ (ll *+ %l($$#% +#*$ b#n. /l("d3 "o) 6no! *+ d(l3 *+ o)* o' ordr r%ord#n. o'
*+#$ (nd *+(*3 *+ l(%6 o' ( $#.n(*)r on *+#n.$3 lo! l&l ,/lo"$ $#.n#n. (''#d(&#*
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT '
*+(* $6 *o 7%#$ (nd nd *o (%*)(ll" /ro& ($$#.n,n*$ or $*(nd#n. or *+(* *+"
.)"$ (r ( r(l /(r*" #n #n*r$*3 *+(* *+ 8)d.,n* #$n'* &o#d3 *+(* *+ no* (nd dd
'ollo!d *+ $(, /(*+3 *+(* *+$ .)"$ d#dn'* .* ( *(7 %rd#* 'or ( lo$$ onl" *o .* *+
bon)$ o' $ll#n. #* 'or $o, ,or ,on"::::(nd !+" do$ $o, #*r(*#on o' "A(,$
Ho, Mor*(.F)nd#n.Lnd#n.Sr%#&#n.So,*+#n.OrO*+r (//(r l#6 ( A#ll#on
*#,$ on !!!:/(%r:.o& #n *+ b(n6r)/*%" $%*#on= All B)$*#on$ *+(* nd (n$!r3
b)* #' ( Tr)$* S(l #$ %ond)%*d3 !ll3 #*$ 6#nd o' *o).+ *o do /+"$#%(l *+r(/" on ( n
(r, ('*r "o) +(& (,/)*(*d #*:9 All e9hibits hereto should be Gudicially noticed
because they are a public record in the Dashoe "ounty 2ecorderIs office+ N20 .%+$4F
N20 .%+'4F <ory v+ -ennight, & Nev+ %7$,%77, './ ;+/d .44, .4$ (&%')+ -(%*)(ll"3
no3 !+" don'* "o) .)"$ .o (+(d (nd d,on$*r(* *+(* !+(*&r "o) .)"$ d#d /)* #n
*+ R%ordr'$ O''#% #$ #n %o,/l#(n% !#*+ *+ rB)#r,n*$ o' *+ l(!3 r(*+r *+(n
($6 'or *+#$ Co)r* *o *(6 "o)r !ord 'or #*9 5he =otion repeats verbatim the entirety of
;laintiffsI original complaint, incorrectly alleges that the substitution of trustee was never
recorded -,or l#6 #* !($n'* (//ro/r#(*l" r%ordd9 and incoherently suggests that
;laintiffs were creditors -*+ C(r/n*#r$3 or r(*+r J(,$ C(l$+ (nd +#$ '#r, (nd *+
<;2I S)nn" Slo/ ;?JIJ (ddr$$ 'or *+ CAr/n*#r'$ +o, ,(d #*$ !(" #n*o *+
A(,$ Dl(!(r C+:11 b63 l#$*#n. C(l$+ (nd +#$ '#r,$ Do)bl R (ddr$$3 r(*+r *+(n
*+ C(r/n*#r$ l($* 6no!n (ddr$$3 !ll ('*r *+#$ Co)r* n*rd (n ORdr (llo!#n.
C(l$+'$ !#*+dr(!(l3 $o:::,("b *+ !r l#$*d #n *+ db*or ,(*r#7/%rd#*or ,(*r#73
!+(*&r3 *+" !r l#$*d3 b)* !#*+ (n (ddr$$ *+(* H#,bl,(n (nd A(,$ +(d bn
$r&d (n Ordr /)**#n. *+, on no*#% *+(* #* !($n'* .ood (n",or:::9of the !elaware
Aames Bome >oan bankruptcy estate+ 5he fact that $+ ;laintiffs cannot establish e9cusable
neglect 5he sole basis in support of ;laintiffsI claim -HOLD ON3 HUNTER3 THE
"SOLE DASIS" REALLY= REALLY= AREN'T YOU FORGETTING ALL THE
CRONGLY ADDRESSED CERTIFICATES OF MAILING3 THE CRONG
ADDRESS LISTED IN THE DELACARE CH:11 DG FOR AAMES3 ETC:3 ETC:=
MAYDE THE CONFUSION IS THAT SO MANY OF THE DASIS FOR
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT 7
EKCUSADLE NEGLECT OVERLAP CITH FRAUD3 IS THAT IT=9 of e9cusable
neglect is that the =otion for 0ummary <udgment incorrectly contained "lark "ounty in
the caption of the =otion instead 4 Dashoe "ounty+ In addition, several filings correctly
citing Dashoe "ounty incorrectly refer to !epartment . instead of !epartment %+ 5his
argument is completely unavailing+ Nowhere iN ;laintiffsI =otion is there an allegation
that ;laintiffs were somehow misled to their detriment due to these scrivener errors+ -DO
NOT DELIVE THAT STATEMENT IS TRUE3 DUT3 IN AN ADUNDANCE OF
CAUTION3 THAT IS HEREDY DEING ALLEGED9 Nor is there is a single allegation
that ;laintiffs were unaware of never received the =otion for 0ummary <udgment and the
Notice of )ntry of the Arder granting summary Gudgment -DITTO3 THE
CARPENTIERS ARE MAGING EKACTLY THAT ALLEGATION AND
ADDITIONALLY3 THEY HAVE HAD UGLY PHONE CALLS CITH LOC
LEVEL EMPLOYEES IN THIS MATTER SAYING THINGS LIGE "ITS YOUR
CORD AGAINST OURS3 SO THERE"9+ In addition, ;laintiffs cite ;asillas v+ B0-"
-ank ?0A, et al+, /% Advance Apinion $& (/4) and >eyva v+ National !efault
0ervicing "orp+, et aI+, /% Nev+, Advance Apinion .4 (/4) in support of their =otion+
5hese opinions are inapplicable to the issues in this case because they are concerned only
with the re*uirements for producing documents and demonstrating standing in mediation
cases conducted under the Nevada =ediation ;rogram and the Nevada 0upreme "ourt
8oreclosure =ediation 2ules+ -NOT SO SURE THE APPLICATION OF THOSE
FINE DECISIONS IS SO LIMITED3 DUT EVEN IF IT IS3 THE CARPENTIERS
CERE DEFRAUDED OUT OF THEIR OPPORTUNITY TO PARTICIPATE IN
THAT PROGRAM3 AND SHOULD DE SO ALLOCED TO NOC IF THEY
CHOOSE9 5he issues set forth in ;laintiffsI original complaint related solely to deceptive
lending practices under N20 '&3! -NO3 NOT SOLEY3 DUT SINCE YOU ASGED3
AND JUST IN CASE3 SOME MORE 'ISSUES' ARE ADDED HERE IN A
RE5UEST THAT CARPENTIERS DE ALLOCED TO DO SO + 8inally, and most
importantly, even if the ;laintiffs were misled or were unaware =otion to 0et Aside under
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT %
N2"; 2ule 74 must be brought within 74 days of the relevant proceeding+ -REALLY3
"L4 DAYS"= LAST TIME THE UNDERSIGNED READ NRCP L4-D9 THERE
CAS A DUNCH OF MENTIONS OF 1;4 DAYS3 DUT REGARDLESS3 THAT ONE
SECTION ADOUT THERE DEING NO SET LIMITATIONS PERIOD FOR
CHERE A JUDGMENT IS VOID3 DOTH IN LIGHT OF NRCP L4 D AND THE
INHERENT POCER OF THIS COURT3 IS UNDOUDTEDLY IN
CONTRADICTION TO THAT ESTIMADLE TREATISE "HUNTER ON RELIEF
FROM JUDGMENTS" *+(* !($ $o /ro&#dd #n o//o$#n. %o)n$l'$ O//o$#*#on9 Bere,
the =otion to 0et Aside is brought eighteen months after the relevant proceeding and is,
therefore, untimely+E And that concludes my novel legal techni*ue of e9tensively
*uoting opposing counselIs Apposition while adding in bold the undersignedIs own
interGectiosn and arguments+
5he "arpentiers hereby allege and ask this "ourt to allow them to add as causes of
action, re*uest for relief, claims etc+ the following, given that this e9cerpt from a case
involving Buston and 2"0/J>0 bear such a remarkable resemblance to the "arpentierIs
own treatment at the hands of 2"0/D>0 (like that time <im forked otu a lump sum
K%,444 payment to these guys, and they then pulled the rug out from under them in bad
faith# E!efendants !oes through 4, inclusive, are fictitious names+ ;laintiffs are
ignorant of the true names of the individuals, corporations, limited liability companies,
limited liability partnerships, partnerships, trusts and other associations so designated by
said fictitious names+ Dhen the true names are discovered, ;laintiffs will seek leave of
"ourt to amend this "omplaint and the proceedings herein to substitute the true names of
said !efendants+ ;laintiffs believe that each of the !efendants designated herein as a !oe
is liable or responsible in some manner for the events herein referred to and intentionally,
negligently, carelessly, and/or recklessly and pro9imately caused damages to ;laintiffs as
herein alleged+ 7+ ;laintiffs are informed and believe and upon such information and belief
allege that at all times material hereto, each of the !efendants was the agent and employee
of the other !efendants and was acting within the course, scope and authority of said
agencyF each !efendant approved, ratified and authoriLed the acts of each of the other
!efendants as herein allegedF each !efendant was subGect to a right of control by the other
!efendantsF each !efendant was authoriLed to act for each and all of the other !efendantsF
and each !efendant is a successor6in6interest to each ofthe other !efendants+ %+ ;laintiffs
are informed and believe and upon such information and belief allege that at all times
material hereto, each !efendant was a mere shell, instrumentality and conduit through
which each other !efendant carried on business in a corporate or partnership name,
e9ercising complete control and dominance of such business to such an e9tent that any
individuality or separateness of the corporate or partnership !efendants and each
individual did not e9ist+ 8A"5?A> A>>)@A5IAN0 3+ An or about 8ebruary /$, /447,
;laintiffs entered into a !eed of 5rust ()9hibit EIE) with =ortgage )lectronic 2egistration
0ystems, Inc+ as nominee for ?niversal American =ortgage "ompany, >>", to secure
;romissory Note and loan against the ;roperty ()9hibit E-E)+ &+ 5he ;romissory Note
indicates that at some point after ;laintiffs entered into it the loan was transferred first to
"ountrywide -ank, N+A+, and then from "ountrywide -ank, N+A+ to "ountrywide Bome
>oans, Inc+ 5he ;romissory Note produced by !efendants is endorsed in blank and as a
result of the blank endorsement, it is currently unknown who the holder thereof is+ 0ee
)9hibit E/+E 4+ An or about !ecember , /44, ;laintiffs were unable to make their
monthly payments due to their change in fmancial circumstances+ ;laintiffs attempted, to
no avail, to secure a loan modification from 2"0, who is the purported servicer of their
loan+ + -ased on information in the "lark "ounty 2ecorderIs records, 2"0 caused a
substitntion of trustees to be recorded against the ;roperty on 0eptember , /44, naming
J>0 as the 5rustee+ /+ -ased on information in the "lark "ounty 2ecorderIs records, 2"0
caused an assignment (the EAssignmentE) to be recorded against the ;roperty on November
3, /44+ ;laintiffs do not have a copy of ,said AssignmentF however, the "lark "ounty
2ecorderIs Affice database indicates that the !eed of 5rust was assigned to 8, 2)A ,
>>"+ $+ An =arch /, /4, J>0 recorded a Notice of -reach and !efault and of
)lection to "ause 0ale of 2eal ;roperty under !eed of 5rust (ENA! E) with regard to the
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT &
;roperty+ 0ee )9hibit E$+E .+ An April , /4, J>0 posted on the door of the ;roperty an
unsigned, un6 notariLed, unrecorded, and different Notice of -reach and !efault and of
)lection to "ause 0ale of 2eal ;roperty under !eed of 5rust (ENA! /E) with regard to the
;roperty+ 0ee )9hibit E.+E 5his posting was untimely pursuant to the mandatory
re*uirements ofN20 4%+43%+ '+ An 0eptember $4, /4, J>0 recorded a Notice of 0ale+
?nfortunately, J>0 has never provided ;laintiffs with a signed Notice of 0ale+ Bowever,
J>0 has provided ;laintiffs with an unsigned, unrecorded Notice of 0ale by mail and
posting+ 0ee )9hibit E'+E Although ;laintiffs have never been provided with a signed,
notariLed Notice of 0ale, the 5rusteeIs 0ale is currently scheduled for Actober /4,/4 at
4#44 a+m+ 7+ An Actober $, /4, ;laintiffs notified 2"0 and J>0 of the violations
ofN20 M 4%+43% and demanded that NA! be rescinded+ 0ee )9hibit E7+E %+ !espite
their knowledge of the patently obvious violations of N20 M 4%+43%, 2"0 and J>0 have
failed to rescind NA! + 8I205 ">AI= 8A2 2)>I)8 (!eclaratory 2elief 6 N20 M $4+4.4
6 All !efendants) 3+ ;laintiffs re6allege each and every allegation contained herein, and
hereby incorporates them by this reference as if fully set forth below+ &+ N20 M $4+4.4
allows any person whose rightsF status or other legal relations are affected by a deed to
have the district court determine any *uestions of construction or validity arising under the
instrument and to obtain a declaration of rights, status or other legal relations thereunder+
/4+ NA! was recorded by J>0 on =arch /,/4+ 0ee )9hibit E$+E ;ursuant to N20 M
4%+43%, NA! was to be posted in a conspicuous place on the ;roperty not later than $
business days after it was recordedF thus the posting was to occur no later than =arch
/',/4+ /+ !efendant J>0 posted an unrecorded, un6notariLed, and different Notice of
!efault, on April , /4 (si9 days late)+ 0ee )9hibit E.+E Accordingly, NA! was not
timely served pursuant to N20 M 4%+43%+ //+ N20 4%+434(')(a) states that the "ourt may
declare a sale void if# E5he trustee or other person authoriLed to make the sale does not
substantially comply with the provisions of this section or any applicable provision ofN20
4%+437 and 4%+43%+E /$+ ;ursuant to A+-+ /%$ 0ec+ '+3(7)%7th >eg+ (Nv+ /4), if the
"ourt finds that J>0 did not comply with any provision of N20 "hapter 4%, the "ourt
must award to ;laintiffs an inGunction enGoining the e9ercise of the power of sale, damages
of K',444 or treble the amount of actual damages, whichever is greater and reasonable
attorneysI fees and costs+ /.+ ;laintiffs are entitled to a declaratory Gudgment that the
aforesaid NA! is null and void+ /'+ In addition, as a direct, pro9imate and necessary result
ofthe !efendants conduct, ;laintiffs have been forced to incur costs and attorneysI fees and
thus ;laintiffs seek an award of costs and attorneysI fees, and damages pursuant to statute,
decisionallaw, common law and this "ourtIs inherent powers+ 0)"AN! ">AI= 8A2
2)>I)8 (-reach of the Implied "ovenant of @ood 8aith and 8air !ealing 6 2"0) /7+
;laintiffs re6alleges each and every allegation contained herein, and hereby incorporates
them by this reference as if fully set forth below+ /%+ /3+ 2"0 is bound by enforceable
contracts with ;laintiffs+ )very contract in Nevada has imp lied into it a covenant that the
parties thereto will act in the spirit of good faith and fair dealing+ /&+ ;laintiffs are
informed and believe that 2"0 breached this covenant by acting inconsistently with its
purpose and intentF such wrongful conduct include, but are not limited to# (a) intentionally
refusing and/or failing to comply with the terms of Nevada law, and (b) failing to rescind
NA! after being put on notice of the violation of NevadaIs non6Gudicial foreclosure laws+
$4+ $+ 5hrough this and other conduct, 2"0 has denied ;laintiffsI Gustified e9pectations+
As a direct and pro9imate result of 2"0I s conduct, ;laintiffs have been, and will continue
to be, harmed in the manner herein alleged in an amount which e9ceeds K4,444+44+
DB)2)8A2), ;laintiffs pmys for Gudgment against the !efendants as follows# + 8or a
declaratory Gudgment that the aforesaid NA! and NA! / was improperly noticed in
violation ofN20 4%+43% and is null and void and shall be rescindedF /+ 8or an immediate,
preliminary and permanent inGunction enGoining all !efendants from taking any further
action against the ;roperty (including, without limitation, any attempts to sell, encumber,
or eGect ;laintiffs from the ;roperty) until this "ourt can determine the e9tent of the partiesI
rights in and to the ;roperty, and to implement verifiable controls to protect ;laintiffs from
any irreparable harm that could be caused by the !efendantsI actionsF $+ 8or an award of
general and special damages against the !efendants, Gointly and severally, in e9cess of
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT
K4,444+44 pursuant to A+-+ /%$ 0ec+ '+3(7) %7th >eg+ (Nv+ /4)F .+ 8or an award of
treble damages against the !efendants, Gointly and severally, in e9cess ofK4,444+44
pursuant to A+-+ /%$ 0ec+ '+3(7)%7th >eg+ (Nv+ /4)F '+ 8or an order of specific
performance re*uiring the rescission of the defective NA! + 7+ 8or an award of attorneysI
fees and costs pursuant to A+-+ /%$ 0ec+ '+3(7) %7th >eg+ (Nv+ /4)F %+ 8or such other and
further relief as the "ourt may deem e*uitable, Gust and proper+E )nd of e9cerpt
incorporated to this case by reference from Buston v 2esidential "redit 0olutions et al,
"ase /#6cv64%.&6>!@ 6"DB in 8ederal "ourt (after one of the many, many magical
removals that these guys are known to do, getting these cases to 8ederal "ourt, where the
citiLens of Nevada get to have lifetime appointee 8ederal "ourt Gudges making, or
seemingly making, Nevada >aw in contravention of the doctrines of absention, comity,
etc+something so elo*uently argued against by the venerable @eof @iles, )s* (no
connection or affiliation to the undersigned, Gust a fan of his work, got it off pacer+gov for
2e# 2ule /3(G) >etter, !ocket 46%/$4 &th "ir !ocket Number# =aves v+ 8irst BoriLon
Bome >oans) in his /3< letter in =aves, attached as where the citiLens of Nevada get to
have lifetime appointee 8ederal "ourt Gudges making, or seemingly making, Nevada >aw
in contravention of the doctrines of absention, comity, etc+ something so elo*uently argued
against by the venerable @eof @iles, )s* (no connection or affiliation to the undersigned,
Gust a fan of his work) in his /3< letter in =aves, attached as E7+#b#* <:
N2"; 74(b)($) allows a party to move for relief from a Gudgment which is void,
and while motions made under N2"; 74(b) are generally re*uired to Ebe made
within a reasonable timeE and to be adGudicated according to the district courtIs
discretion, this is not true in the case of a void Gudgment+ Necessarily a motion under
this part of the rule differs markedly from motions under the other clauses of 2ule
74(b)+ 5here is no *uestion of discretion on the part of the court when a motion is
made under Nthis portion of the 2uleO+ Nor is there any re*uirement, as there usually
is when default Gudgments are attacked under 2ule 74(b), that the moving party show
that he has a meritorious defense+ )ither a Gudgment is void or it is valid+
!etermining which it is may well present a difficult *uestion, but when that *uestion
is resolved, the court must act accordingly+ -y the same token, there is no time limit
on an attack on a Gudgment as void+ + + + N)Oven the re*uirement that the motion be
made within a Ereasonable time,E which seems literally to apply + + + cannot be
enforced with regard to this class of motion+ ?nderstandably, the parties were not
attuned to our recent <acobs decision during oral argument+ Accordingly, it was
determined at that time to allow the parties to supplement their briefs in order to
determine with certainty whether, in fact, no default had been entered against @arcia
prior to the entry of the default Gudgment+ @arciaIs supplemental material supplied
additional evidence that no default was ever entered, including an affidavit by "lark
"ounty "ourt "lerk >oretta -owman attesting that no such filing e9ists in the case
file+ 2espondents also acknowledged that no default was ever entered but argue in
their supplemental brief that <acobs should not be applied retroactively, noting that
the default Gudgment at issue herein was entered prior to our <acobs decision+ 5his
argument is without merit+ 5he court in <acobs determined, consistent with law from
other Gurisdictions, that the default Gudgment entered in <acobs was void+ De
accordingly ordered the district court to grant relief from the void Gudgment, despite
the fact that the ruling in <acobs was, of course, preceded by entry of the default
Gudgment against <acobs+ If this case, rather than <acobs, were before us as a case of
first impression, we would have reached the same conclusion+ A void Gudgment is
void for all purposes and may not be given life under a theory based upon lack of
legal precedent+ @arcia v+ Ideal 0upply "o+, 4 Nev+ .&$, 3%. ;+/d %'/ (Nev+
'/&/&&.)+ 5he defective service rendered the district courtIs personal Gurisdiction
over @assett invalid and the Gudgment against her void+ 8or a Gudgment to be void,
there must be a defect in the courtIs authority to enter Gudgment through either lack of
personal Gurisdiction or Gurisdiction over subGect matter in the suit+ ;uphal v+ ;uphal,
77& ;+/d & (Idaho &3$)+ In ;rice v+ !unn, 47 Nev+ 44, %3% ;+/d %3' (&&4)+
De now hold that the filing of a motion to set aside a void Gudgment previously
entered against the movant shall not constitute a general appearance+ 0ee, e+g+,
!obson v+ !obson, 43 Nev+ $.7, $.&, 3$4 ;+/d $$7, $$3 (&&/)+ Nonetheless,
since the order was void, a Gudgment based thereon would likewise be void++ Nelson
v+ 0ierra "onstr+ "orp+, %% Nev+ $$., $7. ;+/d .4/+ ?nder N2"; 74(b) a motion to
set aside a void Gudgment is not restricted to the si9 monthsI period specified in the
rule+ N2"; '.(a) provides that the word EGudgmentE as used in these rules includes
any order from which an appeal lies+ 5herefore there is no merit to appellantsI
contention that the motion to vacate the Gudgment was not timely made+ 8oster v+
>ewis, %3 Nev+ $$4, $%/ ;+/d 7%& (Nev+ 7/&/&7/)+ A void Gudgment is subGect to
collateral attackF a Gudgment is void if the issuing court lacked personal Gurisdiction
or subGect matter GurisdictionF 0ee .& "+<+0+ <udgments M .4, at %&/ (&.% P supp+
&&)F .7 Am+<ur+/d <udgments MM 7/6'7 (&7& P supp+ &&)+
5he www+ccwashoe+com docket for this case reveals that #/46=AC6/44& 4&#$'
A= Notice +++ (imbelman, )s*+, )ric )ntry# NA5I") A8 -ANQ2?;5"C 8I>IN@
AN! A?5A=A5I" 05AC 4&6<?N6/44&
4#'& A= =tn to !ismiss +++ 0chuler6BintL, )s*+, Qristin A+ )ntry#
!)8)N!AN50I 2)0I!)N5IA> "2)!I5 0A>?5IAN0, IN"+, AN! J?A>I5C
>AAN 0)2,I") "A2;A2A5IANI0 =A5IAN 5A !I0=I00 A2 IN 5B)
A>5)2NA5I,) 8A2 0?==A2C <?!@=)N5 4&6<?N6/44&
4#'& A= Affidavit in 0upport+++ 0chuler6BintL, )s*+, Qristin A+ )ntry#
A88I!A,I5 IN 0?;;A25 A8 =A5IAN 5A !I0=I00 A2 IN5 5B)
A>5)2NA5I,) 8A2 0?==A2C <?I!@=)N5 4&6<?N6/44&
4#'& A= Notice +++ 0chuler6BintL, )s*+, Qristin A+ )ntry# NA5I") A8
>A!@=)N5 IN 0??;;A25 A8 =A5IAN 5A !I0=I00 A2 IN 5B)
A>5)2NA5I,) 8A2 0?==A2C <?!@=)N5
Dhich is interesting considering that, besides never having served a Efiling
readyE motion, yet still seeing fit to file a =otion for 0anctions against the
undersigned, opposing counsel Bunter made some threats related to the undersigned
doing this or that in relation to the automatic stay (which one, the one that didnIt
prevent BintL from filing that <uly 4& 0ummary <udgment =otion? 5he one she
send to former Attorney of 2ecord Dalsh, despite the fact the BintL was properly
served the "ourtIs Arder @ranting DalshIs Dithdrawal as Attorney of 2ecord for the
"arpenter? 5hat one?)+ 5he issue may have more life in a bankruptcy court where
issues such as RstandingS and who the Rreal party in interestS is to pursue a motion to
lift the automatic stay, or to file a proof of claim in a bankruptcy case+ 5o this e9tent,
we have discussed the in 2e ,eal case which we will try to thoroughly blog on soon+
5his is a very interesting case that deals with proof of loan ownership, standing and
real party in an AriLona -ankruptcy "ase+
2egardless, is that K,444 bond in this matter 8,4364%4& still on the books, and
wouldnIt that address the lack of a bond that opposing counsel Bunter obGected to?
5he RlendersS and loan servicers are often trying to pull fast ones in bankruptcy
courts both in filing bogus proofs of claims and in seeking to lift the automatic stay in
bankruptcy court when they have no standing and cannot prove they are the real party
in interest to file the motion I am offering my lift6stay motion with memorandum of
points and authorities i) 5he issue of standing, in the conte9t of a motion to
lift the automatic stay in regard to an alleged failure to pay on a promissory note
re*uires analysis of "alifornia "ommercial "ode law+ 5here are two threshold
*uestions for establishing standing# () has movant established an interest in the
promissory noteF and (/) is the movant entitled to enforce the note? 0ee In re
Dilhelm, .4% -+2+ at $&/F In re Aniel, No+4&6$4.'/!=, /44 D> 74&&/$ (-ankr+
N+!+ "al+ April /, /44)+ 5here is no way to determine whether a moving party is a
party in interest, real party in interest, or has standing sufficient to show a colorable
claim without consulting the applicable state law that dictates which party has the
right to enforce a loan+ In "alifornia, "ommercial "ode 0ection $$4 sets forth those
;ersons who are )ntitled 5o )nforce a negotiable instrument (hereinafter R;)5)S)#
R;erson entitled to enforceS an instrument means# (a) the holder of the instrumentF
(b) a nonholder in possession of the instrument who has the rights of a holder, (c) a
person not in possession of the instrument who is entitled to enforce the instrument
pursuant to 0ection $$4& or subdivision (d) of 0ection $.3+ (e9+ lost note) A person
may be a person entitled to enforce the instrument even though the person is not the
owner of the instrument or is in wrongful possession of the instrument+ (emphasis
added)+ 5he definition of RholderS can be found in "al+ "ommercial "ode 0ection
/4(a)(/)# RBolder,S means the person in possession of a negotiable instrument
that is?payable either to bearer or, to an identified person that is the?person in
possession+
Bad opposing counsel sent the various notices and pleadings related to the Aames
bankruptcy "h+ filing in !elaware to the correct address, rather than the address of
<ames Dalsh, )s*+, well after this "ourt had granted DalshIs Dithdrawal as Attorney
of 2ecord, then the "arpentierIs likely would have benefitted from filing something
like this#
E"alifornia >ift 0tay Apposition =otion and =emorandum of ;oints and
Authorities (3 pages)# 5his pleading is Rbattle testedS in the "entral !istrict
-ankruptcy "ourt in "alifornia+ >oan 0ervicer ("hase) motion to lift the automatic
stay was !)NI)!+ 5his document has most of the maGor bankruptcy cases that deal
with note ownership up to /4+ In re BwangF In re Deisband, In re ,eal, in re
Dalker, etc+ 5he focus is on &th circuit cases, but there are others as well+ 5his
document will save you a 5AN of time in trying to get all the cases together and
organiLe an opposition to a motion to lift the automatic stay+ 5he document flows
nicely from real party in interest, to standing, to arguing about assigning a deed of
trust without the note (all the maGor cases on that point of law are included)+ 0imply
get your facts in there and you are ready to have a great motion+E Dhich is some
motion/package some "alifornian attorney is selling online+ And, the general
consensus in this field is that the bankruptcy arena is a sticky wicket for those
opposing those like the "arpentierIs, allowing for discovery of all sorts of
uncomfortable truths, like who really owns the "arpentierIs loan, who has standing,
etc+, etc+ "ould it be more than Gust a happy coincidence (for 2"0, J>0, Aames,
Dindsor, et al, but, certainly not for the "arpentiers) that AamesI counsel listed
Dalsh and DalshIs firmIs address in the "h+ !elaware -ankruptcy filing creditor
matri9?
=ore from the Rwho owns my loanS series+ 5his time, it is the AriLona 0upreme "ourt
that is hearing oral arguments regarding whether or not assignments evidencing who owns
your loan must be recorded prior to a lender can pursue a non6Gudicial foreclosure+ Bere is
an article that deals with some of the high points of the debate+ 5he "ourt will rule on the
issues at a later date and we will keep you posted when we hearing something+ 5his comes
on the heels of AriLona trying to pass a law (0- /'&) that forces the so6called RlendersS
of securitiLed loans and other loans to record proof of ownership with the "ounty
2ecorder before they seek to foreclose+ 5he law did not get passed likely due to the
financial lobby that of course does not want such a law passed+
http#//aLstarnet+com/articleT7.c7ed776f$$76'bfc6&%/e67'%.4'4&e7cd+html De talked
on another blog post about AriLona 0- /'& that was trying to re*uire proof of ownership
recorded before a lender could foreclose+ 5he debate marches on+ As a society, do we care
if a bank is allowed to foreclose in a private non6Gudicial foreclosure sale if it cannot
legally produce evidence that it is the owner of the loan, or should be not be concerned
with whether or not the true owner of the loan is foreclosing because the borrower is in
default of a loan with no way to repay it? As it stands now the Rproduce the noteS or
Rshow me the noteS or Rwho owns my loanS argument does not have much if any traction
as far as trying to prevent a non6Gudicial foreclosure sale+ 5he issue may have more life in
a bankruptcy court where issues such as RstandingS and who the Rreal party in interestS is
to pursue a motion to lift the automatic stay, or to file a proof of claim in a bankruptcy
case+ 5o this e9tent, we have discussed the in 2e ,eal case which we will try to
thoroughly blog on soon+ 5his is a very interesting case that deals with proof of loan
ownership, standing and real party in an AriLona -ankruptcy "ase+ 0tay tuned+
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT %
In his recent Apposition opposing counsel Bunter points to AA=)0
=A25@A@) IN,)05=)N5 52?05 /44'6/ which would strongly indicated that
the "arpentierIs loan was 0)"?2I5I()!+ It appears the EpoolE can be found here#
http#//www+secinfo+com/K/0)"/8ilings+asp?
"IQU$/&4&7PAsU-8A"0PAs8ilerU8PAsAwnerU-APAsIssuerU"0 Aames
=ortgage Investment 5rust /44'6/
S3 E7+#b#* 1 'or do%),n*(*#on rl(*d *o AAMES MORTGAGE
INVESTMENT TRUST <44>@< :
-oth <oan and <im "arpentier hereby assert violations of the 8!";A and that
their credit has been damaged tremendously, with a curios causal connection evident
from, perhpas, BunterIs listing E"lark "ountyE as the "ourt in his Guly /44 0ummary
<udgment =otion and <im failing a credit application for a damn cell phone,
apparently based on an incorrect answer to whether he ever owned real property in
"lark "ounty+ 8urther, there would appear to be some sort of issue with =c"arthy
Bolthus fee splitting with now attorneys, yeah, I get it, they own 2"0 and or J>0,
but some novel piercing theory could likely demonstrate that some improper fee
splitting/partnering with non6lawyers is occurring+ Also upon information and belief
the "arpentiers allege and amend their claims to add this# E5he 2econveyance
Argument 5his strategy comes from an attorney in "alifornia who is doing this with
his own house+ If you look at your !eed of 5rust or =ortgage, you will invariably see
language that covers the clause of Ereconveyance+E 5he language typically goes like
this# E/$+ 2econveyance+ ?pon payment of all sums secured by this 0ecurity
Instrument, >ender shall re*uest 5rustee to reconvey the ;roperty and shalt surrender
this 0ecurity Instrument and all notes evidencing debt secured by this security
agreement to trustee+ E Dhen you have a situation where# a) 5he note can be proven
that it was securitiLed, then it can be proven that the lender has, in fact, been paid in
full+ b) 5he note has been sold from -ank A, to -ank -, and then to -ank ", who is
trying to foreclose+ In any event, this strategy involves bringing a civil action against
the AriginatorF -ank A, re*uiring them to do their Gob in a breach of contract civil
action+ Cou see, a !eed of 5rust secures the promissory note+ It is the !eed of 5rust
that gives the lender the Epower of saleE clause to foreclose+ If the original lender is
forced to issue a reconveyance, then the !eed of 5rust has collapsed+ 5his is a very
effective, yet easy, method some people have used to stop foreclosure, reason being
that# a) 5he originator is often out of business and cannot respond to the civil action,
thus the homeowner wins by default+ b) 5he originator had already sold the note with
Eno recourseE, 5his means the 2)=I" or the servicer can N),)2 go back to the
originator+ c) If the Ariginator loses the civil action by default, nothing bad happens
to them+ d) If the Ariginator wins the civil action, nothing good happens to them+
BereIs the kicker+ If the Ariginator is still in business and they lose the civil action in
court, then there are very specific dire conse*uences that results+ If they lose, then it
can be proven that every loan they have ever originated that has lost their home is
the result of their gross negligence to perform their duty+ 5his means every
homeowner who has lost his or her home can sue the Ariginator+ It is for this reason
that the Ariginator often doesnIt show up, or settles when confronted with this
strategy+
5he 8air !ebt "ollections ;ractices Act As you recall, your pretender lender
becomes a debt collector after you are 74 days delin*uent+ 5his is the only way they
can negotiate a loan modification with you, because it gets discharged out of the
2)=I"+ I have included a copy of the 8!";A in the Appendi9 at the end of this
book+ Cou can also simply @oogle E8air !ebt "ollections ;ractices Act+E >etIs talk a
bit more about debt collectors+ It is a scam+ !ebt collectors depend on peopleIs
ignorance to collect their ill6gotten gains+ 5his is one of those dirty little secrets
bankers have been hiding for years+ 5hey donIt want you to know this scam+ De are
blowing their dirty laundry out in the open because we are sick of seeing so many
people suffer at the hands of bankers+ 2emember our e9ample of the farming supply
shop owner who gave me credit? 5he crops froLe and I had no money to pay back the
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT &
loan+ 2emember, as a business owner, you can do one of three things+ .) "arry the
debt as an asset+ ') Assign it to a third party through endorsement 7) Drite it off as a
loss A debt collector is someone who (is not the original creditor) buys a debt that
has been offset, and attempts to collect it+ 5hey have purchased the debt after you
have declared it a loss+ 5his is very important for you to understand+ 5his is why the
government created a set of laws called the 8air !ebt "ollections ;ractices Act (?0"
5itle ' 0ection 7&/) in order to minimiLe the deceit and protect people+ 0adly, not
many lawyers understand this mechanic+ 5hey think debt collectors act legitimately+
>etIs say it again+ Ance a debt has been written off, it is discharged+ It cannot be
collected again+ !ebt collectors use deception to convince people that they were
assigned the debt+ 0o, how does this relate to a 2)=I" and a debt collector? As we
discussed earlier, the individual shareholders are the real and beneficial interest
holders+ 0ince the individual shareholders cannot endorse and assign their portion of
the loss, then they have to write it off as a bad debt+ 5he 5rustee of the 2)=I"
cannot do it, either, because the 5rustee is not the real and beneficial holder of the
promissory note+ 5he 2)=I" has given up that right when it chose to structure itself
as a 0pecial ;urpose ,ehicle (0;,) for the purpose of a straight ta9 pass through+
5he only way your lender can foreclose on you is to rely on the same deception
tactics used by debt collectors+ 5he 8air !ebt "ollections ;ractices Act governs the
deceptive practices also+ 2emember, a debt collector pulls off their deception through
peopleIs ignorance+ 5his is whal your ElenderE is doing 4 you+ 5hat is why in all
their communications, you will see E5his is an attempt to collect a debtE+ An original
creditor is not re*uired to disclose this+ 0o if you are in court, or if you are counsel
representing your client, it is important for you to ask opposing counsel to stipulate
the nature of their ownership of the note+ Aftentimes, opposing counsel will come
into the court room representing that their client has Erepurchased the note,E not
realiLing that they have, in fact, brought fraud before the court+ If opposing counsel is
ignorant, then they are not lying+ It is up to you to get them to stipulate the true nature
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT /4
of the negotiable instrument through interrogatories and discoveryF including
subpoena of accounting records+ If you do this, watch how *uickly the blood drains
from opposing counselIs face+ ItIs *uite a sight+ A defective instrument is not
enforceable+ An instrument that has been previously discharged and bought as a bad
debt is not enforceable+ !onIt be fooled+ ItIs like buying a cheap knock off 2ole9
watch in =e9ico+ It might look the same, but underneath the face, it is not+ anyone
who disputes a debt to see if you know the law+ 5his is why it is so important for you
to know the law as wellV ?nder the ?niform "ommercial "ode 0ection $6/4., the
name and the signature of both the beneficiary and the original creditor must be
disclosed in the same document M $6/4. (d)+ 5he signature of the borrower must be
included as + well into the assignment or transferF unless a clause in the deed of
trus?mortgage waives that (most deeds of trust disclose this at clause 1/4)+
Under Uniform Commercial Code, a note is a one of a kind negotiable
instrument that has the only legally binding chain of assignment. Oftentimes, your
lender will show up with a photocopy of the note made years ago . . . again,
obscuring the facts in order to steal your house. This is admissible unless you know
how to object. Again, consult with counsel about the Federal ules of !"idence
#$$% and #$$&. Another way banks hide their fraud is to do what's called (blank
assignments,( so that the loan may be assigned many times amongst themsel"es
that are tracked by )!* +which we will e,plain later-, while keeping a blank
assignment of the note handy in the e"ent a foreclosure is needed. This is blatant
abuse of the law. The law is "ery specific here. The promissory note, as well as the
.eed of Trust, must be together at all times and there must always be a clear and
unambiguous chain of title that is traceable in public records for all parties of interest
in real estate.../iolation of Applicable *tate 0aw 1n e"ery .eed of Trust2)ortgage, it
states specifically that the instrument is subject to applicable *tate and Federal
laws. 1f it can be shown that an assignment of the promissory note occurs without
the corresponding assignment at the county recorder's office for the .eed of
Trus/)ortgage, then the instrument has "iolated *tate law. Thus, "iolating the
terms of the .eed of Trust2)ortgage, making the instrument in"alid. *ince interest
in the promissory note has been sold to a !)1C +eal !state )ortgage
1n"estment Conduit- and proper assignment was ne"er done at the county, then the
terms of the .eed of Trus/)ortgage has been "iolated, making it in"alid. This will
con"ert the debt from a secured instrument to an unsecured instrument. This means
the lender might be able to sue you to collect the money, but can ne"er sell your
property to collect on the collateral....1llegal Trustee Argument There ha"e been two
instances in which a Federal Court 3udge issued a statewide injunction free4ing ali
foreclosures against homeowners against 5ank of America and econtrust. One
was in Utah in late %$#$, and more recently, in 3anuary % $ # # in 6e"ada, because
in both instances, econtrust is not registeredto do business in that state. 1f a
company wants to do business in a state, it needs to register within that stateas an
entity. This way, if someone within that state wants to sue them, they can look up
who the owners are, and where they li"e, so they can be properly ser"edwith a
summons.1n almost all instances, these foreclosure mills are not registered to do
businessin the state they are attempting to foreclose in. )any homeowners ha"e
used this defense to at least forestall foreclosure. 1t is not enough to stop a
foreclosure, but it is another claim the homeowner can make in a 7uiet Title Action
defense making the argument that the Trustee is a (non8entity.(+E ?pon information
and belief, @eof @iles, )s*+ got some similar shutdown of 2"0 and or J>0 in
Nevada Gust last year+++
EI0 CA?2 >)N!)2 A2 >AAN 0)2,I")2 !AN@>IN@ 5B) BA=;
;)2=AN)N5 =A!I8I"A5IAN "A22A5 IN 82AN5 A8 CA?2 NA0)? BA=;
52IA> ;>AN 0"B)=) W 0aying they RwillS modify the loan if trial payments are
made proves crucial+ De have talked about this many times before on our website
5rial ;lan 8raud+ 5hat is, -anks and loan servicers promising to modify your loan if
you make your BA=; trial plan payments on time+ De get this scenario over and
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT //
over+ 5he BA=; modification agreement itself will normally promise the
modification if all payments are made (but the contract is subGect to a bunch of little
trap6holes put in place so the loan servicer can always try to back out of the
modification without having to perform)+ 0ometimes this is also buttressed over the
phone by statements from some Rloss mitigation specialistS or Rforeclosure
specialistS who promises you that you *ualify for the loan modification and if you
Gust make the trial payments Ryou will be goodS or Rwe wonHt foreclose+S 5his is
going on left and right in my honest opinion+ After all, it is a RcleverS way to get
people who may not be making their mortgage payment (potential strategic
defaulters) into making some payments and that is with the false promise of loan mod
assistance+ 0o yes, trying to get a loan modification can often turn into a game of
poker with your lender+ Cou both end up telling each other certain things, some of
which may or may not be true+ 5hatHs what happens when money is on the line,
monthly payments versus the return on investment to investors in mortgage backed
securities+ At any rate, in the case of <ackmon v+ AmericaHs 0ervicing "ompany,
"ase No+ " 64$33. "2-, ("A Northern !istrict /4) the "ourt did not go for this
approach+ 5he fact that the servicer refused to return the signed agreement to the
borrower was not enough to allow the servicer to get out of the hot water+ 5he
borrower made more than the re*uired trial plan payments, and although she faced
eviction following the foreclosure sale, the court issued an inGunction preventing the
eviction from taking place, based on the allegations that the borrower was entitled to,
and promised a final BA=; modification+ 0o, when the 0ervicers are not playing
fair, it may Gust so happen that you have some legal rights+ NA5)# 5he "ourt
re*uired a bond be posted and re*uired K/,7.3 monthly protection payments+
0omething you should always consider before filing a predatory lending lawsuit or
wrongful foreclosure lawsuit seeking a 52A and InGunction+
Among other things, -onnet contended that respondent =)20I conduct was
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT /$
sanctionable because it failed to produce certain re*uired documents at the
mediation+V 0ee N20 4%+437(.), (')+ 5he record indicates that a non6party, "hase
Bome 8inancing, >>", attended the mediation+ -ecause =)20 maintains that "hase
attended the mediation on its behalf, "haseIs conduct at the mediation is properly
imputed to =)20 for purposes of this appeal+ENDO + e ++ + re,Iew a district courtIs
decision regarding the imposition of sanctions for a partyIs participation in the
8oreclosure =ediation ;rogram under an abuse of discretion standard+ E ;asillas v+
B0-" -ank ?0A, /% Nev+ T, T, /'' ;+ $d /3, /37 (/4)+ =)20 failed to
produce the re*uired documents 5o obtain a foreclosure certificate, a deed of trust
beneficiary must strictly comply with four re*uirements# () attend the mediation, (/)
participate in good faith, ($) bring the re*uired documents, and (.) if attending
through a representative, have a person present with authority to modify the loan or
access to such a person+ N20 4%+437(.), (')F >eyva v+ National !efault 0ervicing
"orp+, /% Nev+ T, T, /'' ;+$d /%', /%& (/4) (concluding that strict compliance
with the ;rogramIs re*uirements is necessary)+ N20 4%+437(.) states that the deed
of trust beneficiary or its representative Eshall bring to the mediation the original or a
certified copy of the deed of trust, the mortgage note and each assignment of the deed
of trust or mortgage note+ E =oreover, the 8oreclosure =ediation 2ules (8=2s)
re*uire the beneficiary or its representative to conduct an appraisal of the
homeownerIs home+ 8=2 ($)(b)+ Bere, the record demonstrates that =)20 failed
to produce the deed of trust and any assignments+ / =oreover, it failed to conduct an
appraisal of -onnetIs home+ -ecause =)20 failed to strictly comply with De
recogniLe that -onnetIs original lender may still own her loan, in which case no
assignments would e9ist+ Bowever, =)20I inability to verify who currently owns
-onnetIs loan necessarily means that =)20 was unable to confirm that no
assignments needed to be produced+the ;rogramIs re*uirements, the district court
abused its discretion in ordering a foreclosure certificate to be issued+ >eyva, /%
Nev+ at T, /'' ;+$d at /%&F ;asillas, /% Nev+ at T, /'' ;+$d at /37+ An remand,
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT /.
the district court must determine how =)20 should be appropriately sanctioned+
;asillas, /% Nev+ at T, /'' ;+$d at /3763% (construing N20 4%+ 437(') to mean
that a violation of one of the four statutory re*uirements must be sanctioned and that
the district court is to consider several factors in determining what sanctions are
appropriate)+
0)"5IAN .# "AN">?0IAN XY 0ecuritiLation and =)20 re*uired many
changes in established practices+ 5hese practices were not and have not codified, so
they are maGor points of contention today+ Dhen a lender, title company, foreclosure
company or other firm signed up to become a member of =)20, one of more of their
people were designated as ZM"orporate AfficersZ[ of =)20 and given the title of
either Assistant 0ecretary or ,ice ;resident+ 5hese personnel were not employed by
=)20, nor received income from =)20+ 5hey were named ZM"ertified AfficersZ[
solely for the purpose of signing foreclosure and other legal documents in the name
of =)20+ (Apparently, there are some agreements which ZMauthoriLeZ[ these people
to act in an Agency manner for =)20)+ 5his ZMsolvedZ[ the issue of not having
enough personnel to conduct necessary actions+ It would be the 0ervicers, 5rustees
and 5itle "ompanies conducting the day6to6day operations needed for =)20 to
function+ As well, it was thought that this would provide =)20 and their
ZM"orporate AfficersZ[ with the ZMlegal standingZ[ to foreclose+ Bowever, this brought
up another issue that now needed addressing# XY Dhen the Note is transferred, it
must be endorsed and signed, in the manner of a person signing his paycheck over to
another party+ "ustomary procedure was to endorse it as ZM;ay to the Arder ofZ[ and
the name of the party taking the Note and then signed by the endorsing party+ Dith a
new party holding the note, there would now need to be an Assignment of the !eed+
5his could not work if =)20 was to be the foreclosing party+ =)20 has recogniLed
the Note endorsement problem and on their website, stated that they could be the
foreclosing party only if the Note was endorsed in blank+ If it was endorsed to
another party, then that party would be the foreclosing party+ As a result, most Notes
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT /'
are endorsed in blank, which purportedly allow =)20 to be the foreclosing party+
Bowever, "A "I,I> "A!) /&$/+' has a completely different say in the matter+ It
re*uires that the Assignment of the !eed to the -eneficial Interest Bolder of the note+
"A "I,I> "A!) /&$/+' Z, A00I@N=)N5 Dhere a power to sell real property is
given to a mortgagee, or other encumbrance, in an instrument intended to secure the
payment of money, the power is part of the security and vests in any person who by
assignment becomes entitle to payment of the money secured by the instrument+ 5he
power of sale may be e9ercised by the assignee if the assignment is duly
acknowledged and recorded+ As is readily apparent, the above statute would suggest
that Assignment of the !eed to the Note Bolder is a re*uirement for enforcing
foreclosure+ ;age /$ ;aladin Associates Z, 8orensic =ortgage )9perts XY 5he first
Assignment purports to be e9ecuted by =)20, signed by Dendy ;erry holding the
position of Asst+ 0ecretary+ Dendy ;erry is an employee of "al6Destern
2econveyance "orp, original foreclosing company+ 5he second Assignment purports
to be e9ecuted by !eutsche -ank National 5rust "ompany, signed by 0tarlene >+
0tarling, who is in fact ,ice ;resident and Asst+ 0ecretary of <; =organ "hase -ank+
5he 0ubstitution of 5rustee was purportedly e9ecuted by =)20 signed by Avis 2+
5homas, who is in fact, ,ice ;resident of ;rommis 0olutions+ 5here is a potentially
serious conflict with the same person, as an ZMemployeeZ[ of =)20 Z, with duties
owed to the entity selling a mortgage Z, assigns that mortgage to a bank at
presumably market value, and then the same person, as the bankZ\s employee, swears
an affidavit in the foreclosure case, and the same person is also an employee of the
foreclosing company+ XY It is deemed imperative that the two6hat6wearing signer
provides employment histories for all the companies they represent+ XY 5he debtors,
A?!I5 2)"I;I)N5 were conducted the title owner of the subGect property until
N!)Y D)05, >>" did an invalid non6Gudicial foreclosure proceeding on November
$, /44+ ;rior to the e9ecution of 5rustee+s !eed upon 0ale against the subGect
property, N!)Y D)05, >>" did not maintain a secured interest in the subGect
property+ XY 5he mortgage securing the note, while naming D=" =ortgage "orp+
as ZM>ender,Z[ separately names the =ortgage )lectronic 2egistration 0ystems, Inc
(=)20) as the ZM=ortgagee+Z[ 5he conveyancing language granted the mortgage to
=)20 ZMsolely as nominee for >ender and >ender+s successor+s and assigns+Z[ D="
=ortgage "orp+ was a ZMcorrespondent lenderZ[ that originated mortgage loans which
in turn, was sold and transferred into a ZMfederally6approved securitiLationZ[ trust
named =organ 0tanley "apital I Inc+ 5rust /4476B) XY 5he Note and !eed have
taken two distinctly different paths+ 5he Note was securitiLed into =organ 0tanley
"apital I Inc+ 5rust /4476B)+ XY 5he written agreement that created the =organ
0tanley "apital I Inc+ 5rust /447 B) is a ZM;ooling and 0ervicing AgreementZ[
(;0A), and is a matter of public record, available on the website of the 0ecurities
)9change "ommission+ 5he 5rust is also described in a ZM;rospectus 0upplement,Z[
also available on the 0)" website+ 5he 5rust by its terms set a ZM">A0IN@ !A5)Z[
of 8ebruary /3, /447+ 5he promissory note in this case became trust property in
compliance with the re*uirement set forth in the ;0A+ 5he 5rust agreement is filed
under oath with the 0ecurities and )9change "ommission+ 5he ac*uisition of the
assets of the subGect 5rust and the ;0A are governed under the law+ ;age /. ;aladin
Associates Z, 8orensic =ortgage )9perts In view of the foregoing, all assignments
e9ecuted filed three years after the 5rust+s "losing !ate would be a void act for the
reason that it violated the e9press terms of the 5rust instrument+ XY 5he loan was
originally made D=" =ortgage "orp and was sold and transferred to =organ
0tanley "apital I Inc+ 5rust /447 B)+ 5here is no record of Assignments to either
the 0ponsor or !epositor as re*uired by the ;ooling and 0ervicing Agreement+ In
"arpenter v+ >ongan 7 Dall+ /%,3$ ?+0+ /%, /%., / >+)d+ $$ (3%/), the ?+0+
0upreme "ourt stated ZM5he note and mortgage are inseparableF the former as
essential, the latter as an incident+ An assignment of the note carries the mortgage
with it, while assignment of the latter alone is a nullity+Z[ An obligation can e9ist with
or without security+ Dith no security, the obligation is unsecured but still valid+ A
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT /%
security interest, however, cannot e9ist without an underlying e9isting obligation+ It
is impossible to define security apart from its relationship to the promise or
obligation it secures+ ("ivil "ode Z]Z] /3%/, /&4&, /&/4F "alifornia =ortgages and
!eeds of 5rust, and 8oreclosure >itigation, by 2oger -ernhardt, 8ourth )dition, Z]
+) 5he obligation and the security are commonly drafted as separate documents Z,
typically a promissory note and a deed of trust+ If the creditor transfers the note but
not the deed of trust, the transferee receives a secured noteF the security follows the
note, legally if not physically+ If the transferee is given the deed of trust without the
note accompanying it, the transferee has no meaningful rights e9cept the possibility
of legal action to compel the transferor to transfer the note as well, if such was the
agreement+ (Qelley v+ ?pshaw &&'/) $& "+/d %&, /.7 ;+/d /$F ;olhemus v+
5rainer (377) $4" 73') ZMDhere the mortgagee has ZMtransferredZ[ only the
mortgage, the transaction is a nullity and his ZMassigneeZ[ having received no interest
in the underlying debt or obligation, has a worthless piece of paper (. 2ichard 2+
;owell), ;owell on 2eal ;roperty, Z] $%+/% N/O (/444) -y statute, assignment of the
mortgage carries with it the assignment of the debt+ + + Indeed, in the event that a
mortgage loan somehow separates interests of the note and the deed of trust, with the
deed of trust lying with some independent entity, the mortgage may become
unenforceable+ 5he practical effect of splitting the deed of trust from the promissory
note is to make it impossible for the holder of the note to foreclose, unless the holder
of the deed of trust is the agent of the holder of the note+ Dithout the agency
relationship, the person holding only the note lacks the power to foreclose in the
event of default+ 5he person holding only the deed of trust will never e9perience
default because only the holder of the note is entitled to payment of the underlying
obligation+ 5he mortgage loan becomes ineffectual when the note holder did not also
hold the deed of trust+Z[ ANC A55)=;5 5A 52AN08)2 5B) -)N)8I"IA>
IN5)2)05 A8 A 52?05 !))! DI5BA?5 ADN)20BI; A8 5B)
?N!)2>CIN@ NA5) I0 ,AI! ?N!)2 "A>I8A2NIA >AD
Now, one might suppose the "arpentiers could always 5he -ankruptcy
Automatic 0tay =ethod 5o buy time, some homeowners declare bankruptcy+ Dhen
you declare bankruptcy, you receive an automatic stay from all creditors, including
the lender+ =any homeowners feel this is the best and most assured way to stop the
sale from happening+ -e warned+ -ankruptcy is not for the weak hearted+ !o not
enter bankruptcy lightly+ Cou will need to declare all your assets, income and
financial details+ It is like having a permanent anal probe of your financial details+ It
is not pleasant+ Never ever lie, especially in bankruptcy court+ Cou will go to Gail+ As
great as the temptation to hide the precious little money you have from your creditors
is, donIt do it+ 5he other down side of bankruptcy is that it is a mark in your public
credit score+ -ut frankly, having a bankruptcy or a foreclosure these days is not as big
a deal as it once was+ Almost half the country has been through it+ ItIs like being a
leper in a leper colony+ ItIs not as big a deal anymore+ 5he fact is, however, for most
homeowners this might be the only way to keep their house from the auction block
while they buy time to build their case for their foreclosure defense+ 5he other thing
about bankruptcy is, that in my e9perience, I have found that most of the wins come
from the bankruptcy courts+ 5he thing about bankruptcy is that it has the nice 2ule
$44(d)+ 8ederal 2ules of -ankruptcy $44 (d) )vidence of perfection of security
interest+ If a security interest in property of the debtor is claimed, the proof of claim
shall be accompanied by evidence that the security interest has been perfected+ It
re*uires the lender to provide proof of claim+ 5his means that the table is suddenly
turned+ It is now the lender who has to come up with the proof of claim+ And if you
know how their fraud is being perpetrated, then you know how to obGect and deflect
their deception+ Dhat many people do after they file for bankruptcy is to file an
adversary proceeding+ As a debtor, this is absolutely free+ An adversary proceeding is
like a normal civil action, but done under bankruptcy court, and under bankruptcy
rules+ It allows the debtor to challenge the bank to provide proof of standing+ 5he
other thing many homeowners do is file their house as an unsecured debt+ ;lease
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT /&
note, you cannot file an adversary proceeding under "hapter %+ 5his is very important
to remember+ 5his will then prompt the lender to complain+ -ut in doing so, they are
then re*uired to provide proof of claim which they often are unable to do+E or
Emotion to oppose the lifting of the automatic stay in bankruptcy court+ Bere is
another pleading for warrior lawyers# "alifornia 52A InGunction ;ackage W K'&' 6 If
you have clients seeking to stop the foreclosure sale of their home, and you have
valid legal grounds to file a lawsuit, here are the materials you will need to seek to
obtain a 52A (temporary restraining order) and preliminary inGunction+ "omplete
with intel from the foreclosure trenches from Attorney 0teve ,ondran+ 5hese tips,
insights and sample pleadings will save you alot of time if you have never been
through the foreclosure 52A process in "alifornia+ "ertain additional local rules may
apply, but this is a good collection of documents to assist you+ Bere is what you get
in this valuable kit# + . page 52A and InGunction checklist (guide6sheet with tips)
/+ 0ample Notice of 52A to opposing parties $+ 52A / A0" application (with sample
memorandum of points and authorities) .+ !eclarations in 0upport of 52A .+
;roposed Arder for 52A / A0" '+ 2e*uest for <udicial Notice 7+ >is ;endens
5emplate %+ Dithdrawal of >is ;endens 5emplate 3+ 0ample "ivil "omplaint
5emplate
"arpentiers allege and wish to amend their complaint to add this too#
EBomeowner Dins# "ase >aw 0uccesses ;atton v+ !iemer, $' Ahio 0t+ $d 73F '3
N+)+/d &.F &33)+ A Gudgment rendered by a court lacking subGect matter
Gurisdiction is void ab initio+ "onse*uently, the authority to vacate a void Gudgment is
not derived from Ahio 2+ eiv+ ;+ 74(-), but rather constitutes an inherent power
possessed by Ahio courts+ I see no evidence to the contrary that this would apply to
All courts+ EA party lacks standing to invoke the Gurisdiction of a court unless he has,
in an individual or a representative capacity, some real interest in the subGect matter
of the action+ >ebanon "orrectional Institution v+ "ourt of "ommon ;leas $' Ahio
0t+/d %7 (&%$)+ EA party lacks standing to invoke the Gurisdiction of a court unless
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT $4
he has, in an individual or a representative capacity, some real interest in the subGect
matter of a n action+E Dells 8argo -ank, v+ -yrd, %3 Ahio App+$d /3',
/443++Ahio^.74$, 3&% N+)+/d %// (/443)+ It went on to hold, EIf plaintiff has offered
no evidence that it owned the note and mortgage when the complaint was filed, it
would not be entitled to Gudgment as a matter of law+E (5he following court case was
unpublished and hidden from the public) Dells 8argo, litton loan v+ 8armer, 37%
N+,+0+/d / (/443)+ EDells 8argo does not own the mortgage loan +++ 5herefore,
the +++ matter is dismissed with preGudice+E (5he following court case was unpublished
and hidden from the public) Dells 8argo v+ 2eyes, 37% N+,+0+/d / (/443)+
!ismissed with preGudice, 8raud on "ourt P 0anctions+ Dells 8argo never owned the
=ortgage+ (5he following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public)
!eutsche -ank v+ ;eabody, 377 N+,+0+/d & (/440)+ )*ui8irst, when making the
loan, violated 2egulation ( of the 8ederal 5ruth in >ending Act ' ?0" M74 and
the 8air !ebt "ollections ;ractices Act ' ?0" M7&/F Eintentionally created fraud
in the factumE and withheld from plaintiff+++ Evital information concerning said debt
and all of the matri9 involved in making the loan+E (5he following court case was
unpublished and hidden from the public) Indymac -ank v+ -oyd, 334 N+,+0+/d //.
(/44&)+ 5o establish a prima facie case in an action to foreclose a mortgage, the
plaintiff must establish the e9istence of the mortgage and the mortgage note+ It is the
lawIs policy to allow only an aggrieved person to bring a lawsuit + + + A want of
Estanding to sue,E in other words, is Gust another way of saying that this particular
plaintiff is not involved in a genuine controversy, and a simple syllogism takes us
from there to a EGurisdictionalE dismissal# www+consumerdefenseprograms+com 4.
(5he following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Indymac
-ank v+ -ethley, 334 N+C+0+/d 3%$ (/44&)+ 5he "ourt is concerned that there may be
fraud on the part of plaintiff or at least malfeasance ;laintiff IN!C=Ae (!eutsche)
and must have EstandingE to bring this action, (5he following court case was
unpublished and hidden from the public) !eutsche -ank National 5rust "o v+5orres,
NC 0lip Ap '.%? (/44&)+ 5hat Ethe dead cannot be suedE is a well established
principle of the Gurisprudence of this state plaintiffIs second cause of action for
declaratory relief is denied+ 5o be entitled to a default Gudgment, the movant must
establish, among other things, the e9istence of facts which give rise to viable claims
against the defaulting defendants+ E5he doctrine of ultra vires is a most powerful
weapon to keep private corporations within their legitimate spheres and punish them
for violations of their corporate charters, and it probably is not invoked too often +++ E
(inc "arbonate "o+ v+ 8irst National -ank, 4$ Dis+ /', %& ND //& (3&&)+ Also
see# American )9press "o+ v+ "itiLens 0tate -ank, 3 Dis+ %/, &. ND ./%
(&/$)+ (5he following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public)
Dells 8argo v+ 2eyes, 37% N+,+0+/d / (/443)+ "ase dismissed with preGudice, fraud
on the "ourt and 0anctions because Dells 8argo never owned the =ortgage+ (5he
following court case was unpublished and hidden from the public) Dells 8argo, litton
loan v+ 8armer, 37% N+C+0+/d / (/443)+ Dells 8argo does not own the mortgage
loan+ EIndeed, no more than (affidavits) is necessary to make the prima facie case+E
?nited 0tates v+ Qis, 7'3 8+/d, '/7 (%th "ir+ &3)+ (5he following court case was
unpublished and hidden from the public) Indymac -ank v+ -ethley, 334 N+,+0+/d
3%$ (/44&)+ 5he "ourt is concerned that there may be fraud on the part of plaintiff or
at least malfeasance ;laintiff IN!C=A" (!eutsche) and must have EstandingE to
bring this action+ lawyer responsible for false debt collection claim 8air !ebt
"ollection ;ractices Act, ' ?0"0 MM 7&/++7&/4,BeintL v+ <enkins, '. ?+0+ /&F
' 0+ "t+ .3&, $t l+ )d+ /d $&' (&&')+ and 8!";A 5itle ' ?0c+ sub section
7&/+ In determining whether the plaintiffs come before this "ourt with clean hands,
the primary factor to be considered is whether the plaintiffs sought to mislead or
deceive the other party, not whether that party relied upon plaintiffsI
misrepresentations+ 0tachnik v+ Dinkel, $&. =ich+ $%', $3%F /$4 N+D+/d '/&, '$.
www+consumerdefenseprogra ms+com 4' (&%')+ EIndeed, no more than (affidavits)
is necessary to make the prima facie case+E ?nited 0tates v+ Qis, 7'3 8+/d, '/7 (%th
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT $/
"ir+ &3)+ "ert !enied, '4 ?+0+ loD+ /7&F 0+ "t+ =arch //, (&3/)+ E0ilence can
only be e*uated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak or when a n
in*uiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading+E ?+0+ v+ 5weel, '04 8+/d
/&% (&%%)+ EIf any part of the consideration for a promise be illegal, or if there are
several considerations for an un6severable promise one of which is illegal, the
promise, whether written or oral, is wholly void, as it is impossible to say what part
or which one of the considerations induced the promise+E =enominee 2iver "o+ v+
Augustus 0pies l P " "o+, .% Dis+ ''& at p+ '%/F $/ ND 3 (&/)+ 8ederal
2ule of "ivil ;rocedure %(a)(l) which re*uires that EIaOn action must be prosecuted
in the name of the real party in interest+E 0ee also, In re <acobson, .4/ -+2+ $'&,
$7'^77 (-ankr+ D+A+ Dash+ /44&)F In re Bwang, $&7 -+2+ %'%, %7767% (-ankr+ "!+
"al+ /443)+ =ortgage )lectronic 2egistration 0ystems, Inc+ v+ "hong, 3/. N+,+0+/d
%7. (/447)+ =)20 did not have standing as a real party in interest under the 2ules to
file the motion +++ 5he declaration also failed to assert that =)20, 8=" "apital >l"
or Bomecomings 8inancial, ll" held the Note+ >andmark National -ank v+ Qesler,
/3& Qan+ '/3, /7 ;+$d '3 (/44&)+ EQan+ 0tat+ Ann+ M 746/74(b) allows relief from
a Gudgment based on mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or e9cusable neglectF newly
discovered evidence that could not have been timely discovered with due diligenceF
fraud or m isrepresentationF a void GudgmentF a Gudgment that has been satisfied,
released, discharged, or is no longer e*uitableF or any other reason Gustifying relief
from the operation of the Gudgment+ 5he relationship that the registry had to the bank
was more akin to that of a straw man than to a party possessing all the rights given a
buyer+E Also In 0eptember of /443, A "alifornia <udge ruling against =)20
concluded, E5here is no evidence before the court as to who is the present owner of
the Note+ 5he holder of the Note must Goin in the motion+E >a0alle -ank v+ Ahearn,
3%' N+,+0+/d '&' (/44&)+ !ismissed with preGudice+ lack of standing+ Novastar
=ortgage, Inc v+ 0nyder $#4%",.34 (/443)+ ;laintiff has the burden of establishing
its standing+ It has failed to do so+ www+consumerdefenseprograms+com 47 !?
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT $$
"apital, Inc+ v+ ;arsons, "A0) NA+ 4%6=A6% (/443)+ A genuine issue of material
fact e9isted as to whether or not appellee was the real party in interest as there was no
evidence on the record of a n assignment+ 2eversed for lack of standing+ )verhome
=ortgage "ompany v+ 2owland, No+ 4%A;67' (Ahio /443)+ =ortgagee was not the
real party in interest pursuant to 2ule %(a)+ >ack of standing+ In lambert v+ 8irstar
-ank, 3$ Ark+ App+ /'&, /% 0+D+ $d '/$ (/44$), complying with the 0tatutory
8oreclosure Act does not insulate a financial institution from liability and does not
prevent a party from timely asserting any claims or defenses it may have concerning a
mortgage foreclosure A+"A+ M36046 7(d)_/` and violates honest services 5itle 3
8raud+ Notice to credit reporting agencies of overdue payments/foreclosure on a
fraudulent debt is defamation of character and a whole separate fraud+ A "ourt of
Appeals does not consider assertions of error that are unsupported by convincing
legal authority or argument, unless it is apparent without further research that the
argument is well taken+ 82A?! is a point well takenV lambert 0upra+ No lawful
consideration tendered by Ariginal >ender and/or 0ubse*uent =ortgage and/or
0ervicing "ompany to support the alleged debt+ EA lawful consideration must e9ist
and be tendered to support the NoteE and demand under 5I>A full disclosure of any
such consideration+ Anheuser6-usch -rewing "ompany v+ )mma =ason, .. =inn+
$3,.7 N+D+ ''3 (3&4)+ National -anks and/or subsidiary =ortgage
companies+cannot retain the note, EAmong the assets of the state bank were two
notes, secured by mortgage, which could not be transferred to the new bank as assets
under the National -anking laws+ National -ank Act, 0ect /3 P '7E National -ank
of "ommerce v+ Atkinson, 3 Qan+ App+ $4, '. ;+ 3 (3&3)+ EA bank can lend its
money, but not its credit+E 8irst NatIl -ank of 5allapoosa v+ =onroe, $' @a 7., 7&
0+)+ l/$ (&l)+ It is not necessary for rescission of a contract that the party making
the misrepresentation should have known that it was false, but recovery is allowed
even though misrepresentation is innocently made, because it would be unGust to
allow one who made false representations, even innocently, to retain the
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT $.
fruits of a bargain induced by such representations+E Dhipp v+ Iverson, .$ Dis+
/d 77, 73 N+D+/d /4 (&7&)+ EA bank is not the holder in due course upon merely
crediting the depositors account+E 0ankers 5rust v+ Nagler, /$ A+!+/d 7.', /'%
N+C+0+/d /&3 (&7')+ EAny conduct capable of being turned into a statement of fact
is representation+ 5here is DND+consumerdefenseprograms+com 4% no distinction
between misrepresentations effected by words and misrepresentations effected by
other acts+E (5he seller or lender) EBe is liable, not upon any idea of benefit to
himself, but because of his wrongful act and the conse*uent inGury to the other party+E
>eonard v+ 0pringer, &% '$/+ 7. N) /&& (&4/)+ EIf any part of the
consideration for a promise be illegal, or if there are several considerations for an un6
severable promise one of which is illegal, the promise, whether written or oral, is
wholly void, as it is impossible to say what part or which one of the considerations
induced the promise+E =enominee 2iver "o+ v+ Augustus 0pies l P " "A+,.% Dis+
''& at p+ '%/F $/ ND 3 (&/)+ E5he contract is void if it is only in part
connected with the illegal transaction and the promise single or entire+E @uardian
Agency v+ @uardian =ut+ 0avings -ank, //% Dis+ ''4, /%& ND %& (&$3)+ =oore v+
=id6;enn "onsumer !iscount "o+, "ivil Action No+ &467.'/ ?+0+ !ist+ l)YI0
4$/. (;a+ &&)+ 5he court held that, under 5I>AIs 2egulation (, / "82 M//7+.
(a), a lender had to e9pressly notify a borrower that he had a choice of insurer+
=arshall v+ 0ecurity 0tate -ank of Bamilton, / -+2+ 3. (III+ &&4) violation of
8ederal 5ruth in lending ' ?0"0 M7$3(a`(&), and 2egulation (+ 5he bank took a
security interest in the vehicle without disclosing the security interest+ 0teinbrecher v+
=id6;enn "onsumer !iscount "o+, 4 -+2+ '' (;a+ &&4)+ =id6;enn violated
5I>A by not including in a finance charge the debtorsI purchase of fire insurance on
their home+ 5he purchase of such insurance was a condition imposed by the
company+ 5he cost of the insurance was added to the amount financed and not to the
finance charge+ Nichols v+ =id6;enn "onsumer !iscount "o+, &3& Dl .773/ (;a+
&3&)+ =id6;enn misinformed Nichols in the Notice of 2ight to "ancel =ortgage+
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT $'
=c)lvany v+ Bousehold 8inance 2ealty "orp+, &3 3+2+ /$% (;a+ &3&)+ debtor filed
an application to remove the mortgage foreclosure proceedings to the ?nited 0tates
!istrict "ourt pursuant to /3 ?0"0 M.4&+ It is strict liability in the sense that
absolute compliance is re*uired and even technical violations will form the basis for
liability+ lauletta v+ ,alley -uick Inc+, ./ 8+ 0upp+ 4$7 at 4.4 (;a+ &%7)+
<ohnson6Allen v+ lomas and Nettleton "o+, 7% -+2+ &73 (;a+ &37)+ ,iolation of
5ruth6inlending Act re*uirements, ' ?0"0 M7$3(a)(4), re*uired mortgagee to
provide a statement containing a description of any security interest held or to be
retained or ac*uired+ 8ailure to disclose+ www+consumerdefensepro*rams+com 43
"ervantes v+ @eneral )lectric =ortgage "o+, 7% -+2+ 37 (;a+ &37)+ creditor failed
to meet disclosure re*uirements under the 5ruth in >ending Act, ' ?+0+"+0+ M 746
77%c and 2egulation ( of the 8ederal 2eserve -oard, / "82 M//7+ =c"ausland
v+ @=A" =ortgage "o+, 7$ -+2+ 77', (;a+ &37)+ @=A" failed to provide
information which must be disclosed as defined in the 5I>A and 2egulation (, /
"82 M//7+ ;erry v+ 8ederal National =ortgage "orp+, '& -+2+ &.% (;a+ &37) the
disclosure statement was deficient under the 5ruth In >ending Act, ' ?+0+"+0+ M
7$3(a)(&)+ !efendant =ortgage "o+ failed to reveal clearly what security interest
was retained+ 0chultL v+ "entral =ortgage "o+, '3 -+2+ &.' (;a+ &37)+ 5he court
determined creditor mortgagor violated the 5ruth In lending Act, ' ?+0+"+0+ M
7$3(a)($), by its failure to include the cost of mortgage insurance in calculating the
finance charge+ 5he court found creditor failed to meet any of the conditions for
e9cluding such costs and was liable for twice the amount of the true finance charge+
0olis v+ 8idelity "onsumer !iscount "o+, '3 -+2+ &3$ (;a+ &37)+ Any misgivings
creditors may have about the technical nature of the re*uirements should be
addressed to "ongress or the 8ederal 2eserve -oard, not the courts+ !isclosure
re*uirements for credit sales are governed by ' ?+s+"+0+ M 7$3 / "82 M //7+3_b),
(c)+ !isclosure re*uirements for consumer loans are governed by ' ?+s+"+0+ M 7$&
/ "82 M //7+3_b), (d)+ A violator of the disclosure re*uirements is held to a
standard of strict liability+ 5herefore, a plaintiff need not show that the creditor in fact
deceived him by making substandard disclosures+ 0ince 5ransworld 0ystems Inc+
have not cancelled the security interest and return all monies paid by =s+ 0herrie I+
>a8orce within the /4 days of receipt of the letter of rescission of Actober %, /44&,
the lenders named above are responsible for actual and statutory damages pursuant to
' ?+s+c+ 7.4(a)+ ;orter v+ =id6;enn "onsumer !iscount "o+, &7 8+/d 477 ($rd
eir+ &&/)+ ;orter filed an adversary proceeding against appellant under ' ?+0+c+
M7$', for failure to honor her re*uest to rescind a loan secured by a mortgage on her
home+ 2owland v+ =agna =illikin -ank of !ecatur, N+A+, 3/ 8+0upp+ 3%' (&&/)
)ven technical violations will form the basis for liability+ 5he mortgagors had a right
to rescind the contract in accordance with ' ? +s+c+ M7$'(c)+ New =aine Nat+ -ank
v+ @endron, %34 8+0upp+ '/ (l&&/)+ 5he court held that defendants were entitled to
rescind loan under strict liability terms of 5I>A because plaintiff violated 5I>AIs
provisions+ !i9on v+ 0 P 0 loan 0ervice of Daycross, Inc+, %'. 8 +0upp+ '7%
(&&4)F 5I>A is a remedial statute, and, hence+ is liberally construed in favor of
borrowers+ 5he remedial obGectives of 5I>A are achieved by imposing a system of
strict liability in favor of consumers when www+consumerdefenseprograms+com 4&
mandated disclosures have not been made+ 5hus, liability will flow from even minute
deviations from the re*uirements of the statute and the regulations promulgated
under it+ Doolfolk v+ ,an 2u "redit "orp+, %3$ 8+0upp+ %/. (l&&4) 5here was no
dispute as to the material facts that established that the debt collector violated the
8A";A+ 5he court granted the debtorsI motion for summary Gudgment and held that
() under ' ?+s+c+ M7&/(e), a debt collector could not use any false, deceptive, or
misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debtF
?nfair !ebt "ollection ;ractices Act+ <enkins v+ >andmark =ortg+ "orp+ of ,irginia,
7&7 8+0upp+ 43& (D+!+ ,a+ &33)+ ;laintiff was also misinformed regarding the
effects of a rescission+ 5he pertinent regulation states that Ewhen a consumer rescinds
a transaction, the security interest giving rise to the right of rescission becomes void
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT $%
and the consumer shall not be liable for any amount, including any finance charge+E
/ "82 M//7+/$(d) ()+ >aubach v+ 8idelity "onsumer !iscount "o+, 737 8+'upp+
'4. ()+!+ ;a+ &33)+ monetary damages for the plaintiffs pursuant to the 2acketeer
Influenced and "orrupt ArganiLation Act, 3 ?0" M&7+ ("ount I)F the 5ruth6in6
lending Act, ' ?0" M74+ 0earles v+ "larion =ortg+ "o+, &3% D> 7&$/ ()+!+
;a+ &3%)F liability will flow from even minute deviations from re*uirements of the
statute and 2egulation (+ failure to accurately disclose the property in which a
security interest was taken in connection with a consumer credit transaction involving
the purchase of residential real estate in violation of ' ?0"s M7$3(a)(&)+ and /
"82 M//7+3(m)+ !i9on v+ ' P ' loan 0ervice of Daycross, Inc+, %'. 8+0upp+ '7%,
'%4 (0+!+ @a+ &&4)+ "ongressIs purpose in passing the 5ruth in >ending Act
(5I>A), ' ?0"s M74(a)+ was to assure a meaningful disclosure of credit terms so
that the consumer will be able to compare more readily the various credit terms
available to him+ ' ?0"s M74(a)+ 5I>A is a remedial statute, and, hence, is
liberally construed in favor of borrowers+F "ervantes v+ @eneral )lectric =ortgage
"o+, 7% -+2+ 37 ()+!+ ;a+ &37)+ 5he court found that the 5I>A violations were
governed by a strict liability standard, and defendantIs failure to reveal in the
disclosure statement the e9act nature of the security interest violated the 5I>A+ ;erry
v+ 8ederal National =ortgage, '& -+2+ &.% ()+!+ ;a+ &37)+ !efendant failed to
accurately disclose the security interest taken to secure the loan+ ;orter v+ =id6;enn
"onsumer !iscount "o+, &7 8 +/d 477 ($rd "ir+ &&/)+ Adversary proceeding
against appellant under ' ?0c+ M7$', for failure to honor her re*uest to
DIo/,II+consumerdefenseprograms+com 4 rescind a loan secured by a mortgage
on her home+ 0he was entitled to the e*uitable relief of rescission and the statutory
remedies under ' ?0c+ M7.4 for appellantIs failure to rescind upon re*uest+ 0olis v+
8idelity "onsumer !iscount "o+, '3 -+2+ &3$ (;a+ &37)+ Any misgivings creditors
may have about the technical nature of the re*uirements should be addressed to
"ongress or the 8ederal 2eserve -oard, not the courts+ !isclosure re*uirements for
credit sales are governed by ' ?+0+"+0+ M 7$3 / "82 M //7+3(b), (c)+ !isclosure
re*uirements for consumer loans are governed by ' ?+0+"+0+ M 7$& / "82 M
//7+3(b), (d)+ A violator of the disclosure re*uirements is held to a standard of strict
liability+ 5herefore, a plaintiff need not show that the creditor in fact deceived him by
making substandard disclosures+ 2owland v+ =agna =illikin -ank of !ecatur, N+A+,
3/ 8+0upp+ 3%' (&&/), )ven technical violations will form the basis for liability+
5he mortgagors had a right to rescind the contract in accordance with ' ?+0+c+
M7$'(c)+ New =aine Nat+ -ank v+ @endron, %34 8+0upp+ '/ (!+ =e+ &&/)+ 5he
court held that defendants were entitled to rescind loan under strict liability terms
of 5I>A because plaintiff violated 5I>AIs provisions+ @oogle# E5he -oyko
!ecisionE E2ickie Dalker "aseE+++"82 5itle /# -anks and -anking ;A25 //76
52?5B IN >)N!IN@ (2 )@?>A5IAN () M//7+$& =ortgage transfer disclosures+
>ink to an amendment pu blished at %' 82 '3'4, 0ept + /., /44+ (a) 0cope+ 5he
disclosure re*uirements of this section apply to any covered person e9cept as
otherwise provided in this section+ 8or purposes of this section# () A Ecovered
personE means any person, as defined in M//7+/(a)(//), that becomes the owner of an
e9isting mortgage loan by ac*uiring legal title to the debt obligation, whether through
a purchase, assignment, or other transfer, and who ac*uires more than one mortgage
loan in any twelve6month period+ 8or purposes of this section, a servicer of a
mortgage loan shall not be treated as the owner of the obligation if the servicer holds
title to the loan or it is assigned to the servicer solely for the administrative
convenience of the servicer in servicing the obligation+ (/) A Emortgage loanE means
any consumer credit transaction that is secured by the principal dwelling of a
consumer+ (b) !isclosure re*uired+ )9cept as provided in paragraph (c) of this
section, any person that becomes a covered person as defined in this section shall
mail or deliver the disclosures re*uired by this section to the consumer on or before
the $4th calendar day following the ac*uisition date+ If there is more than one
covered person, only one disclosure shall be given and the covered persons shall
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT $&
agree among themselves which covered person shall comply with the re*uirements
that this section imposes on any or all of them+ () Ac*uisition date+ 8or purposes of
this sect ion, the date that the covered person ac*uired the mortgage loan shall be the
date of ac*uisition recog niLed in the books and records of the ac*uiring party+ (/)
=ultiple consumers+ If there is more than one consumer liable on the obligation, a
covered person may mail or deliver the disclosures to any consumer who is primarily
liable+ (c) )9ceptions+ Notwithsta nding paragraph (b) of this section, a covered
person is not subGect to the re*uirements of this section with respect to a particular
mortgage loan if# () 5he covered person sells or otherwise transfers or assigns legal
title to the mortgage loan on or before the $4th calendar day following the date that
the covered person ac*uired the mortgage loanF or (/) 5he mortgage loan is
transferred to the covered person in connection with a repurchase agreement and the
transferor that is obligated to repurchase the loan continues to recog niLe the loan as
an asset on its own books and records+ Bowever+ if the transferor does not repurchase
the mortgage loan, the ac*uiring party must make the disclosures re*uired by M//7+$&
within $4 days after the date that the transaction is recogniLed as an ac*uisition in its
books and records+ (d) "ontent of re*uired disclosures+ 5he disclosures re*uired by
this section shall identify the loan that was ac*uired or transferred and state the
following# ( ) 5he identity, address, and telephone number of the covered person
who owns the mortgage loan+ If there is more than one covered person, the
information re*uired by this paragraph shall be provided for each of them+ (/) 5he
ac*uisition date recogniLed by the covered person+ ($) Bow to reach an agent or party
having authority to act on behalf of the covered person (or persons), which shall
identify a person (or persons) authoriLed to receive legal notices on behalf of the
covered person and resolve issues concerning the consumerIs payments on the loan+
Bowever, no information is re*uired to be provided under this paragraph if the
consumer can use the information provided under paragraph (d)() of this section for
these purposes+ If multiple persons are identified under this paragraph, the disclosure
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT .4
shall provide contact information for each and indicate the e9tent to which the
authority of each agent differs+ 8or purposes of this paragraph (d)($), it is sufficient if
the covered person provides only a telephone number provided that the consumer can
use the telephone number to obtain the address for the agent or other person
identified+ (.) 5he location where transfer of ownership of the debt to the covered
person is recorded+ Bowever, if the transfer of ownership has not been recorded in
public records at the time the disclosure is provided, the covered person complies
with this paragraph by stating this fact+ (e) Aptional disclosures+ In addition to the
information re*uired to be disclosed under paragraph (d) of this section, a covered
person may, at its option, provide any other information regarding the transaction+E
8erguson v+ Avelo =ortgage, >>" ("al+App+ / !ist+ <un+ , /4), "al+2ptr+$d
/4, D> /$&.$, 5his case involves another challenge to a non6Gudicial
foreclosure sale in "alifornia+ 5he basic facts of this case are that a borrower initially
took out a loan with New "entury =ortgage which loan was accompanied by a
=)20 deed of 5rust (=)20 was the nominee of the lender and its successors and
assigns under the deed of trust and also listed as the beneficiary)+ 5he 5rustee under
the !eed of 5rust was 8irst American 5itle "ompamy+ After a default of the
K744,444 purchase loan taken out by borrower BC?NB in /447, the following
se*uence of recorded documents occurred# () 3/$/4% a Notice of !efault was
recorded by Juality >oan 0ervice "orporation (J>0") W Note that the trustee under
the !eed of 5rust was 8irst American 5itleF (/) 3/$4/4% Assignment of !eed of 5rust
was recorded (=)20 assigned its beneficial interest to Avelo =ortgage) W Note the
typical assignment of the !eed of 5rust together with Rnotes thereinS (5he 8ontenot
case sees this as proper even though =)20 does not, and has never held any note in
its possession)+ ($) /&/4% Notice of 0ale by J>0"+ (.) /&/4% (same day but
after the Notice of 0ale was recorded) 0ubstitution of 5rustee was recorded
substituting J>0" for 8irst American 5itle (note, apparently this document was
e9ecuted on 3///4% prior to the notice of default being recorded by J>0")F
5hereafter, the property was sold at non6Gudicial foreclosure trustee sale on %/43+ 5he
purchaser at the foreclosure sale was Avelo =ortgage, allegedly paying .44k for the
property+ Avelo recorded the 5rustees !eed upon sale+ After the sale, BC?NB (the
original borrower), Juitclaimed his interest to 8erguson (the ;laintiff in this action)
on 7//%/4&+ 8erguson recorded his Juitclaim deed on %//4& and brought suit to
Juiet 5itle against Avelo =ortgage arguing the foreclosure sale was illegal as Avelo
received no valid interest from =)20 in the Assignment of !eed of 5rust since
=)20 had no note to assign, and thus Avelo had no authority to foreclose+ ?nder
this theory, 8erguson argued there was no re*uirement to tender the full amount of
the loan balance to try to set aside the foreclosure sale and claim the property as his
own since he was challenging the foreclosure RsaleS and not the foreclosure
RprocedureS+ In addition, 8erguson argued there can be no tender rule re*uirement
where Avelo is not the true beneficiary (since they never got the note+ 8erguson also
sued BC?NB for fraud+ 5he "ourt disagreed with the ;laintiff 8erguson, and held
that the tender rule applies whether or not Avelo had any note+ Bere is the relevant
language of the case# ($) 5he power of sale in a deed of trust allows a beneficiary
recourse to the security without the necessity of a Gudicial action+ (0ee =elendreL
v+ + + + Investment, Inc+ (/44') /% "al+App+.th /$3, /.& N/7 "al+2ptr+$d .$O+)
Absent any evidence to the contrary, a nonGudicial foreclosure sale is presumed to
have been conducted regularly and fairly+ ("iv+ "ode, M /&/.+) Bowever,
irregularities in a nonGudicial trusteeHs sale may be grounds for setting it aside if they
are preGudicial to the party challenging the sale+ (0ee >o v+ <ensen (/44) 33
"al+App+.th 4&$, 4&%64&3 N47 "al+2ptr+/d ..$OF see also Angell v+ 0uperior
"ourt (&&&) %$ "al+App+.th 7&, %44 N37 "al+2ptr+/d 7'%O NEaIn order to challenge
the sale successfully there must be evidence of a failure to comply with the
procedural re*uirements for the foreclosure sale that caused preGudice to the person
attacking the sale+IEO+) 0etting aside a nonGudicial foreclosure sale is an e*uitable
remedy+ (>o v+ <ensen, supra, 33 "al+App+.th at p+ 4&3 NEA debtor may apply to a
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT ./
court of e*uity to set aside a trust deed foreclosure on allegations of unfairness or
irregularity that, coupled with the inade*uacy of price obtained at the sale, mean that
it is appropriate to invalidate the sale+EO+) A court will not grant e*uitable relief to a
plaintiff unless the plaintiff does e*uity+ (0ee Arnolds =anagement "orp+ v+ )ischen
(&3.) '3 "al+App+$d '%', '%36'%& N/4' "al+2ptr+ 'OF see also $ Ditkin,
0ummary of "al+ >aw (4th ed+ /44') )*uity, M 7, pp+ /376/3%+) 5hus, RNiOt is settled
that an action to set aside a trusteeHs sale for irregularities in sale notice or procedure
should be accompanied by an offer to pay the full amount of the debt for which the
property was security+S (Arnolds =anagement "orp+ v+ )ischen, supra, '3
"al+App+$d at p+ '%3F see also 8;"I 2)6BA- 4 v+ ) P @ Investments, >td+ (&3&)
/4% "al+App+$d 43, 4// N/'' "al+2ptr+ '%O Nrationale behind tender rule is that
irregularities in foreclosure sale do not damage plaintiff where plaintiff could not
redeem property had sale procedures been properO+) Bowever, a tender may not be
re*uired where it would be ine*uitable to do so+ (0ee Anofrio v+ 2ice (&&%) ''
"al+App+.th .$, ./. N7. "al+2ptr+/d %.OF see also !imock v+ )merald ;roperties
(/444) 3 "al+App+.th 373, 3%763%3 N&% "al+2ptr+/d /''O Nwhen new trustee has
been substituted, subse*uent sale by former trustee is void, not merely voidable, and
no tender needed to set aside saleO+) 0pecifically, Raif the NplaintiffIsO action attacks
the validity of the underlying debt, a tender is not re*uired since it would constitute
an affirmative of the debt+HS (Anofrio v+ 2ice, supra, '' "al+App+.th at p+ ./.+)
Appellants contend they are not challenging irregularities in the foreclosure
proceeding+ 2ather, they argue that respondent is not the holder of the underlying
promissory note and therefore cannot invoke the tender rule against them+ In their
complaint, appellants alleged that New "entury remains in possession of the
promissory note and that appellants owe no obligation to respondent+ An appeal,
appellants contend that whether respondent holds the promissory note is a factual
dispute, and sustaining respondentHs demurrer presupposes that respondent has
authority to enforce the loan obligation+ 5hey assert that while =)20 had the
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT .$
authority to transfer its beneficial interest under the deed of trust, there is no evidence
that =)20, which was acting as a nominee of New "entury, held the promissory
note and was authoriLed to assign the note itself to respondent+ 5he role of =)20 is
central to the issues in this appeal+ Ra=)20 is a private corporation that administers
the =)20 0ystem, a national electronic registry that tracks the transfer of ownership
interests and servicing rights in mortgage loans+ 5hrough the =)20 0ystem, =)20
becomes the mortgagee of record for participating members through assignment of
the membersH interests to =)20+ =)20 is listed as the grantee in the official records
maintained at county register of deeds offices+ 5he lenders retain the promissory
notes, as well as the servicing rights to the mortgages+ 5he lenders can then sell these
interests to investors without having to record the transaction in the public record+
=)20 is compensated for its services through fees charged to participating =)20
members+HS (@omes v+ "ountrywide Bome >oans, Inc+ (/4) &/ "al+App+.th .&,
' N/ "al+2ptr+$d 3&O (@omes v+ "ountrywide), *uoting =ortgage )lectronic
2egistration 0ystems, Inc+ v+ Nebraska !ept+ of -anking P 8inance (/44') /%4 Neb+
'/& N%4. N+D+/d %3., %3'O+) (.) Appellants cite two federal cases for the proposition
that =)20, as the nominee of the lender under a deed of trust, does not possess the
underlying promissory note and cannot assign it, absent evidence of an e9plicit
authoriLation from the original lender+ (0ee 0a9on =ortgage 0ervices, Inc+ v+ Billery
(N+!+"al+, !ec+ &, /443, No+ "6436.$'%) /443 ?+0+!ist+ >e9is 444'7F see also In re
Agard (-ankr+ )+!+N+C+ /4) ... -+2+ /$+) Not all courts agree on this issue and
appellants do not distinguish nor address other cases that have upheld =)20Hs ability
to assign a mortgage+ (0ee ?0 -ank, N+A+ v+ 8lynn(N+C+0up+ /44) /% =isc+$d 34/
N3&% N+C+0+/d 3'', 3'&O Nassignee of =)20 has standing to initiate foreclosure
proceeding because where Ean entity such as =)20 is identified in the mortgage
indenture as the nominee of the lender and as the mortgagee of record and the
mortgage indenture confers upon such nominee all of the powers of such lender, its
successors and assigns, a written assignment of the note and mortgage by =)20, in
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT ..
its capacity as nominee, confers good title to the assignee and is not defective for lack
of an ownership interest in the note at the time of the assignmentEOF see also "rum v+
>a0alle -ank, N+A+ (Ala+"iv+App+ /44&) '' 0o+$d /77, /7&+) De are not bound by
federal district and bankruptcy court decisions, and the cases cited by appellants are
in direct conflict with persuasive "alifornia case law+ In @omes v+ "ountrywide,
supra, &/ "al+App+.th .&, plaintiff @omes obtained a loan from Q- Bome
=ortgage "ompany (Q- Bome) to finance a real estate purchase+ Be e9ecuted a
promissory note secured by a deed of trust naming Q- Bome as the lender and
=)20 as Q- BomeHs nominee and beneficiary under the deed of trust+ (@omes v+
"ountrywide, supra, &/ "al+App+.th at p+ '+) 5he deed of trust contained a
provision granting =)20 the power to foreclose and sell the property in the event of
a default+ (Ibid+) @omes defaulted on his payments and was mailed a notice of default
by 2econ5rust, which identified itself as an agent for =)20+ Attached was a
declaration signed by "ountrywide Bome >oans, acting as the loan servicer+ (Ibid+)
@omes filed suit against "ountrywide Bome >oans, 2econ5rust and =)20 for
wrongful initiation of foreclosure, alleging =)20 did not have authority to initiate
the foreclosure because it did not possess the note and was not authoriLed by its
current owner to proceed with foreclosure+ (Id+ at p+ '/+) !efendants demurred,
arguing, among other things, that @omes was re*uired to plead tender
to maintain a cause of action for wrongful foreclosure and that the terms of the
deed of trust authoriLed =)20 to initiate a foreclosure proceeding+ 5he trial court
sustained the demurrer without leave to amend+ (Ibid+) An appeal, the court affirmed
the order, finding that @omes could not seek Gudicial intervention in a nonGudicial
foreclosure before the foreclosure has been completed+ (@omes v+ "ountrywide,
supra, &/ "al+App+.th at p+ '.+) Nonetheless, the appellate court reached the
merits of @omesHs claim as an independent ground for affirming the order sustaining
the demurrer+ 5he court reGected @omesHs argument that =)20 lacked authority to
initiate the foreclosure procedure because the deed of trust e9plicitly provided =)20
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT .'
with the authority to do so+ 5he court found that the Rdeed of trust contains no
suggestion that the lender or its successors and assigns must provide @omes with
assurances that =)20 is authoriLed to proceed with a foreclosure at the time it is
initiated+S (Id+ at p+ '%+) 5hus, @omes acknowledged =)20Hs authority to
foreclose by entering into the deed of trust+ (Ibid+) <ust as in @omes v+ "ountrywide,
the deed of trust in this case specifically states# R-orrower understands and agrees
that =)20 holds only legal title to the interests granted by -orrower in this 0ecurity
Instrument, but, if necessary to comply with law or custom, =)20 (as nominee for
>ender and >enderHs successors and assigns) has the right# to e9ercise any or all of
those interests, including, but not limited to, the right to foreclose and sell the
;ropertyF and to take any action re*uired of >ender including, but not limited to,
releasing and canceling this 0ecurity Instrument+S (') Appellants concede that =)20
had the authority to assign its beneficial interest to respondent+Accordingly,
respondent had the same authority to initiate foreclosure proceedings+ And while
@omes v+ "ountrywide did not address the tender issue, it does not follow that a
beneficiary may initiate nonGudicial foreclosure proceedings under a deed of trust
without the original promissory note, but cannot seek tender from a defaulting
borrower attempting to set aside the foreclosure+ Although "alifornia courts have not
resolved this issue (see =iller P 0tarr, "al+ 2eal )state ($d ed+ /446/4 0upp+)
!eeds of 5rust and =ortgages, M 4#$&#4, p+ .), several federal district courts in this
state have upheld a beneficiaryHs authority to initiate foreclosure proceedings and
invoke the tender rule against a defaulting borrower, even when the beneficiary is not
the holder of the original promissory note+ 5hose courts have noted that R"alifornia
law adoes not re*uire possession of the note as a precondition to NnonGudicialO
foreclosure under a !eed of 5rust+HS (<ensen v+ Juality >oan 0ervice "orp+ ()+!+"al+
/44) %4/ 8+0upp+/d 3$, 3&F see also Adinma v+ Aurora >oan 0ervices
(N+!+"al+, =ar+ /$, /44, No+ "64&6.7%. )!>) /44 ?+0+ !ist+ >e9is /3$.%F see
also =orgera v+ "ountrywide Bome >oans, Inc+()+!+"al+, <an+ , /44, No+ /#4&6
cv64.%76=")6@@B) /44 ?+0+!ist+ >e9is /4$%, p+ b/ N=)20, as nominee of
lender, has authority to initiate nonGudicial foreclosure without underlying promissory
noteO+) =oreover, in cases involving an assignment of a deed of trust from =)20 to
a third party, courts have invoked the tender rule despite arguments that =)20 did
not have the authority to assign its interest under the deed of trust without the
promissory note+ (0ee >ai v+ Juality >oan 0ervice "orp+("+!+ "al+, Aug+ /7, /44,
No+ ", 46/$43 ;0@ (;>A9)) /44 ?+0+ !ist+ >e9is &%/+) Appellants offer no
authority, state or federal, to support the legal loophole they claim for defaulting
borrowers and their successors+ Appellants also argue that respondent was not
authoriLed to substitute Juality as the trustee prior to becoming the beneficiary under
the deed of trust+ Juality initiated the foreclosure proceedings when it was not the
trustee and therefore had no legal right to do so+ ?nder a deed of trust, the trustee
may be substituted by a Rsubstitution e9ecuted and acknowledged by# (A) all of the
beneficiaries under the trust deed, or their successors in interest+ + +F or (-) the holders
of more than '4 percent of the record beneficial interest of a series of notes secured
by the same real property or of undivided interests in a note secured by real property
e*uivalent to a series transaction, e9clusive of any notes or interests of a licensed real
estate broker that is the issuer or servicer of the notes or interests or of any affiliate of
that licensed real estate broker+S ("iv+ "ode, M /&$.a, subd+ (a)()+) (7) De agree
with appellants that respondent did not have the authority to e9ecute a substitution of
trustee until =)20 assigned the deed of trust to it+ 5hus, JualityHs August $, /44%
notice of default was defective+ Nonetheless, Buynh had more than three months to
satisfy his obligation before Juality e9ecuted a notice of sale+ 5he substitution of
trustee was effective when respondent became the beneficiary under the deed of trust
and when the substitution was recorded on November &, /44%+ ("iv+ "ode, M /&$.a,
subd+ (a)(.) NE8rom the time the substitution is filed for record, the new trustee shall
succeed to all the powers, duties, authority, and title granted and delegated to the
trustee named in the deed of trust+EO+) 5hus, the notice of sale was valid+Juality then
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT .%
completed the foreclosure in <uly /443, long after its substitution as trustee took
effect+ 5his situation is distinct from other cases that have voided a nonGudicial
foreclosure sale when a party other than the trustee initiated the proceeding and
completed the sale without having been substituted in as the trustee+ (0ee ;ro ,alue
;roperties, Inc+ v+ Juality >oan 0ervice "orp+ (/44&) %4 "al+App+.th '%&, '3$ N33
"al+2ptr+$d $3OF see also !imock v+ )merald ;roperties, supra, 3 "al+App+.th at
pp+ 3%763%3 Nforeclosure sale void where original trustee completed foreclosure sale
after being replaced by new trusteeO+) Appellants offer no authority for the
proposition that the defective nature of the initial notice of default corrupted all
subse*uent steps in the nonGudicial foreclosure proceeding such that the sale was
void, not merely voidable+ 5hus, this ruling seems to leave open a tiny door for
situations where the wrong trustee sells the property at foreclosure sale+ In those
situations, the sale may be ,AI! with no obligation to tender+ 0o, looking for
grounds to challenge the 0ubstitution of 5rustee may be one of the few remaining
challenges in "alifornia to either enGoin or set aside a wrongful foreclosure sale
despite courts recogniLing the the foreclosure procedure must be valid+ 5he "ourt
cited 5ender statute in "alifornia# (3) A tender is an offer of performance made with
the intent to e9tinguish the obligation+ ("iv+ "ode, M .3'+) It must be unconditional
("iv+ "ode, M .&.) and offer full performance to be valid ("iv+ "ode, M .37)+ "ivil
"ode section '/ provides# RIf the performance of an obligation be prevented by the
creditor, the debtor is entitled to all the benefits which he would have obtained if it
had been performed by both parties+S NA5)# I do not believe the Rtender ruleS is a
hard and fast rule+ Cou have to look at what your facts are+ 0ome cases have held that
a tender may not be re*uired where it would be ine*uitable to do so+ (0ee Anofrio v+
2ice (&&%) '' "al+App+.th .$, ./.F see also !imock v+ )merald ;roperties (which
was actually cited by the 8erguson court) (/444) 3 "al+App+.th 373, 3%763%3
Nwhich held that there was no re*uirement to tender when the wrong trustee sells the
property, in these instances, the sale is ,AI!, not merely ,AI!A->), and no tender
was needed to challenge the ,AI! saleO+) 5here are other cases that talk about ,AI!
vs+ ,AI!A->)+ Bowever, you need to be aware of the rule, and there will be tender
challenges raised in almost every case of wrongful foreclosure so there has to be a
strategy, and cases to deal with that+ Also, where the ;laintiffHs lawsuit challenges the
validity of an alleged underlying debt, tender is not re*uired since it would constitute
an affirmation of the debt+S 0ee Anofrio v+ 2ice, supra, '' "al+App+.th at p+ ./.+
NA5)/# 5his case also discussed the re*uirements of a Juiet 5itle lawsuit in
"alifornia# (/) Bere, appellants sought to *uiet title against respondents and set aside
the trustee sale at which respondents purchased the property+ In order to state a viable
cause of action for *uiet title, a complaint must include# R(a) A description of the
property that is the subGect of the action+ + + + NcO (b) 5he title of the plaintiff as to
which a determination under this chapter is sought and the basis of the title+ + + + NcO
(c) 5he adverse claims to the title of the plaintiff against which a determination is
sought+ NcO (d) 5he date as of which the determination is sought+ + + + NcO (e) A prayer
for the determination of the title of the plaintiff against the adverse claims+S ("ode
"iv+ ;roc+, M %7+4/4+) 5o bring an action to *uiet title a plaintiff must allege he or
she has paid any debt owed on the property+ 0himpones v+ 0tickney (&$.) /& "al+
7$%, 7.& NENAO mortgagor cannot *uiet his title against the mortgagee without paying
the debt secured+SO+) 5he complaint must also be verified (sworn under oath)+
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT .&
DECLARATION OF JAMES S CARPENTIER AND JOAN E: CARPENTIER:
IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER (nd REPLY TO
OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER
+ 5his !eclaration is made pursuant to the provisions of N20 '$+4.', we are presently
in the 0tate of Nevada and I declare under penalty of perGury that the foregoing is true
and correct+
/+ !eclarants are the ;laintiffs in ",4364%4&+
$+ !eclarants aver that the factual statements set for above in this 2eply to Apposition
to ;laintiffIs =otion to 0et Aside and in the earlier filed ;laintiffIs =otion to 0et Aside
are are accurate+
.+ I, <A=)0 0 "A2;)N5I)2 and I, <AAN )+ "A2;)N5I)2 are available to testify, if
necessary, as to these matters+ I declare under penalty of perGury that the foregoing is
true and correct+
)9ecuted on <anuary , /4
T/s/ <ames 0+ "arpentierTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
<A=)0 0 "A2;)N5I)2
;>AIN5I88
/s/ <oan )+ "arpentierTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT
<AAN ) "A2;)N5I)2
;>AIN5I88
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT '4
A88I2=A5IAN ;ursuant to N20 /$&-+4$4
!A5)! this <anuary , /4/#
/s/ (ach "oughlin
(ach "oughlin, )s*+
Attorney for ;laintiffs <oni and <ames "arpentier
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, (ach "oughlin, declare, that on <anuary , /4/, I caused the forgoing to be
deliver to all named !efendantIs in this action, by electronic filing to#
Qristin A+ 0chuler6BintL, )s*+
"hristoper Bunter, )s*+
=c"arthy P Bolthus, >>;
&'4 D+ 0ahara Ave+, 0uite 4
>as ,egas , N, 3&%
;hone# %4/673'64$/&
8a9# 3776$$&6'7&
khintL:mccarthyholthus+com
Atty for !)85I0 2)0I!)N5IA> "2)!I5 0A>?5IAN0 IN", AN! J?A>I5C
>AAN 0)2,I") "A2;A2A5IANI0
And via delivering to their attorneyIs of record by efiling (if he is an efiler), fa9,
email and depositing a true and correct copy of this document in the ?0 mail on this
date addressed to#
)ric -+ (imbelman, )s*+
;eel -rimley, >>;
/4. )+ =adison, 0uite 44
0eattle , DA &3//
;hone# /476%%46$$$&
8a9# /476%%46$.&4
eLimbelman:peelbrimley+com
Atty for !)85I0DIN!0A2 =ANA@)=)5N "A+ AN! A""2)!I5)!
BA=) >)N!)20, IN"+ A0 0?"")00A2 IN IN5)2)05 5A AA=)0 8?N!IN@
"A2;A2A5IAN !-A AA=)0 BA=) >AAN
!A5)! this <anuary th, /4/
/s/ (ach "oughlin
(ach "oughlin, )s*+
Attorney for ;laintiffs <oni and <ames "arpentier
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT '/
INDEK TO EKHIDITSF
+ )YBI-I5 # AA=)0 =A25@A@) IN,)05=)N5 52?05 /44'6/ which
would strongly indicated that the "arpentierIs loan was 0)"?2I5I()!+ It
appears the EpoolE can be found here#
http#//www+secinfo+com/K/0)"/8ilings+asp?
"IQU$/&4&7PAsU-8A"0PAs8ilerU8PAsAwnerU-APAsIssuerU"0 Aames
=ortgage Investment 5rust /44'6/F Ane () page+
/+ )YBI-I5 /# where the citiLens of Nevada get to have lifetime appointee
8ederal "ourt Gudges making, or seemingly making, Nevada >aw in
contravention of the doctrines of abstention, comity, etc+ something so
elo*uently argued against by the venerable @eof @iles, )s* (no connection or
affiliation to the undersigned, Gust a fan of his work) in his /3< letter in =avesF
5hree ($) pages+
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT '$
EXHIBIT 1
F I L E D
Electronically
01-11-2012:04:18:26 PM
Clerk of the Court
SEC Info Home Search My Interests Help Sign In Please Sign In
Aames Mortgage Investment Trust 2005-2
Filings as: Filer Owner Issuer
15 Filings Click on a Filing-Type to view it List the Documents within these Filings
in Show and
Help... Wildcards: ? (any letter), * (many). Logic: for Docs: & (and), | (or); for Text: | (anywhere), "(&)" (near).
As Of Filer Filing For/On/As Docs:Size Issuer Agent
3/ 29/ 06 Aames Mor t gage I nvest ment . . 2005- 2 10- K 12/ 31/ 05 5: 20 Si dl ey Aust i n LLP/ FA
2/ 23/ 06 Aames Mor t gage I nvest ment . . 2005- 2 8- K/ A{8, 9} 10/ 25/ 05 1: 38 Nor west Asset Sec. . Tr ust
1/ 26/ 06 Aames Mor t gage I nvest ment . . 2005- 2 15- 15D 1/ 26/ 06 1: 3 Nor west Asset Sec. . Tr ust
1/ 06/ 06 Aames Mor t gage I nvest ment . . 2005- 2 8- K{8, 9} 12/ 27/ 05 1: 37 Nor west Asset Sec. . Tr ust
6/ 15/ 05 Aames Mor t gage I nvest ment . . 2005- 2 8- K{8, 9} 5/ 25/ 05 6: 358 Si dl ey Aust i n LLP/ FA
6/ 02/ 05 Cwabs I nc 424B5 1: 110 Aames Mor t gage I nvest ment . . 2005- 2 Capi t al Syst ems 01/ FA
Filing Types:
10-K Annual Report Form 10-K.
15-15D Notice of Suspension of Duty to File Reports Form 15.
424B5 Prospectus Rule 424(b)(5).
8-K Current Report Form8-K { Post-8/23/04... Item 1: Business & Operations; 2: Financial Info.; 3: Securities & Trading;
4: Accountants & Accounting; 5: Governance & Management; 6: Asset-Backed Securities; 7: Reg. FD; 8: Events; 9: Financials Pre-8/23
/04... Item1: Control; 2: Assets; 3: Bankruptcy; 4: Accountants; 5: Events; 6: Resignations; 7: Financials; 8: Year; 9: Reg. FD; 10: Ethics;
11: Suspension; 12: Results }.
/A Amendment to or Amended version of a previous filing of this type.
Top
Sponsored Ads...
Copyright 2012 Fran Finnegan & Company. All Rights Reserved.
About Privacy Redactions Help Wed, 11 Jan 07:48:58.1 GMT

SEC Info - Aames Mortgage Investment Trust 2005-2 - Filings - p. 1 http://www.secinfo.com/$/SEC/Filings.asp?CIK=1329096&As=BFOC...
1 of 1 1/10/2012 11:51 PM
EXHIBIT 2
F I L E D
Electronically
01-11-2012:04:18:26 PM
Clerk of the Court
1
The only caveat concerning that holding was that such prior action would have to sound in rem
or quasi in rem, for the doctrine to apply, and that question was certified to the Nevada Supreme Court. It
has now been fully briefed there and awaits decision.
Geoffrey Lynn Giles and Associates
Law Offices
527 California Avenue, Suite 1 775.329.4999
Post Office Box 93 1.800.234.5068
Reno, Nevada 89509 fax: 775.786.1684

November 25, 2011
Clerk, Court of Appeals
PO Box 193939
San Francisco, CA 94119-3939
Re: Rule 28(j) Letter, Docket 10-17230
9
th
Cir Docket Number: Maves v. First Horizon Home Loans
Date of Hearing: December 9, 2011
Dear Clerk;
On November 17, 2011, I was associated in as co-counsel with Terry Thomas on
behalf of appellant Tara Maves. I will take part of the oral argument scheduled
for December 9, 2011. I write in order to present to the panel, certain additional
information that is relevant to this appeal, in the form of cases decided since it was
taken.
One of the issues presented relates to the refusal of the District Court to remand
this suit which sounded in state law. This implicates the issue of the existence or
non-existence of federal jurisdiction, which may of course, be raised at any time.
Closely related to subject matter jurisdiction is the doctrine of abstention. This
has been addressed recently by this Honorable Court.
In the case of; Chapman v. Deutsche Bank, 651 F.3d 1039, (9
th
Cir. 2011) this
court held that Prior Exclusive Jurisdiction would bar removal of a quiet
title/wrongful foreclosure case to the federal courts, if an Unlawful Detainer action
and/or Quiet Title action was previously commenced in state court.
1
In so holding
this court noted that abstention may not merely be a discretionary rule:
Case: 10-17230 11/25/2011 ID: 7978658 DktEntry: 36-1 Page: 1 of 3
However, [c]omity or abstention doctrines may, in various
circumstances, permit or require the federal court to stay or dismiss
the federal action in favor of the state-court litigation... it [prior
exclusive jurisdiction] is no mere discretionary abstention rule.
Rather it is a mandatory jurisdictional limitation- at 5-6 Slip Op.
[emphasis added]
In the case of; Cervantes v. Countrywide et al., 656 F.3d 1034, (9
th
Cir. 2011), this
court provided guidance as to the boundaries to be observed by District Courts
sitting in diversity, as to novel issues of state laws.
Although a federal court exercising diversity jurisdiction is at
liberty to predict the future course of [a states] law, plaintiffs
choosing the federal forum... [are] not entitled to trailblazing
initiatives under [state law] Ed Peters Jewelry Co. v C&J Jewelry
Co., Inc., 124 F.3d 252, 262 -63 (1
st
Cir. 1997) (affirming dismissal
of a wrongful foreclosure claim when no such claim existed under
state law.) [emphasis added] At Slip Op. pp 16992.
This being the case, it is respectfully submitted that the District Court exceeded
those bounds when it ruled as it did, in the instant case below. For District Courts,
sitting in diversity, to persist in addressing novel issues of state law, is nothing less
than a trailblazing initiative. Emblematic of the problem of federal courts
predicting as to how the Supreme Court of Nevada would rule, on unanswered
questions of state law, are the following illustrations. In; North v. Bank of
America, ___F.Supp 2d___, 2011 WL 3419515 (D.Nev. 2011), the District Court
noted that;
the ever expanding body of case law within this district holds that
the Nevada law governing non-judicial foreclosure, NRS 107.080,
does not require a lender to produce the original note, nor does it
require that ReconTrust be substituted as trustee under the deed of
trust as prerequisites to non-judicial foreclosure proceedings, at Slip
Op 3.
The court went on to cite no less than six (6) other federal District Court opinions
in support of this proposition, in spite of the fact that no federal court can bind a
state court on an issue of state law, Cf. Leavitt v. J ane, 518 U.S. 137, 146, 116
S.Ct. 2068, 2073 (1996). The precise issue at stake there has never been
addressed by the Nevada Supreme Court, and can not be so addressed, so long as
virtually all suits brought in the courts of Nevada, are removed to federal court.
Central to the proper administration of justice under our dual sovereign system,
is uniformity of decision making and consistency between courts. This means
respect for the sphere of influence that is reserved solely for state authorities, under
the general rubric of comity and federalism. In that connection, the District
Courts are not always in agreement among themselves, concerning the application
of state law. For instance, in Chase v. United Residential Mortgage, ___F.Supp
2d___, 2011 WL 198008 (D. Nev. 2011), one District Judge respectfully disagreed
with another, as to the interpretation of the Nevada Collection Agency law, NRS
649.171. This is something the Nevada Supreme Court has never addressed, and
may never get a chance to address.
It is respectfully suggested that the outcome of a particular litigants case should
not be a function of the random assignment of judges to the lawsuits, that are
inevitably removed by bank counsel. This is not only unseemly, but illustrates just
how far the litigation process has devolved, at the behest of bank counsel, in
disdaining the prerogative of the Nevada Supreme Court. Indeed, there is every
indication from that court that it welcomes the certification of novel, and hitherto
unaddressed, issues of state law.
The very tender of an amicus brief, in this appeal, by the trade association of
foreclosure trustees, shows the lengths to which the industry has gone to elude
holdings from the courts of Nevada. The amici urge the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals to determine the nature and effect of Nevada state collection law, the
Nevada Supreme Court having failed to be presented with the opportunity to do so.
Counsel for appellant Maves respectfully suggests that the task be declined, in
favor of a more general rule that discourages District Courts from hearing these
kinds of cases on abstention grounds. In our view, this is requisite to preserve the
decorum and protocol that is a necessary adjunct to a dual system of jurisprudence.
Yours truly,
/s/ Geoff Giles
Geoff Giles
/s/ Terry Thomas
Terry Thomas
GG:glg
c. all parties
SUPPLEMENTAL TO REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S
EMERGENCY MOTION FOR TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
PLEASE NOTE THAT THE UNDERSIGNED COUNSEL APOLOGIZES FOR
THE SOMEWHAT SLAPDASH NATURE OF THIS FILING, HOWEVER, IT
MUST BE EXCUSED TO SOME EXTENT CONSIDERING THE
UNDERSIGNED JUST SPENT ! HOURS IN JAIL AFTER THE RENO POLICE
SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'SEMERGENCY MOTION FOR TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN THE ALTERNATIVE;
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1
Document Code: 3795
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
NV Ba No: 9!73
1!"" E. 9th #t. $"
%eno, NV &95'1
(ele: 775)""9)*737
+a,: 9!9)**7)7!'"
-o .e /..ellant
ZachCoughlin0hotmail.com
/ttone1 2o 3oni and 3ames Ca.entie
3/4E# C/%-EN(5E%, E( /6,
-lainti22
7.
//4E# +8ND5N9 C:%- E(/6,
De2endant

Case No: CV'&)'17'9
De.t No: 7
SUPPLEMENTAL REPLY TO
OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S
TRO/INJUNCTION; or PLED IN THE
ALTERNATIVE; MOTION TO SET
ASIDE ORDER GRANTING
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
5N (;E #EC:ND 38D5C5/6 D5#(%5C( C:8%( :+ (;E
#(/(E :+ NEV/D/ 5N /ND +:%
(;E C:8N(< :+ =/#;:E
F I L E D
Electronically
01-13-2012:07:36:54 AM
Clerk of the Court
DEPARTMENT "WITH THE HELP OF OPPOSING COUNSEL IN THE
UNDERSIGNED EVICTION FROM HIS LAW OFFICE CASE, RICHARD G#
HILL, ES$% ARRESTED THE UNDERSIGNED FOR &JAYWAL'ING& OR
&FAILURE TO USE A SIDEWAL' WHERE PRESENT& OR SOME OTHER
SUCH CHARGE WHILE THE UNDERSIGNED WAS IN THE COURSE OF
FILMING THE DESTRUCTION OF ITEMS OF PERSONAL PROPERTY "LI'E
THE LAST THING THE UNDERSIGNED'S GRANDMOTHER GAVE HIM
BEFORE SHE DIED, LI'E THE CARICTURE DRAWING OF THE
UNDERSIGNEDS GIRLFRIEND AND DOMESTIC PARTNER FOR FIVE
YEARS WHOSE !! YEAR OLD COUSIN JUST DIED IN A CAR ACCIDENT
DAYS AGO% PEACEABLY AND ON PUBLIC PROPERTY AND AFTER A
RENO PD OFFICER WHO ACTUALLY HAS SOME CLASS INFORMED
RICHARD HILL THAT THE UNDERSIGNED WAS NOT DOING ANYTHING
ILLEGAL# BUT THEN IN COMES OFFICER DEL VECHIO WHO ACTUALLY
&DREW DOWN& AFTER SCREACHING TO A HALT AND VEERING ACROSS
THE LANE OF ONCOMING TRAFFIC ON THE UNDERSIGNED THIS
SUMMER IN FRONT OF THE SAME LAW OFFICE AT NIGHT DUE TO THE
UNDERSIGNED'S MOUNTAIN BI'E, ALLEGEDLY LAC'ING A PROPER
LIGHT, AND NOTHING ELSE# TODAY, WHILE BEING ARRESTED FOR
JAYWAL'ING "DESPITE THE FACT THAT RICHARD HILL'S CREW OF
MOVERS HAD THEIR TRUC' PAR'ED IN THE MIDDLE OF THE
SIDEWAL' THE UNDERSIGNED WAS ON% RICHARD HILL WENT BAC'
TO A PLACE HE REALLY, REALLY LI'ES, THE RENO JUSTICE COURT,
AND APPARENTLY GOT HIMSELF A PROTECTION ORDER, THEN DROVE
OFF IN ONE OF HIS APPROXIMATELY PORCHES WEARING A SHIRT
WITH FLAMING S'ULLS ON IT IN A REPEATING ED HARDY INSPIRED
DESIGN# THE UNDERSIGNED WAS DENIED ANY PHONE CALLS AT THE
WASHOE COUNTY JAIL FOR AT LEAST ( HOURS, IMMEDIATELY
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT "
PLACED IN A SOLITARY CONFINEMENT STYLE ICE LOC'ER DESPITE
HAVING MADE NO DEMONSTRATION OR RESISTENCE OR
DEMONSTRATING ANY INAPPROPRIATE CONDUCT TO THE JAIL STAFF,
WHEREUPON SEVERAL JAIL NURSE REFUSED TO PROVIDE MEDICAL
CARE "EXCESSIVE FORCE WAS USED DURING THE ARREST, WHICH
APPARENTLY, WAS CONDUCTED BY AN OFFICER LEEDY THAT OFFICER
DEL VECHIO WAS &TRAINING&, THEN MONEY WAS STOLEN FROM THE
UNDERSIGNED BY THE JAIL STAFF, A DEPUTY ADAMS, IN FRONT OF
DEPUTY DOCIO INFORMED THE UNDERSIGNED THAT HE &DIDN'T GIVE
A SHIT IF A DIPSHIT LI'E YOU HAS LIFE THREATENING MEDICAL
ISSUES& AND REFUSED TO SUMMON A NURSE# THE WASHOE COUNTY
JAIL FOUND IT APPROPRIATE TO FINALLY RELEASE THE
UNDERSIGNED FROM JAIL AFTER MA'ING HIM PAY SOME OF THE
LAST MONEY HE HAD FOR &BAIL&, TA'ING MOST OF THE REST OF THE
MONEY THE UNDERSIGNED HAD AND CLAIMING IT WAS EITHER
&LOST& OR THAT &THEY WERE WRONG EARLIER WHEN THE SWORE
THAT THAT AMOUNT WAS ALL YOU WOULD NEED TO BAIL OUT&
WHEREUPON THE JAIL STAFF DECIDED TO POC'ET CASH FROM THE
UNDERSIGNED, WITHOUT HIS CONSENT, PRIOR TO RELEASE# THE JAIL
SAW FIT TO RELEASE THE UNDERSIGNED ONLY MINUTES AFTER THE
LAST BUS FOR THE NIGHT LEFT PARR BLVD, AND AT )** AT NIGHT,
WITH THE UNDERSIGNED DRESS ONLY IN A THIN SHIRT AND JEANS,
THE TEMPERATURE A FREEZING !+ DEGREES, AND THE UNDERSIGNED
HAVING ,! IN HIS POC'ET, WHEREUPON THE UNDERSIGNED CALLED
- AND WAS HUNG UP ON BY SUPERVISOR &'ARI& WHO INFORMED
THE UNDERSIGNED THAT SHE 'NEW EVERYTHING THE RENO PD
COULD OR WOULD DO AND THAT THEY WOULDN'T DO ANYTHING
WRONG, AND THEN 'ARI REFUSED TO DIVULGE THE IDENTITY OF THE
- OPERATORS WHO INFORMED THE UNDERSIGNED THAT
HYPTHERMIA OR EXPOSURE TO COLD WEATHER DID NOT CONSITUTE
AN EMERGENCY, NEITHER WOULD A SITUATION WHERE POLICE OR
SHERIFF PERSONNEL WERE CONSPIRING TO MURDER SOMEONE RISE
TO THE LEVEL OF EMERGENCY# FINALLY THE UNDERSIGNED GOT TO
HIS VEHICLE, NEAR THE SIENNA HOTEL, ONLY TO PROMPTLY BE
PULLED OVER BY +.( ARMED RENO PD OFFICERS WHOM CITED THE
FACT THAT THE UNDERSIGNED LICENSE PLATE WAS GONE "IT HAD,
APPARENTLY, MYSTERIOUSLY DISAPPEARED WHILE THE
UNDERSIGNED WAS IN JAIL FOR A CUSTODIAL ARREST FOR
&JAYWAL'ING&, SOMETHING RICHARD HILL, ES$# DID IN FRONT OF
THESE VERY SAME OFFICERS SEVERAL TIMES WHILE THE
UNDERSIGNED WAS IN THE PATROL CAR%, INCLUDING ONE WHOM THE
UNDERSIGNED HAS SUBMITTED A COMPLAINT REGARDING TO THE
RENO PD JUST DAYS BEFORE, OFFICER NICHOLAS DURALDE, WHOM
WAS PRESENT WHEN OFFICER RON ROSA ATTEMPTED TO EXTORT A
CONFESSION OR CONSENT TO SEARCH FROM THE UNDERSIGNED
DURING AN INCIDENT IN AUGUST BY, IN ROSA'S WORDS &CALLING THE
STATE BAR& AND DEFAMING THE UNDERSIGNED, WHEREUPON
OFFICER DURALDE COMMITTED EGREGIOUS POLICE MISCONDUCT# IT
IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT RENO PD OFFICER CARTER PREVIOUSLY
INFORMED THE UNDERSIGNED THAT &RICHARD HILL PAYS HIM A LOT
OF MONEY AND THEREFORE HE WILL ARREST WHO RICHARD HILL
SAYS TO AND HE WILL DO WHAT RICHARD HILLS SAYS&# PREVIOUSLY,
RENO PD SARGENT TARTER HAS TIC'ETED THE UNDERSIGNED FOR
FAILURE TO STOP COMPLETELY BEFORE THE WHITE LINE AT A STOP
SIGN, IN A RETALIATORY FASHION, AFTER THE UNDERSIGNED LEFT
RICHARD HILL, ES$#S OFFICE, WHERE RICHARD HILL HAD BEEN
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT !
REFUSING TO TURN OVER THE UNDERSIGNED STATE OF NEVADA
DRIVER'S LICENSE FOR OVER ONE WEE'# FURTHER, RICHARD HILL'S
LICENSED CONTRACTOR "WHOM HAD PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED WHAT
APPEARS TO BE A FRAUDULENT BILL FOR ,*(* TO BOARD UP AND &FIX
A LEA' IN THE BASEMENT& "THE LEA', HE INFORMED THE
UNDERSIGNED, HE ACTUALLY JUST FIXED OUT OF THE &GOODNESS OF
HIS HEART&% AS, SOMEHOW, $UALIFYING AS &REASONABLE STORAGE,
MOVING, AND INVENTORYING EXPENSES& LANDLORD LIEN UNDER NRS
/A#0-*, DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE CONTRACTOR USED THE
UNDERSIGNED'S OWN WOOD AND PLYWOOD TO BOARD UP THE
PROPERTY DESPITE CHARGING ,*(* FOR DOING SO AND WHOM
TODAY WAS THROWING AWAY THE CALIFORNIA NUEROSURGEON,
MATTHEW JOEL MERLISS, MD#'S CARPET, WHILE RICHARD HILL WAS
APPARENTLY READYING HIMSELF TO SUE THE UNDERSIGNED BOTH
FOR THE COST OF DISPOSING IT AND FOR COST OF IT AS PROPERTY,
AND BOTH OF THESE DISCOVERIES SEEMED TO VEX THE
CONTRACTOR SO COMPLETELY THAT HE FELT IS NECESSARY TO
CALL UP RICHARD HILL RIGHT AWAY AND HAVE RICHARD DO HIS
THING WITH THE RENO PD "LI'E WHEN OFFICER CARTER AND
OFFICER LOPEZ ARRESTED THE UNDERSIGNED FOR TRESPASSING
DESPITE NOT ONCE IDENTYING THEMSELVES PRIOR TO ARREST AS
OFFICER AND NO ONE HAVING AS'ED THE UNDERSIGNED TO LEAVE
THE PREMISES, AND WHERE THESE OFFICERS, AGAIN, STRANGELY,
FOUND THE UNDERSIGNED NOT &CANDIDATE FOR A CITATION&# THE
ARREST TODAY WAS PARTICULARLY CONVENIENT FOR RICHARD HILL
CONSIDERING IT PREVENTED ANY FILMING OF THE DESTRUCTION OF
PROPERTY HE WAS ENGAGING IN# RICHARD HILL PREVIOUSLY GAVE
THE UNDERSIGNED A BAG OF TRASH IN RESPONSE TO THE
UNDERSIGNED'S DEMAND THAT HILL CEASE APPLYING AN UNLAWFUL
RENT DISTRAINT TO THE UNDERSIGNED'S CLIENT'S FILES# FURTHER,
WHEN THE UNDERSIGNED REFERENCE THE DAMAGE RICHARD HILL
WAS DOING TO CLIENT'S INTERESTS IN CASES JUST LI'E THE
CARPENTIER'S, RICHARD HILL, IN JUDGE SFERRAZZAS COURT ROOM
WATCHING THE PROCEEDINGS AND PERIODICALLY CROSSING THE
BAR TO PASS POST IT NOTES TO CASEY BA'ER "DESPITE JUDGE
SFERRAZZA DIRECTING HILL AND OTHER WITNESSES TO LEAVE THE
COURTROOM UNTIL CALLED TO TESTIFY% MADE A MASTURBATORY
JESTURE AND EXTREMELY DISMISSIVE AND CRUDE FACIAL
EXPRESSION AS IF TO SIGNAL HOW LITTLE HE CARED ABOUT THE
FORECLOSURE DEFENSE OF MIDDLE CLASS AMERICANS AND CITIZENS
OF WASHOE COUNTY LI'E JOAN AND JIM CARPENTIER#
4u.h1 7. #im.son Dua>Vent Co., 5nc., "''9 =6 !5&*'9 ?=.D.6a."''9@
?holding that an em.lo1e su22icientl1 demonstated good cause to set aside a de2ault
Audgment Bhee the em.lo1e agued that the em.lo1ee did not se7e the em.lo1e 2o
moe than si, months a2te the 2iling o2 the com.laint, se7ed the Bong com.an1, and
the em.lo1e immediatel1 attem.ted to oCtain an e,tension. (he em.lo1e also
immediatel1 2iled a motion to set aside the ent1 o2 de2ault Bhen it leaned that an
e,tension o2 time Bas una7ailaCle. +uthe, the em.lo1e .esented se7eal Dmeitoious
de2ensesE to the em.lo1eeFs claims@. +ed.%.Ci7.-. 55?c@ .o7ides that a cout ma1 set
aside an ent1 o2 de2ault 2o Dgood cause,E and it ma1 set aside a de2ault Audgment unde
+ed.%.Ci7.-. *'?C@. (he undesigned has located thee ?3@ cases in Bhich the 8.#. +i2th
Cicuit Cout o2 /..eals has Ceen con2onted Bith a motion to set aside a de2ault
Audgment Cased u.on a 2ailue to .o7ide notice as equied C1 +ed.%.Ci7.-. 55?C@?"@. 5n
the 2ist case, #a7oetti 7. %odigueG>3imineG, "5" +."d "9' ?5th Ci.195&@, the +i2th
Cicuit concluded that the distict cout eed in 2ailing to set aside a Audgment C1 de2ault
that had Ceen enteed Bithout the notice equied C1 +ed.%.Ci7.-. 55?C@?"@, and the
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT *
de2ault Audgment Bas thee2oe 7acated and the matte emanded 2o 2uthe .oceedings.
5n eaching that conclusion, the +i2th Cicuit onl1 geneall1 e2eed to +ed.%.Ci7.-. *'?C@
as its Casis and did not indicate Bhethe it Bas el1ing u.on a .aticula suCsection o2 that
.o7ision.+N1 +N1. (he cicuits ae s.lit as to Bhethe the 2ailue to .o7ide notice as
equied C1 %ule 55?C@?"@ endes a de2ault Audgment 7oid, unde %ule *'?C@?!@, o Aust
7oidaCle, unde %ule *'?C@?*@. #ee, CitiGens BanH 7. -anes, "'1' =6 1753"9*, >>>>&>9
?*th Ci."'1'@?citing cases 2om 7aious cicuits that ae s.lit on the issue@. =hile the
+i2th CicuitFs decision in #a7oetti suggests that the 2ailue to gi7e notice might ende a
de2ault Audgment 7oid unde %ule *'?C@?!@, the +i2th Cicuit did not s.eci2icall1 el1 u.on
%ule *'?C@?!@ in endeing its decision in that case, and its suCsequent decisions,
discussed in2a, indicate instead that the 2ailue to .o7ide notice as equied C1 %ule
55?C@?"@ endes a de2ault Audgment 7oidaCle unde %ule *'?C@?*@ since the +i2th Cicuit
s.eci2icall1 elies u.on that .o7ision in those cases. I3 #uCsequentl1, the +i2th Cicuit
endeed decisions in Chalton 6. Da7is J Co., -.C. 7. +edde Data Cente, 5nc., 55* +."d
3'& ?5th Ci.1977@ and (une 7. #al7atiea, 5&' +."d -age 3 #li. Co.1, "'11 =6
519'"&" ?4.D.6a.@ ?Cite as: "'11 =6 519'"&" ?4.D.6a.@@ 199 ?5th Ci.197&@, Bheein
it Cased its decisions to 7acate de2ault Audgments on +ed.%.Ci7.-. *'?C@?*@. 5n Coth o2
those cases, the +i2th Cicuit concluded that the de2ault Audgments should Ce 7acated
Cecause o2 the 2ailue to .o7ide notice as equied C1 +ed.%.Ci7.-. 55?C@?"@ and Cecause
the .at1 mo7ing to set aside the de2ault Audgment set 2oth a Dmeitoious de2enseE to the
laBsuit.+N" +N". #ee also, #e7en El7es, 5nc. 7. EsHenaGi, *35 +."d 39* ?5th Ci.19&1@
?Bhee the +i2th Cicuit elected not to chaacteiGe a Audgment as a de2ault Audgment o a
Audgment enteed a2te a tial on the meits, noting that %ule *'?C@ is a..licaCle to Coth
t1.es o2 Audgments. 5n eaching its decision that the %ule *'?C@ motion to 7acate should
ha7e Ceen ganted, the +i2th Cicuit consideed the 2act that ?1@ the mo7ants seeHing to set
aside the Audgment asseted a meitoious de2ense, ?"@ the1 timel1 2iled the motion to set
aside the Audgment Bithin a DeasonaCle timeE Cecause it Bas 2iled Bithin one ?1@ 1ea o2
the Audgment Ceing enteed and Bithin tBel7e ?1"@ da1s o2 the mo7ants oCtaining
HnoBledge o2 the AudgmentK and ?3@ Cecause a Dcon2luence L M o2 unusual cicumstancesE
esulted in the mo7ants not Ceing .esent at an e7identia1 heaing Bhee Audgment Bas
enteed against them@. 5n su..ot o2 his motion to 7acate the de2ault Audgment:nce the
Ca.enties 2ound out that the :de +o #umma1 3udgment e,isted and undestood its
im.act, the1 immediatel1 sought to etain counsel, ha7ing to settle moe the loBest, most
Casest o.tion an1one could imagine, hiing the undesigned a2te eading his incoheent
Caigslist .osting. /nd noB the1 shoB a meitoious de2ense and then some.
6e17a 7. NatFl De2ault #e7icing Co.., "55 -.3d 1"75 ?Ne7."'11@. N5n
6e17a, the Ne7ada #u.eme Cout addessed the issue o2 Bho has
standing to 2oeclose on a .o.et1 .usuant to a deed o2 tust o a
motgage note. /t the outset, the Cout disagees Bith De2endants that
6e17a is o2 no .ecedential 7alue in this suit meel1 Cecause it Bas
.imail1 2ocused on com.liance Bith Ne7adaFs 2oeclosue mediation
statutes. :n the conta1, the 6e17a cout 2ound it necessa1 to
detemine a .at1Fs standing to 2oeclose on the .o.et1 at issue in that
case and to clai21 Ne7ada 2oeclosue laB in light o2 the Dincease in
the numCe o2 2oeclosue a..eals in this state.E "55 -.3d at 1"&1.
/ccodingl1, the Cout Bill addess the a..lication o2 6e17a to the
instant case, Hee.ing in mind that onl1 clea eo andO o mani2est
inAustice Austi2ies ganting -lainti22 elie2 2om ou .e7ious :de ?$ "5@
.usuant to %ule 59?e@. I3 #.eci2icall1, -lainti22 claims that 6e17a
stands 2o the .o.osition that a .at1 cannot initiate a non)Audicial
2oeclosue until it estaClishes Bho the Dtue holdeE o2 the note is and
the tue holdeFs elationshi. Bith the entities 2oeclosing on the
.o.et1 as a matte o2 standing. -lainti22 claims that De2endants in this
case ha7e 2ailed to estaClish thei standing -age 3 #li. Co.1, "'11 =6
5"!&171 ?D.Ne7.@ ?Cite as: "'11 =6 5"!&171 ?D.Ne7.@@ to 2oeclose.
-lainti22 2inds su..ot in the 6e17a CoutFs assetion that DLtMhe oCligo
on the note has the ight to HnoB the identit1 o2 the entit1 that is
Pentitled to en2oceQ the motgage note unde /ticle 3 Lo2 the 8ni2om
Commecial Code ?D8.C.C.E@ M, see N%# 1'!.33'1, PLoMtheBise, the
LhomeoBneM ma1 .a1 2unds to a stange in the case.Q E "55 -.3d at
1"79>&' ?quoting 5n e Veal, !5' B.%. &97, 9"' ?B./.-. 9th Ci."'11@@.
=hile at 2ist glance this .o.osition a..eas to su..ot -lainti22Fs claim,
the 6e17a Cout Bas addessing en2ocement o2 a note DC1 a .at1 othe
than to Bhom the note is oiginall1 .a1aCle.E "55 -.3d at 1"&'. (he
6e17a Cout Bent on to hold that 2o such a note to Ce en2oceaCle C1
someone othe than the oiginal .at1 named on the note, it must Ce
assigned eithe C1 negotiation o tans2e in accod Bith /ticle 3 o2 the
8.C.C., as codi2ied in Ne7ada %e7ised #tatues ?DN%#E@ R 1'!.3"'1.
"55 -.3d at 1"&'>&1. 5n this case, the Audiciall1 noticed documents
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT &
con2im that the oiginal .at1 named on the Note, De2endant
9een-oint, is the .at1 seeHing to en2oce the Note. (he Note Bas
oiginall1 made .a1aCle to the ode o2 the 6ende, 9een-oint
4otgage +unding, 5nc. ?Note at 1 ?$ 9 E,. D@.@ (he Deed o2 (ust
names 9een-oint the 6ende, 4ain the (ustee, 4E%# the Cene2icia1
and nominee 2o 6ende, and e2es to the Note and .o.et1 at issue.
?Deed o2 (ust at " ?$ 9 E,. E@.@ (he Deed o2 (ust 2uthe .o7ides that
D4E%# ?as nominee 2o 6ende and 6endeFs successos and assigns@
has the ight: to e,ecise an1 o all o2 those inteests, including, Cut not
limited to, the ight to 2oeclose and sell the -o.et1K and to taHe an1
action equied o2 6ende ...E ?5d. at 3.@N -/%SE%, 7. 9%EEN-:5N(
4:%(9/9E +8ND5N9 5NC.K"'11 =6 5"!&171 ?D.Ne7.@@
NDoe agued in his %ule 59?e@ motion that the tial cout eed in den1ing his
%ule *'?C@ motion Cecause #u.eio Cout %ules 5 and 77 Bee 7iolated, in
deogation o2 his ights to notice and the o..otunit1 to Ce head. #u.e. Ct.
Ci7. %. 5?a@ states that De7e1 Bitten motion othe than one Bhich ma1 Ce
head e, .ate ... shall Ce se7ed u.on each o2 the .aties.E #e7ice unde
%ule 5?a@ ma1 Ce accom.lished C1 DLmMailing a co.1 to the last HnoBn
addess o2 the .eson se7ed.E #u.e. Ct. Ci7. %. 5?C@. D=ithout notice o2 an
im.ending gant o2 summa1 Audgment, a de2endant has no o..otunit1 to
Ce head ... Land so isM denied due .ocess o2 laB....E NeB <oH 6i2e 5ns. Co.
7. BoBn, &! +.3d 137, 1!3 ?5th Ci.199*@. L1"M #u.eio Cout %ule 77
demands that DLiMmmediatel1 u.on the ent1 o2 an ode o Audgment the
cleH shall se7e a notice o2 the ent1 in the manne .o7ided 2o in %ule
5?C@ u.on each .at1 Bho is not in de2ault 2o 2ailue to a..ea, and shall
maHe a note in the docHet o2 the se7ice.E #u.e. Ct. Ci7. %. 77?d@?1@.
9eneall1, a .at1 ma1 not el1 u.on a 2ailue to ecei7e notice o2 the ent1
o2 2inal Audgment as a Casis 2o elie2 2om that Audgment unde #u.e. Ct.
Ci7. %. *'?C@. 5d.K see also Distict o2 ColumCia 7. =atHins, *&! /."d 395,
39& ?D.C.199*@. ;oBe7e, as Be oCse7ed in =atHins, DLBMhile the actual
mailing o2 the notice is the citical element in the unning o2 the time 2o
notice o2 a..eal, Lcitation omittedM, the ule contem.lates that the mail Bill
Ce diected to the .at1Fs addesses Bhee he o she is liHel1 to ecei7e it.
:nl1 Bhen mail is .o.el1 diected can the act o2 mailing Austi21 the
.esum.tion o2 ecei.t.E 5d. at !'' ?citing (oome1 7. Distict o2 ColumCia,
315 /."d 5*5, 5*7 ?D.C.197!@@. =e held consequentl1 that Bhee the cout
cleH sent notice o2 the tial coutFs uling to the a..ellantFs .io addess
instead o2 to a..ellantFs Dlast HnoBn addessE and mailed the uling -age 13
9!& /."d 1"1' ?Cite as: 9!& /."d 1"1'@ though the coutFs Din)houseE
ciculation s1stem instead o2 though the Dodina1 mail,E and Bhee the
a..ellant did not ecei7e the ode, thee Bas Da su22icient shoBing o2
e,taodina1 cicumstances to su..ot the tial coutFs e,ecise o2 its
discetion to gant La..ellantFs %ule *'?C@ M motion.E +N1! 5d. +N1!.
#.eci2icall1, Be held that the a..ellantFs cicumstances made Dthe equisite
shoBing o2 e,taodina1 cicumstances 2o a 2inding o2 e,cusaCle
neglect....E 5d. (his Bas notBithstanding the geneal ule that D2o .u.oses
o2 %ule *'?C@, e,cusaCle neglect is undestood to encom.ass situations in
Bhich the 2ailue to com.l1 Bith a 2iling deadline is attiCutaCle to Lthe
.at1FsM negligenceE and that Da .at1Fs 2ailue to 2ile on time 2o easons
Ce1ond his o he contol is not consideed to constitute Pneglect.Q E -ionee
5n7. #e7. Co. 7. BunsBicH /ssocs. -Fshi., 5'7 8.#. 3&', 39!, 113 #.Ct.
1!&9, 1"3 6.Ed."d 7! ?1993@. L13ML1!ML15M ;ee, Cecause Be do not ha7e
Ce2oe us a co.1 o2 DoeFs %ule *'?C@ motion, Be cannot con2im diectl1
that the I1"19 motion ad7ised the cout that the cout cleH did not mail the
ode to DoeFs last HnoBn addess o that Doe e,.lained to the cout that he
2iled his motion immediatel1 a2te ecei7ing notice o2 the ode.+N15 But,
Cecause the #u.eio Cout AacHet contains the en7elo.e maHed Detun)to)
sendeE in Bhich the coutFs summa1 Audgment ode had Ceen mailed to
Doe at his .e7ious addess, the ecod maHes clea that Doe did not ecei7e
timel1 notice o2 the coutFs uling.+N1* =e also can in2e the content o2
DoeFs %ule *'?C@ motion 2om the coutFs uling on DoeFs %ule 59?e@ motion,
in Bhich the cout stated that Doe had not DaiseLdM an1 issues that Bee not
consideed in the CoutFs 3anua1 1", "''* :de Lden1ing his %ule *'?C@
motion 2o elie2M.E 5n his Cie2 and a22ida7it in su..ot o2 his %ule 59?e@
motionTand thus, .esumaCl1, in his %ule *'? C@ motion as BellTDoe
e,.lained that it Bas not until DecemCe 1", "''5, a2te ecei7ing a
es.onse 2om the cout to his inqui1 aCout the status o2 his litigation, that
he leaned o2 the DistictFs summa1 Audgment motion and the coutFs
summa1 Audgment uling, and that he 2iled his motion 2o elie2 2om
Audgment on the same da1. 5n light o2 the 2oegoing, the cout should not
ha7e egaded DoeFs %ule *'?C@ motion as uneasonaCl1 dela1ed. +N15.
D/..ellant has the Cuden o2 demonstating tial cout eo and must
.o7ide the a..ellate cout Bith a ecod su22icient to shoB a22imati7el1
that eo occued.E 3onathan =oodne Co. 7. /dams, 53! /."d "9", "9!
?D.C.19&7@. ;oBe7e, Doe is a .o se a..ellant and is incaceated,
cicumstances that Baant some lenience. DL-Mo se litigants ae not alBa1s
held to the same standads as ae a..lied to laB1es.E 4ac6eod 7.
9eogetoBn 8ni7. 4ed. Ct., 73* /."d 977, 9&' ?D.C.1999@ ?citation
omitted@. 4oeo7e, D.leadings .e.aed C1 .isones Bho do not ha7e
access to counsel Lae toM Ce liCeall1 constued.E 5d. +N1*. (hus, the cout
did not 2ul2ill its oCligation unde %ule 77?d@?1@ to Dse7e a notice o2 the
ent1 Lo2 summa1 AudgmentME C1 DLmMailing a co.1 to the last HnoBn
addess o2 the .eson se7ed.E #u.e. Ct. Ci7. %. 77?d@?1@. +uthe, Be can
in2e, 2om the tial coutFs Cie2 e2eence in its uling on the %ule *'? C@
motion, that Doe e,.lained in his motion, at the 7e1 least, that he had Ceen
tans2eed to a -age 1! 9!& /."d 1"1' ?Cite as: 9!& /."d 1"1'@ di22eent
2acilit1 and that he ne7e ecei7ed the DistictFs motion 2o summa1
Audgment. =ith the e,.lanation that he .o7ided, his change)o2)addess
notice that Bas docHeted Ce2oe the DistictFs summa1 Audgment motion
Bas 2iled, and his .io athe than cuent addess shoBn on the ceti2icate
o2 se7ice attached to the DistictFs motion, the cout had Ce2oe it e7idence
that at the 7e1 least called into question Bhethe Doe had e7e ecei7ed a
co.1 o2 the DistictFs motion. 5n light o2 all these cicumstances, Be must
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1'
conclude that the cout eed in den1ing DoeFs equest 2o elie2 unde %ule
*'? C@?!@ Bithout at least a heaing to inquie into mattes such as Bhethe
the Distict 2ailed to mail its summa1 Audgment motion to DoeFs last
addess o2 Bhich the Distict had Ceen a..ised and Bhethe the motion
.a.es Bee etuned as undeli7eaCle. +N17 /nd, as discussed in2a, such a
heaing Bould not Ce 2utile. +N17. =e cannot tell 2om the ecod Bhethe
the Distict HneB o should ha7e HnoBn that Doe had Ceen tans2eed to the
+C5 in (ennessee Bhen it mailed its motion 2o summa1 Audgment to the
+C5 in =est Viginia. DoeFs .aeci.e shoBs a mailing date o2 3ul1 "3, "''!,
and the #u.eio Cout date stam. and docHet sheet shoB that the cout
ecei7ed the .aeci.e on /ugust "3, "''!. 5t might Ce .esumed that the
Distict ecei7ed the change)o2)addess .aeci.e on o aCout the same date.
But it is also .ossiCle that the .aeci.e and the DistictFs /ugust "7, "''!
motion cossed in the mail, and that the Distict Bas not on notice o2 DoeFs
neB addess Bhen it attem.ted to se7e him C1 mail Bith its motion 2o
summa1 Audgment. C2. Sidd 5ntFl ;ome Cae, 5nc. 7. -ince, 917 /."d
1'&3, 1'&* ?D.C."''7@ ? Dthe alleged 2ailue o2 an indi7idual to ecei7e mail
sent to the coect addess unde these cicumstances does not constitute a
de.i7ation o2 due .ocessE@ ?intenal .unctuation and citation omitted@.
E7en in that case, hoBe7e, notice to Doe ma1 not ha7e Ceen
constitutionall1 adequate. C2. 3ones 7. 9ieg, &"9 /."d 195, 199 ?D.C."''3@
?holding, in a ta, sale case, that Bhile Dnotice C1 mail to the ecod oBne
geneall1 satis2ies due .ocess commands,E i2 Dthe notice is etuned
unclaimed, the Distict is then equied to taHe some additional ste. to
noti21 the ecod oBneE@ ?intenal quotation maHs and citations omitted@K
4alone 7. %oCinson, *1! /."d 33, 3& n. 9 ?D.C.199"@ ?D;ad the notice o2
e,.iing edem.tion .eiod not Ceen etuned, the DistictFs mailing o2 that
notice Bould ha7e ... Ceen constitutionall1 adequate, since se7ice C1 mail is
easonaCl1 calculated to gi7e notice in most cicumstancesE@. E7en in the
aCsence o2 a 2inding o2 de.i7ation o2 due .ocess, i2 the cout detemines
that Doe did not timel1 ecei7e actual notice o2 the DistictFs motion, it
could in its discetion gant him %ule *'? C@ elie2 2om the summa1
Audgment ode.N 3ohn D:E, /..ellant, 7. D5#(%5C( :+ C:684B5/
4E(%:-:65(/N -:65CE DE-/%(4EN(, 9!& /."d 1"1' ?"''&@
(he Ca.enties claims also 2all unde the 2edeal +ai DeCt Collection -actice /ct,
though unde the P=ell -leaded Com.laintQ ule,the claim 2o elie2 sounded as a
.edicate 2o the Ne7ada un2ai and Dece.ti7e (ade -actice statute.
Uualit1 goes to geat length in its litigating to demonstate that it is not 2actuall1, no
legall1 a deCt collecto no collection agenc1, des.ite all the language to the conta1 that
is set 2oth in its Notice o2 De2ault, and Notice o2 (usteeQs #ale. Ne7etheless, on
:ctoCe 1!, "'1', the #tate o2 Ne7ada,De.atment o2 Business and 5ndust1, +inancial
5nstitutions Di7ision L+5DM issued anK :%DE% (: CE/#E /ND DE#5#(
8N65CENCED /C(5V5(5E# /ND N:(5CE :+ %59;( (: /--E/6, to Uualit1 6oan
#e7ice, Co.., in connection Bith anothe 2oeclosue.
(hee the +5D detemined that Uualit1 Bas engaging in unlaB2ul collection acti7it1
C1 2oeclosing in the #tate o2 Ne7ada, Bithout 2ist oCtainingthe .o.e license.(his is
signi2icant Cecause in this case the +edeal Cout has Ceen called u.on to ansBe
aquestion o2 state laB, Bhen the Ne7ada #u.eme Cout has not .e7iousl1 addessed it.
=hile the +5Dis not the Ne7ada #u.eme Cout, it is a legitimate souce o2 guidance
aCout hoB this Ne7ada #tatute,N%# *!9.171 is to Ce a..lied. 5t is antici.ated that Uualit1
Bill e,ecise its a..eal ights Bith es.ect to this ode, and ma1 e7en 2ile a -etition 2o
%e7ieB in state cout, i2 it is unha..1 Bith the esult it ultimatel1 oCtains. Ne7etheless, i2
this Cease and Desist :de is coect, and it cetainl1 is entitled to a .esum.tion o2
coectness until such time as it is 7acated o e7esed, then it is a .edicate 2o one o2
-lainti22sQ claims 2o elie2. 5t is entitled to some de2eence C1 this Cout, as the onl1
souce o2 authoit1on the .aticula .oint o2 laB in question. (he -lainti22s ha7e alleged
that Uualit1 does not ha7e the.o.e license, and as such it has committed an 8n2ai and
Dece.ti7e (ade -actice L8D/-M unde N%#59&.'9"3?1@KDDece.ti7e tade .acticeE
de2ined. / .eson engages in a Ddece.ti7e tade .acticeEBhen in the couse o2 his o he
Cusiness o occu.ation he o she HnoBingl1: 1.Conducts the Cusiness o occu.ation
Bithout all equied state, count1 o cit1 licenses.E/ 7iolation o2 a state o 2edeal statute
o egulation is also such a 7iolation unde N%# 59&.'9"3?3@./s alleged in the com.laint,
the .lainti22s ae entitled to actual damages, costs and attone1 2ees Cecausethe1 then
Cecome P7ictims o2 2audQ unde N%# !1.*''?3@. 5ndeed, noB that this case is in 2edeal
coutthe1 intend to .usue thei +ai DeCt Collection -actice /ct diectl1, and not Aust as
a .edicate to a state8D/- claim. (his Bould entitle each o2 them to statuto1 damages
as Bell. (his Cout Bill also Ce called u.on to detemine i2 the actions taHen C1 Uualit1,
ae 7oid, 7oidaCle o meel1 se7e as a .edicate 2o the 8D/- claim Cecause o2 this
7iolation.5n the motion undue eliance is .lace u.on .ecedent cited C1 counsel that is not
contolling. (he ;ulse, case, in2a, is sim.l1 not a Ninth Cicuit case, it is 2om the
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1"
+edeal Distict Cout in :egon. +o easons that Bill Ce made clea, is noB Cad laB and
should not Ce 2olloBed C1 this cout. (he de2endant Uualit1 has .ointed to 2edeal cases
Bhich state that othe 2oeclosue tustees, unde othe 2actual cicumstances ha7e Ceen
held not to Ce PdeCt collectosQ in +DC-/ cases. (hose cases ma1 cetainl1 Ce .esuasi7e
authoit1, Cut the1 ae not contolling authoit1 Bhich this Cout is oCligated to 2olloB.
:nl1 the Ne7ada #u.eme Cout and the Ninth Cicuit Cout o2 /..eals could Ce taHen
as setting Cinding .ecedent, and that is not the case hee. (he Ninth Cicuit as sim.l1 not
uled squael1 on the issue o2 a 2oeclosue com.anies Ceing Bithin the +DC-/, o not.
(he case cited C1 Uualit1 2o the .o.osition that 2oeclosue tustee ae not deCt
collectos is that o2K ;ulse 7. :cBen +ed. BanH, 195 +.#u..."d 11&& ?D.:. "''"@. 5n
;ulse the Cout detemined that 2oeclosue Bas not a DdeCt collectionE acti7it1 as
de2ined C1 the +ai DeCtCollection -actices /ct and the coolla1 :egon statute. (he
state cout and state agenc1 hee ha7e held the o..osite. (his is not a Cinding decision
that 2edeal couts in Ne7ada Bould Ce oCliged to2olloB, Cut meel1 a .esuasi7e one.
Because its easoning is 2laBed, it should not Ce 2olloBed C1 thiscout. 5t cited to onl1 one
case, ;einemann 7. 3im =alte ;omes, 5nc., !7 +.#u..."d 71* ?D.=.Va.199&@, a22QQd
173 +.3d &5' ?!th Ci. 1999@, Bhich contained no anal1sis o2 2oeclosue laB Cut
ne7etheless held that the +DC-/ did not a..l1. ;oBe7e, the ;einemann decision
su.a, has Ceen o7euled C1 =ilson 7. Da.e J 9oldCeg, !!3 +.3d 373 ?!th Ci. "''*@.
5n =ilson, su.a, the !th Cicuit e,.essl1 eAected the 2oeclosue laB1eQs assetion that
the1 Bee not collecting a deCt asde2ined C1 the +DC-/ Cecause the action Bas in em
and noted, as is the case hee, that the laB1esad7ised that einstatement could occu i2
monies Bee .aidK 5d. at 37*. (hus, the =ilson Cout e,.essl1eAects the summa1
decision endeed in ;einemann , Bhich is the case that su..oted the CoutQQsholding in
;ulse . /n identical issue has Ceen .ending in the (enth Cicuit Cout o2 a..eals 2o
moethan a 1ea noB, and it Bill Ce Cought to this CoutQs attention Bhen it is uled
u.on, eithe Ba1.(he =ilson decision su.a , Bas endeed at a..o,imatel1 the same
time asK SaltenCach 7.%ichads , !*! +.3d 5"! ?5 th Ci. "''*@. (he Cout in SaltenCach
did not el1 u.on the =ilson decision,Cut still eached the same conclusion >> that the
+DC-/ did a..l1 to attone1s andOo tustees Bho Beeattem.ting to collect a deCt C1
2oeclosing. (he 3 d Cicuit in -i.e 7. -otno22 6aB /ssocs . , 39* +.3d""7, "3! ?3 d
Ci. "''5@ eached the same conclusion and em.hasiGed the im.otance o2 the 2act that
the2oeclosing laB 2im Bas asHing 2o mone1 to einstate the loan. 5d. 5n ;ulse , su.a ,
thee is no indication that the Cout e7en consideed that Bhen 2oeclosing, atustee and
Cene2icia1 ae concuentl1 maHing demands 2o mone1 to sto. the sale, Bhich is o2
couse,ha..ening in the case at Ca. 5t is clea that the 3 d , ! th and 5 th Cicuit Couts in
=ilson, SaltenCach and -i.e 2ound that the demand 2o .a1ment Bas deCt collection
acti7it1 in lieu o2 seiGing the eal .o.et1.(he Ninth Cicuit ma1 come doBn conta1,
Cut it Bould o.en the matte 2o a .etition 2o cetioai,Bhich is something it has Ceen
loath to do o2 late, and case in the (enth Cicuit ma1 Bell gi7e muchneeded guidance in
this egad. -eha.s the touchstone is Bhethe the 2oeclosue tustee also is collecting
mone1 in the .ocess o2 2oeclosue, o meel1 getting the collateal CacH 2om the
homeoBnes in em . 52 memo1 se7es this 7e1 issue Bas touched u.on in this 7e1
Cout duing the oal agument on the motion.
$123456 7o5 o736 8ro9:;;:; <or:93o;1r: =o91>:75;, 45 9o33:95; >o7:6 o7 ?:@23< o<
?27A;/3:7=:r;/;:rB49:r;#
%e.ossessing on eal estate, cou.led Bith collecting mone1 due on the undel1ing notes,
Cings Uualit1 Bithin the de2inition o2 a deCt collecto unde 2edeal laB, o a collection
agenc1 unde state laB. -at o2 this detemination has alead1 Ceen made C1 the state
cout and state agenc1,and it is one that this ;onoaCle Cout is Cound to es.ect. +o the
2oegoing easons, the Ca.enties should Ce alloBed to amend thei Com.laint as to the
+DC-/ and 8D/- issues and ha7e the :de 9anting #umma1 3udgment set aside,
and the -lainti22s Ce alloBed to go 2oBad Bith disco7e1.N
I>8ro8:r For:93o;1r: U7=:r NRS S:954o7 *C#*/*
-lainti22 seeHs a declaation that the N:D is Nnull and 7oid.N (he most common
statuto1 de2ect in 2oeclosue in Ne7ada occus Bhen a 2oeclosing entit1 2ails to adhee
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1!
to N%# section 1'7.'&', ecoding a N:D Ce2oe it has Ceen named as the tustee ?as
hee@, and Bithout an1 e7idence o2 agenc1 on Cehal2 o2 the tustee o Cene2icia1 o2 the
undel1ing deCt at the time o2 ecodation ?as hee@. #ee Ne7. %e7. #tat. R 1'7.'&'?"@?c@.
-lainti22 alleges a 7iolation o2 this statute, and alleges that the N:D 2ailed to include
cetain notices as equied unde the D:(, U6# Bas a..aentl1 neithe the tustee no the
Cene2icia1 Bhen it ecoded the N:D. ;oBe7e, it claimed on the N:D to ha7e Ceen
N/9EN( +:% BENE+5C5/%<,N and it identi2ied the Cene2icia1 as ... (he onl1 e7idence
in the ecod as to the identit1 o2 the Cene2icia1 at the time the N:D Bas ecoded is the
D:( itsel2, Bhich namesVVVVVVV as the lende, maHing it the Cene2icia1 as a matte o2
laB, egadless o2 the D:(Fs language aCout 4E%# Ceing a NCene2icia1.N /lthough
4E%# is not a Cene2icia1, its agenc1 2o...N
Co.eland 7. 5BE= 6ocal No. &, "''* =6 "9!*9!' ?N.D.:hio "''*@ ?%ule
*'? C@?*@ elie2 ganted Bhee the client made Ddiligent attem.tsE to contact his
counselK 1et, his counsel 2ailed to in2om him o2 the CoutFs ganting o2 summa1
Audgment to the de2endant until a2te the time 2o a..eal had .assed, and the attone1Fs
conduct constituted Dgoss negligenceE@K 6.-. #teuat, 5nc. 7. 4attheBs, 3"9
+."d "3! ?C./.D.C.19*!@?/ .lainti22Fs suit Bas dismissed 2o 2ailue to .osecuteK
cout einstated suit tBo 1eas a2te its dismissal .usuant to %ule *'? C@?1@ and ?*@
Cecause .esonal .oClems o2 counsel had caused him to neglect the diligent
.lainti22Fs case and to mislead the .lainti22. (he .lainti22 had made numeous inquies
o2 his attone1, Bho had e2used to ansBe such inquies and had occasionall1 assued
the client that the case Bas .oceeding@.
4E%# has since e7ol7ed 2om that o2 a sim.le egistation s1stem to that o2 the
custodian o2 .oBes. /s such, 4E%# has essentiall1 ClocHed homeoBnes 2om
.e7enting thei houses 2om Cecoming 2oeclosues and loan 2aud 7ictims 2om .usuing
thei cases in cout Cecause the1 could not identi21 the com.anies holding thei motgage
notes. %ecent cout ulings in se7eal states ha7e challenged 4E%# in 2oeclosue cases
and ha7e 2ound that, at Cest, 4E%# onl1 holds a co.1 o2 the ClanH note Bith the tue
Cene2icia1 holding the oiginal note. 4E%# hoBe7e commences the 2oeclosue .ocess
C1 su..osedl1 assigning the secuit1 instuments to a (ustee. /t Cest, the (ustee is in
.ossession o2 ClanH secuit1 instuments at the time the Notice :2 De2ault is ecoded
Bhile the still unidenti2ied holde o2 the eal Note emains oCscued.
5n a 2oeclosue situation BheeC1 4E%# is the claimed Cene2icia1 and the tue
Cene2icia1 oCtains the (usteeQs Deed a22ecting a cedit sale CacH to the lende, 4E%#
schemes to a7oid the tans2e ta, o2 the tansaction. +uthemoe, in non)Audicial states,
4E%# admits to meel1 holding title as nominee 2o the tue Cene2icia1. ;ee is an e,et
2om thei on BeC site. DNomall1, Bhee the name o2 the gantee unde the (usteeQs
Deed 8.on #ale is di22eent than the name o2 the 2oeclosing entit1, the (usteeQs Deed
8.on #ale states that the N9antee Bas not the 2oeclosing Cene2icia1.N (his designation
tigges the im.osition o2 tans2e ta,es on the sale. 5t is im.otant to note that in a 4E%#
2oeclosue sale, e7en Bhee the .o.et1 e7ets, the name o2 the gantee Bill Ce di22eent
than the name o2 the entit1 2oeclosing. Nonetheless, the (usteeQs Deed 8.on #ale
should state that N(he 9antee Bas the 2oeclosing Cene2icia1.N (his is Cecause 4E%#
meel1 holds title as nominee 2o the tue Cene2icia1K it is the tue Cene2icia1 that has
actuall1 2oeclosed and acquied titleE. B1 this admission, 4E%# has stated that the1 ae
not, and Bas not, the tue Cene2icia1 theeC1 nulli21ing the nomination .usuant to the
Deed :2 (ust. -usuant to the 2oegoing, as Ne7ada is a non)Audicial 2oeclosue cases,
the Ca.enties demand that the 2oeclosing institutions .o7ide .ima 2ascia e7idence
that the1 ae indeed the legal Cene2icia1, and legitimate oBne o2 the Note Bith .oBe o2
sale.
N4acHlin also agues that the tusteeFs sale is 7oid Cecause Deutsche
BanH, "''*>" (ust, and the tustees, =indso 4anagement and Uualit1
6oan #e7icing, Bee acting outside o2 thei authoit1 Bhen the1
2oeclosed Cecause the1 Bee not in .h1sical .ossession o2 the Note. /s
Deutsche BanH .oints out, Cali2onia laB has no such equiement.
/l7aa 7. /uoa 6oan #e7ices, No. C>'9>151" #C, "''9 =6
1*&9*!', at I * ?N.D.Cal. 3une 1*, "''9@ ?DL8Mnde Cali2onia laB,
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1*
tustee need not .ossess a Note in ode to initiate 2oeclosue unde a
Deed o2 (ust.E@K +ane 7. Count1Bide ;ome 6oans, 5nc., No. '&>CV
"193, "''& =6 1&9'"5, at I " ?#.D.Cal. 3an. "9, "''9@ ?DL(Mhee does
not a..ea to Ce an1 equiement unde Cali2onia laB that the oiginal
Note Ce .oduced in ode to ende the 2oeclosue .oceedings 7alid.E@K
Uuintos 7. Decision :ne 4otgage Co., 66C, No. '&>CV>1757 34
?-:%@, "''& =65!11*3*, at I 3 ?#.D.Cal. Dec. "9, "''&@ ?D Cal.
Ci7.Code R "9"! outlines the equiements 2o non)Audicial 2oeclosues
in Cali2onia, and does not include .o7iding the oiginal Note .io to
the saleE@. L17ML1&M /lmost lost in the clutte o2 misstatements aCout the
5ndentue, allegations Bithout an1 su..ot in laB o 2act, and the
selecti7e eading o2 documents, 4acHlin does aise an issue concening
hoB Deutsche BanH conducted the noticing o2 the 2oeclosue sale. (he
cout stats Bith the Casic .emise that 2o Deutsche BanH to .oceed
Bith a 2oeclosue it had to Ce entitled to .a1ment on the Note. Cal.
Ci7.Code RR "93".5, "93*K Cal. Comm.Code R 33'1. Deutsche BanH
.esents the Note Bith an allonge to document the tans2e o2 the Note.
;oBe7e, the allonge is undated. (he /ssignment o2 the Deed o2 (ust,
Bhich Bas ecoded on No7emCe 3', "''9, has an illegiCle date as to
Bhen it Bas e,ecuted. -esumaCl1, it Bas e,ecuted on o aCout
No7emCe 17, "''9, shotl1 Ce2oe it Bas ecoded. +uthe, one could
.esume that a No7emCe 17, "''9 date 2o the /ssignment o2 the Deed
o2 (ust Bould coes.ond Bith the allonge to tans2e the Note to
Deutsche BanH. But the #uCstitution o2 (ustee C1 Deutsche BanH
ecoded on No7emCe "9, "''9, .u.oting to suCstitute Uualit1 6oan
#e7ice Co.. 2o =indso 4anagement Co. as tustee unde the Deed o2
(ust, states that it Bas signed C1 Deutsche BanH on /ugust "1, "''9.
(his Bould Ce Bell in ad7ance o2 the No7emCe 17, "''9 assignment o2
the Deed o2 (ust. No e,.lanation has Ceen .o7ided 2o these a..aentl1
inconsistent dates. (he cout Bill not meel1 assume that Deutsche BanH
acquied the Note much ealie Cut did not ecod the Notice o2
/ssignment o2 Deed o2 (ust until a late date. %ecent cases ha7e
discussed Bhethe a Deed o2 (ust is suCAect to 7aious .o7isions o2 the
Ci7il Code Bhich e2eence motgages, motgagees, o othe
encumCances. #e7eal tial couts ha7e concluded that Ci7il Code R
"93".5 does not a..l1 Bhen the encumCance is en2ocing ights
.usuant to a Deed o2 (ust. (hough o2 .esuasi7e 7alue, these tial cout
cases ae not Cinding .ecedent 2o this cout. I11 L19M 5n consideing
Bhat is mean C1 Dmotgagee o othe encumCanceE holding a .oBe o2
sale, the cout 2ist consides the distinction CetBeen a DmotgageE and a
DDeed o2 (ust.E +o a Deed o2 (ust, title is 7ested in the tustee, Bho
has a .oBe to sell the .o.et1 u.on the e7ent o2 s.eci2ied contactual
de2aults. (his alloBs 2o the sale o2 the collateal Bithout Audicial
inte7ention. But this is a limited DtitleE in the tustee. /s addessed C1
the Cali2onia #u.eme Cout in BanH o2 5tal1 Nat. (ust J #a7. /ssn. 7.
Bentle1, "17 Cal. *!!, *5*, "' -."d 9!' ?1933@, the legal title held C1 the
tustee is to the e,tent necessa1 2o e,ecu)tion o2 the tust, Cut does not
ca1 Bith it the incidents o2 oBneshi.. 5n .actical e22ect, a Deed o2
(ust is a motgage Bith a .oBe to con7e1, Bith the incidents o2
oBneshi. etained C1 the tusto. (he Deed o2 (ust is teated as an
encumCance on the eal .o.et1, and gi7en .otection as a lien athe
than an inteest in the land suCAect to a mateialmanFs lien. ;oll1Bood
6umCe Co. 7. 6o7e, 155 Cal. "7', 1'' -. *9& ?19'9@.+N1" L"'M :7e
the 1eas, couts and the 6egislatue ha7e continued to diminish the
distinction CetBeen a Deed o2 (ust and motgage, othe than the
2undamental di22eence that the .oBe o2 sale unde the Deed o2 (ust is
e,ecised nonAudiciall1, Bhile the motgage still equies Audicial
inte7ention.+N13 (he 6egislatue has made Coth deeds o2 tust and
motgages suCAect to time limitations on en2ocement, Ci7il Code RR
&&'.'">&&7.'9 ?4aHetaCle %ecod (itle /ct@ and ceated a ight o2
edem.tion 2olloBing a Audicial sale unde eithe a motgage o Deed o2
(ust, Cal.Ci7.-oc.Code R 7"9 .'1'. 5n stating its intent Cehind the
4aHetaCle %ecod (itle /ct, the 6egislatue con2imed that eal
.o.et1 is a Casic esouce o2 the .eo.le and title tansactions should
.oceed Bith econom1 and e,.edienc1. +o this to Ce achie7ed, eal
.o.et1 ecods must cleal1 and accuatel1 document title to the
.o.et1. Cal. Ci7.Code R &&'.'"'. Because thee is no Audgment o
ode su..oting a nonAudicial 2oeclosue sale, documentation o2
com.liance Bith Cali2onia laB 2o a nonAudicial 2oeclosue sale is
essential. :nl1 the o22icial ecod contains the documentation o2 Bho
Bas entitled to en2oce the ights unde the Deed o2 (ust. :n .e7ious
occasions, the Cali2onia #u.eme Cout has a..lied a statute e2eencing
a DmotgageE to deeds o2 tust Bhen it im.acts the ights o2 the CooBe.
5n #ecuit1 -aci2ic National BanH 7. =oGaC, 51 Cal.3d 991, 99&, "75
Cal.%.t. "'1, &'' -."d 557, the cout a..lied the one)action ule, Code
o2 Ci7il -ocedue 7"*?a@, to oCligations secued C1 a Deed o2 (ust as
Bell as othe .esonal .o.et1. #ee also =alHe 7. Communit1 BanH, 1'
Cal.3d 7"9, 73" n. 1, 111 Cal.%.t. &97, 51& -."d 3"9 ?197!@. Ci7il
Code R "93".5 .o7ides that, Bhee a .oBe o2 sale 2o eal .o.et1 is
gi7en to a motgagee o othe encumCance to secue an oCligation, such
.oBe o2 sale ma1 Ce e,ecised C1 the assignee Bho is entitled to ecei7e
.a1ment o2 the oCligation Di2 the assignment is dul1 acHnoBledged and
ecoded.E 52 the assignment has not Ceen ecoded, then the .oBe
cannot Ce e,ecised. (he a..lication o2 Ci7il Code R "93".5 to all
encumCances, including deeds o2 tust, BoHs to .otect the CooBe
?tusto@, lende ?Cene2icia1@, tustee, .uchase at a 2oeclosue sale, and
suCsequent oBnes o2 the .o.et1. Be2oe .esons .u.ot to taHe action
and e,ecise ights unde a Deed o2 (ust, the assignment documenting
the acquisition o2 those ights is ecoded Bith the count1 ecode. (his
esults in the eal .o.et1 ecods cleal1 and unamCiguousl1 stating
Bho held the ights and Bho asseted the ights. (his minimiGes title
dis.utes 1eas late as to Bhethe a notice o2 de2ault o notice o2 sale Bas
gi7en C1 a .o.el1 authoiGed .at1 and Bhethe the .u.oted sale
unde the Deed o2 (ust is 7oid. (his im.oses the minimalist o2 Cudens
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT 1&
on the Cene2icia1 acquiing a Note secued C1 a Deed o2 (ustT
ecoding the notice o2 assignment Ce2oe .u.oting to change the
tustee o authoiGe a 2oeclosue. I1" 5n the .esent case, 4acHlin and
Deutsche BanH ha7e demonstated that the ecoding o2 the assignment
o2 the Deed o2 (ust .ost)dated Deutsche BanH ecoding documents
.u).oting to change the tustee to =indso 4anagement and then
=indso 4anagement .u.oting to gi7e a notice o2 sale. (hough thee
ae onl1 da1s C1 Bhich Deutsche BanH, "''*>" 2ailed to ecod the
assignment o2 the tust deed, a ecod has Ceen ceated that someone not
o2 ecod title .u.oted to taHe action on a Deed o2 (ust .io to
com.liance Bith Ci7il Code R "93".5. 5ssues o2 title and the ecod u.on
Bhich 2utue geneations o2 oBnes Bill e.l1 cannot Ce suCAect to a
Bould)1ou)Celie7e)5)missed)it)C1)that)much im.lied Bai7e o2 this
statuto1 equiement. 4acHlin has shoBn a liHelihood o2 .e7ailing on
the issue o2 the .u.oted 2oeclosue sale not ha7ing Ceen .o.el1
conducted, theeC1 esulting in a 7oid deed. (he cout issues the
.elimina1 inAunction on this gound.N 5n %e 4acHlin, "'11 =6
"'155"' ?BHtc1.E.D.Cal.@@.
/nd the Ca.enties seeH to amend thei Com.laint as thei case is
suCstantiall1 simila to the 2olloBing: N". De2endant Uualit1 6oan
#e7ice Co.. ?NUualit1N@ ecoded a Notice o2 W Beach and De2ault and
o2 Election to Cause #ale o2 eal -o.et1 8nde Deed o2 (ust ?NN:DN@
on 4a1, !, "'1'. Uualit1 desciCes itsel2 on the N:D as N ... eithe the
oiginal tustee, the dul1 a..ointed suCstituted tustee, o acting as agent
2o the Cene2icia1 unde a Deed o2 (us6.N Uualit1 is not egisteed
Bith the Ne7ada #eceta1 o2 #tate no does Uualit1 .osses a +oeign
DeCt CollectoFs 6icence X7ith the Ne7ada De.t. o2 Business and
5ndust1 as equied C1 N%# *!9. 171, though it is a FdeCt collectoF
Bithin the meaning o2 15 8.#.C. R 1*9"?a@?*@, as inco.oated into
Ne7ada laB C1 N%# *!9.37'. 5t is Celie7ed to Ce one o2 the neB
ceations o2 the N+oeclosue 5ndust1.N 3. De2endant ;#BC B/NS,
8#/, N/, as (ustee 2o 4eill 61nch /ltenati7e Note /sset (ust,
#eies "''7)/3, ?N;#BCN@ is desciCed as the Note ;olde o2 -lainti22Fs
motgage note C1 De2endant /meicaFs #e7ice Com.an1. 5t is unHnoBn
i2 ;#BC claims to Ce the Cene2icia1 on a Deed o2 (ust, .esumaCl1
ecoded on No7emCe 17,"''*, Bhich desciCes the lende as 8ni7esal
/meican 4otgage Com.an1 o2 Cali2onia. ;#BC BanH is not
egisteed Bith the Ne7ada #eceta1 o2 #tate. 5n es.onse to a Uuali2ied
=itten %equest .usuant to 1" 8.#.C. R "*'5?e@ and 15 8.#.C. R 1*!
1?2@?"@ !. De2endant /meicaFs #e7ice Com.an1 ?N/#CN@ is a
collection com.an1 attem.ting to collect mone1 2om -lainti22 Cased
u.on he motgage. /#C is not egisteed Bith the Ne7ada #eceta1 o2
#tate no does it ha7e a +oeign DeCt CollectoFs 6icence Bith the
Ne7ada De.t. o2 Business and 5ndust1 as equied C1 N%# *!9. 171,
though it is a FdeCt ..ollectoF Bithin the meaning o2 15 8.#.c. R 1*9"?a@
?*@, as inco.oated into Ne7ada laB C1 F22i.# *!9.37' 5. (he tue names
and ca.acities, Bhethe indi7idual, co.oate, associate, .atneshi. o
otheBise o2 the de2endants heein designated as Does 1 though 1'',
inclusi7e, ae unHnoBn to .lainti22, Bho thee2oe sues said de2endants
C1 such 2ictitious names. *. -lainti22 alleges that each named de2endant
and each de2endant heein designated as a Doe de2endant is negligentl1,
Bill2ull1, maliciousl1, contactuall1 o otheBise legall1 es.onsiCle 2o
the e7ents and ha..enings heein e2eed to and .o,imatel1 caused
inAu1 and damages to -lainti22, as heein alleged. -lainti22 Bill seeH
lea7e o2 this Cout to inset the tue names and ca.acities o2 such
de2endants Bhen the same ha7e Ceen ascetained and Bill 2uthe asH
lea7e to Aoin said de2endants in these .oceedings .usuant to N%C- 1'.
7. Based u.on in2oYation and Celie2 .lainti22 alleges that at all times
mentioned heein, the de2endants, and each o2 them, Bee the agents,
se7ants, em.lo1ees andOo Aoint 7entues o2 thei co)de2endants, and
each Bee as such, acting Bithin the couse, sco.e, and authoit1 o2 such
agenc1, em.lo1ment andOo 7entue, and that each and e7e1 de2endant,
as a2oesaid, Bhen acting as a .inci.al, Bas negligent in the selection,
hiing, taining and a..ointment o2 each and e7e1 othe de2endant as an
agent, em.lo1ee andOo Aoint 7entue. +/C(8/6 /66E9/(5:N# &.
-lainti22 alleges, ealleges and inco.oates C1 e2eence each and e7e1
allegation contained in the .eceding .aaga.hs. 9. 5n ode 2o
-lainti22, a .uClic school music teache, to get out o2 the ental maHet
Bhee she Bas ne7e going to Cuild a 2utue, -lainti22 .uchased a
modist home in %eno C1 Ceing talHed into an adAustaCle ate motgage.
-lainti22, liHe e7e1one else at the time, Bas told Bods to the e22ect:
NDonFt Bo1, a2te 1ou ha7e estaClished a good .a1ment ecod, Be Bill
e2i and get 1ou into a loBe ate, maHe it into a 3' 1ea 2ull1 amotiGed
loan ... and 1ou can Cuild equit1 . . . N -lainti22 Bas ne7e equied to
.o7ide an1 documentation as to he 2inancial aCilit1 to .a1 the
.a1ments that the inceases in inteest ates equied. /nd, -lainti22 Bas
e.eatedl1 told that she could e2inance he loan?s@ so that she Bould not
Ce equied to .a1 the huge inceases in inteest that Bould maHe it
im.ossiCle to sta1 in he home. 1'. /2te -lainti22 estaClished he
e,cellent .a1ment ecod, the housing maHet cashed, and -lainti22
2ound hesel2 not onl1 u.side doBn, Cut Bith a a.idl1 ad7ancing
incease in he /%4, Bhich she could neithe e2inance no a22od to
.a1. Due to the economic de.ession, engineeed and Cought on C1
entities such as the de2endants heein, -lainti22Fs home, liHe millions o2
othe /meicans, lost at least . one hal2 o2 its 7alue. 55. :n in2omation
and Celie2, -lainti22 alleges that he motgages Bee almost immediatel1
tans2eed, Bithout he HnoBledge o notice, in 7iolation o2 in 7iolation
o2 5# 8.#.C. R 1*!1?2@?"@ Bhich equies notice to the CooBe a2te
assignment o2 the motgage documents, to some othe entit1 o entities.
1". 8ntil such time as -lainti22 etained counsel to send a Uuali2ied
=itten %equest .usuant to 1" 8.#.C. R "*'5?e@ and 15 8.#.C. R
1*!1?2@?"@ lette to /#C, -lainti22 Bas NEVE% in2omed Bho he Note
and Deed o2 (ust Bee tans2eed to. No tans2es o2 the note no deed
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT "'
o2 tust Bee ecoded at the =ashoe Count1 %ecode. (hus, -lainti22,
and quite .ossiCl1, none o2 the De2endants, ha7e an1 .oo2 Bhatsoe7e
o2 the e,istence o2 an1 .eson o entit1 that is the cuent NoBneN o2 an1
.at o2 he motgages. 13. 5n .lace o2 an adequate es.onse to -lainti22Fs
Uuali2ied =itten %equest lette 2o in2omation, on aCout 4a1 !, "' 5 ',
Uualit1 ecoded a Notice o2 De2ault and Election to #ell unde Deed o
(ust ?FN:DN@. (his N:D Bas and is 2atall1 de2ecti7e 2o the 2olloBing
easons: /. -aaga.h "" o2 the Deed o2 (ust and N%# 1'7.'&'?"@
equie the 6ende to gi7e notice o2 an1 de2ault .io to acceleating the
note. B. -aaga.h "" o2 the Deed o2 (ust equies an1 notice o2 de2ault
to s.eci21: ?a@ the de2aultK ?C@ the action equied to cue the de2aultK ? c@
a date, not less than 3' da1s 2om the date the notice is gi7en to
BooBe, C1 Bhich the de2ault must Ce cuedK and ?d@ that 2ailue to
cue the de2ault on o Ce2oe the date s.eci2ied in the notice ma< esult
in acceleation o2 the sums secued C1 this #ecuit1 5nstument and sale
o2 the suCAect .o.et1. C. -aaga.h 19 o2 the Deed o2 (ust gi7es the
CooBes the ight, i2 the1 meet cetain conditions, to ha7e en2ocement
o2 the secuit1 inteest discontinued at an1 time .io to the ealiest o2
?1@ +i7e da1s Ce2oe the sale, ?"@ #uch .eiod as a..licaCle laB might
s.eci21 2o the temination o2 CooBeFs ight to einstate o ?3@ ent1 o2
a Audgment en2ocing the secuit1 inteest. D. Uualit1 and /#C do not
ha7e, and did not ha7e at the times mentioned heein, a 2oeign
collectos license as equied C1 N%# *!9.171, and ae not domestic
collection agenc5es. E. (his N:D 2ailed to com.l1 Bith .aaga.h "" o2
the note in the 2olloBing as.ects: 1. ". 3. !. (he N:D 2ailed to s.eci21
the amount o2 the de2ault. (he N:D 2ailed to s.eci21 the action equied
to cue the de2ault. (he N:D 2ailed to s.eci21 the date C1 Bhich the
de2ault ma1 Ce cued. .J K.OO5O6 (he N:D 2ailed to ad7ise the BooBe
o2 V ight to ha7e en2ocement o2 the secuit1 inteest discontinued i2
the1 meet cetain conditions. 5. (he N:D stated that the Cene2icia1
unde the deed o2 tust had alead1 declaed all sums secued
immediatel1 due. *. (he N:D 2ailed to unequi7ocall1 state that i2 the
de2aults Bee not cued, the amount due unde the note Bould Ce
acceleated and that the Cene2icia1 Bould conduct a 2oeclosue sale. 7.
(he N:D Bas an attem.t to collect a deCt. +5%#( C6/54 +:%
%E6E5+ DEC6/%/(:%< %E65E+ 1!. -lainti22 ealleges the a2oesaid
.aaga.hs as though set 2oth in 2ull heein. 15. N%# 3'.'!' alloBs an1
.eson Bhose ights, status o othe legal elations ae a22ected C1 a deed
to ha7e the Distict Cout detemine an1 questions o2 constuction o
7alidit1 aising unde the instument and to oCtain a declaation o2
ights, status o othe legal elations theeunde. 1*. (he Notice o2
De2ault and Election to #ell 2ailed to s.eci21 the amount o2 the de2ault.
17. (he N:D 2ailed to itemiGe the amount necessa1 to cue and a date
cetain Bithin Bhich to cue. 1&. (he N:D and election to sell 2ailed to
state the BooBes ha7e the ight to ha7e en2ocement o2 the secuit1
inteest discontinued i2 the1 meet cetain conditions. 19. (he N:D and
election to sell stated that the Cene2icia1 unde the deed o2 tust had
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT "1
alead1 declaed all sums secued immediatel1 due. "'. (he N:D and
election to sell 2ailed to unequi7ocall1 state that i2 the de2aults Bee not
cued, the amount due unde the note Bould Ce acceleated and that the
(ustee Bould conduct a 2oeclosue sale. "1. (he 2ailue to adhee to
the notice .o7isions contained in the deed o2 tust, the statement in the
Notice o2 De2ault and Election to #ell declaing that the Cene2icia1 had
alead1 declaed a de2ault and acceleated the oCligation and the 2ailue
to gi7e unequi7ocal notice o2 acceleation and sale ae NsuCstantial
iegulaitiesN Bhich ae gounds to 7acate the N:D. "". (he -lainti22 is
entitled to a declaato1 Audgement that the a2oesaid N:D is null and
7oid. #EC:ND C6/54 +:% %E65E+ DEB( C:66EC(5:N
V5:6/(5:N# "3. -lainti22 eallege# the 2oegoing .aaga.hs as
though set 2oth in 2ull heein. "!. (his is a action 2o damages Cought
C1 a indi7idual consume 2o 7iolations o2 :he Ne7ada +ai DeCt
Collection laB 2ound in (itle *!9 o2 the Ne7ada %e7ised #tatutes. 5n
laticula, N%# *!9.37' .o7ides that an1 7iolation o2 the +edeal +ai
DeCt Collection @actice /ct, is a 7iolation o2 Ne7ada laB as an
inde.endent state cause o2 action. (he o55oBing allegations ecite the
2edeal laBK +ai DeCt Collection -actices /ct, 15 8.#.C. K 1*9", et seq.
?heeina2te N+DC-/N@, Bhich ae inco.oated into the laBs o2 the
#tate o2 5 Ne7ada, as noted aCo7e. (hese
laBs .ohiCit deCt collectos 2om engaging in aCusi7e, dece.ti7e, and
un2ai .actices. "5. Uualit1 and %(C ae NdeCt collectosN as de2ined C1
15 8.#.C. R 1 *9"?a@?*@ and N%# *!9.'"'. "*. (he a2oesaid Notice o2
De2ault and Election to #ell ecoded in the =ashoe Count1t1
%ecodeFs :22ice ?heeina2te N:D@ is a NcommunicationN as de2ined C1
R1*9"?a@?"@. ?5@. "7. (he N:D 2ailed to contain the language mandated
C1 15 8.#.C. R1*9"e?11@. "&. (he N:D 2ailed to contain the language
mandated C1 15 8.#.c. R1*9"g?a@?1@) "9. (he N:D is a 2alse and
dece.ti7e means o2 collecting a deCt in that it e.esented the note
secued C 1 the deed o2 tust had Ceen acceleated Bhen in 2act the note
cannot Ce legall1 acceleated Bithout 2ist sending a notice to the
-lainti22 o2 a ight to cue the alleged de2ault. 3'. (he N:D is a 2alse
and dece.ti7e means o2 collecting a deCt in that it 2ailed to .o7ide the
notices equied C1 the undel1ing deed o2 tust. 31. (he da2ting,
tendeing, ecodation and mailing o2 a notice o2 de2ault Bhich contains
the in2omation equied C1 .aaga.h "" o2 the Deed o2 (ust is a
condition .ecedent to initiate 2oeclosue .oceedings and acquie the
ight o2 .ossession o2 the .o.et1. 3". -lainti22 is entitled to statuto1
damages .usuant to 15 8.#.c. R1*9"H?a@ in the amount o2Z5,:::.::
each. 33. -lainti22 is entitled to actual damages .usuant to 15 8.#.C.
R1*9"H?a@ in an 5mount accoding to .oo2 at the time o2tial. 3!.
-lainti22 is entitled to easonaCle attone1 2ees and costs o2 the action
.usuant .' 15 8.#.C.R1*9"H?a@. 55 (;5%D C6/54 +:% %E65E+
8N+/5% /ND DECE-(5VE (%/DE -%/C(5CE# 35. -lainti22
ealleges the 2oegoing .aaga.hs as though set 2oth in 2ull heein 3*.
(he Ne7ada 8n2ai and Dece.ti7e (ade -actice /ct, N%# 59&.'9"3
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT ""
de2ines a Fdece.ti7e tade .acticeF as conducting a Cusiness o
occu.ation Bithout all equied state, , count1 o cit1 licensesK N%#
59&.'9"3?1@, and as 7iolating a state o 2edeal statute o egulation
elating to the sale o lease o2 goods o se7icesK N%# 59&.'9"3?3@. 37.
(hat a 7iolation o2 N%# 59&.'9"3 is a dece.ti7e tade .actice and C1
sending the .lainti22 the a2oementioned notice, /uoa has 7iolated
Coth suCsections ?1@ and ?3@ o2 that laB, maHing the .lainti22s FVictims
o2 +audF as de2med C1 N%#!1.*''?"@?d@. 3&. (hat Uualit1 did not ha7e
the equied 2oeign collectoFs license Bhen it sent the a2oementioned
notice to the .lainti22 and 7iolated the N%# *!9.37' inco.oating the
+DC- /, in sending the notice that it did. 39. /s 7ictims o2 2aud the
.lainti22s ae entitled to damages, costs and attone1 2ees unde N%#
!1.*''?3@. +:8%(; C6/54 +:% %E65E+ D/4/9E# +:%
V5:6/(5:N :+ N%# 59&D.5'' !'. -lainti22 alleges, eallege and
inco.oates C1 e2eence each and e7e1 allegation contained in the
.eceding .aaga.hs. !1. -lainti22 is a CooBeK one o moe o2
De2endantsF o thei .edecessos o successos in inteest, i2 an1 such
inteest e,ists, is a lendeK Bhich, one o moe o2 the lendes made the
loan?s@ in question on -lainti22Fs home. !". #aid home loan?s@ Bee
made to -lainti22 Bithout detemining that -lainti22 had :he aCilit1 to
e.a1 the loan?s@ in 7iolation o2 N%# 59&D. 5n 2act, -lainti22 Bas
induced to ..nte into an adAustaCle ate motgage Cased u.on .omises
that she could e2inance Ce2oe he inteest ate incease Bould ha7e to Ce
.aid, thus thee Bas no need 2o he to ha7e to @o7e o shoB an aCilit1
to .a1 the u.coming inceases in motgage .a1ments .. +5+(; C6/54
+:% %E65E+ ?Uuiet (itle, N%# !'.'1'@ !3. -lainti22 alleges, ealleges
and inco.oates C1 e2eence each and e7e1 allegation contained in the
.eceding .aaga.hs. !!. :n in2omation and Celie2 .lainti22 alleges
that no e,isting de2endant oBns o he .omisso1 note o he deed o2
tustK that no de2endant has standing to Ce a .lainti22 o can 2oeclose
u.on he .o.et1K that all ights, title and inteest in he .o.et1 Bee
suClimated into a non)2unctional Nsecuit1N instument that gi7es no one
entit1 ights in 5 indi7idual notes and deeds o2 tust. !5. :n in2omation
and Celie2 .lainti22 alleges that 4E%# has intenall1 tans2eed an1
ights o titles o title o loan instuments, e2uting and 2launting the
%ecoding laBs o2 this #tate, de2auding =ashoe Count1 o2 %ecoding
2ees and maHing it im.ossiCle to ascetain, o 2o an1 de2endant to
.o7e, it has oCtained all the ights necessa1 to oCtain an inteest in
.lainti22Fs .o.et1, thus no entit1 has such inteest. !*. De2endants ha7e
.laced a cloud u.on .lainti22Fs title. !7. -lainti22 seeHs to quiet title
against all de2endants and each o2 them as o2 the date o2 this com.laint.
=;E%E+:%E, -lainti22 .a1s 2o the 2olloBing elie2: 1. +o a
declaato1 Audgment that the a2oesaid N:D Bas im.o.el1 noticed
and is null and 7oid aC initio. ". +o a declaation that the actions taHen
C1 a 2oeign co.oations, in attem.ting to collect a deCt Bithout a
2oeign collectoF s license ae 7oid aC initio, and that the same
constituted Dece.ti7e (ade -actices Bithin the meaning o2N%#
59&.'9"3. 3. +o statuto1 damages .usuant to 15 8.#.C. R1*9"H?a@, as
inco.oated C1 N%# *!9.37', in the amount o2 Z1,'''.'' 2o each
.lainti22 against +ist 6oan #e7icing. !. +o actual damages .usuant to
15 8.#.C. R1*9"H?a@ as inco.oated C1N%# *!9.37', in an amount
accoding to .oo2 at the time o2 tial against an1 and all .aties causing
diect and .o,imate ham to the .lainti22. 5. +o geneal damages
against de2endants in e,cess o2Z1','''.''. *. +o 3udgment quieting
title in .lainti22sF 2a7o as oBne in 2ee sim.le o2 the -o.et1 desciCed
heein. (hat de2endant?s@ aud each o2 them ha7e no ight, title, estate,
lien o inteest in the -o.et1 ad7ese to .lainti22 sK 7. +o such othe
and 2uthe damages o2 an1 Hind against all .aties ... ma1 .. a..ea Aust
and .o.e at tial. &. +o easonaCle attone1 2ees and costs o2 the
action....N
/nd the Ca.enties ha7e a meitoious case.
AFFIRMATION P1r;1275 5o NRS !D-B#*D*
D/(ED this 3anua1 13, "'1":
OsO Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
/ttone1 2o -lainti22s 3oan E. and 3ames Ca.entie
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT "!
DECLARATION OF JAMES S CARPENTIER AND JOAN E# CARPENTIER
27= ZACH COUGHLIN, ES$# IN SUPPORT OF SUPPLEMNT TO MOTION
TO SET ASIDE ORDER 27= REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO SET
ASIDE ORDER
1. (his Declaation is made .usuant to the .o7isions o2 N%# 53.'!5, Be ae .esentl1
in the #tate o2 Ne7ada and 5 declae unde .enalt1 o2 .eAu1 that the 2oegoing is tue
and coect.
". Declaants ae the -lainti22s in CV'&)'17'9 o attone1 o2 ecod.
3. Declaants a7e that the 2actual statements set 2o aCo7e in this %e.l1 to :..osition
to -lainti22Fs 4otion to #et /side and in the ealie 2iled -lainti22Fs 4otion to #et /side
ae ae accuate.
!. 5, 3/4E# # C/%-EN(5E% and 5, 3:/N E. C/%-EN(5E%, and Z/C; C:89;65N
ae a7ailaCle to testi21, i2 necessa1, as to these mattes. 5 declae unde .enalt1 o2
.eAu1 that the 2oegoing is tue and coect.
E,ecuted on 3anua1 13, "'11
VVOs[ 3im Ca.entieVVVVV
3/4E# # C/%-EN(5E%
-6/5N(5++
VVVV3oen E. Ca.entieVVV
3:/N E C/%-EN(5E%
-6/5N(5++
OsO Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
attone1 2o the Ca.enties
PROOF OF SERVICE
5, Zach Coughlin, declae, that on 3anua1 13, "'1", 5 caused the 2oegoing to
Ce deli7e to all named De2endantFs in this action, C1 electonic 2iling to:
Sistin /. #chule);intG, Esq.
Chisto.e ;unte, Esq.
4cCath1 J ;olthus, 66-
951' =. #ahaa /7e., #uite 11'
6as Vegas , NV &9117
-hone: 7'")*&5)'3"9
+a,: &**)339)5*91
HhintG0mccath1holthus.com
/tt1 2o DE+(F# %E#5DEN(5/6 C%ED5( #:68(5:N# 5NC, /ND U8/65(<
6:/N #E%V5CE C:%-:%/(5:NF#
/nd 7ia deli7eing to thei attone1Fs o2 ecod C1 e2iling ?i2 he is an e2ile@, 2a,,
email and de.ositing a tue and coect co.1 o2 this document in the 8# mail on this
date addessed to:
Eic B. ZimCelman, Esq.
-eel Bimle1, 66-
"'1! E. 4adison, #uite 1''
#eattle , =/ 9&1""
-hone: "'*)77')3339
+a,: "'*)77')3!9'
eGimCelman0.eelCimle1.com
/tt1 2o DE+(F#=5ND#:% 4/N/9E4E(N C:. /ND /CC%ED5(ED
;:4E 6ENDE%#, 5NC. /# #8CCE##:% 5N 5N(E%E#( (: //4E# +8ND5N9
C:%-:%/(5:N DB/ //4E# ;:4E 6:/N
D/(ED this 3anua1 13th, "'1"
OsO Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
/ttone1 2o -lainti22s 3oni and 3ames Ca.entie%
MOTION TO SET ASIDE ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT "*
F I L E D
Electronically
04-20-2012:03:49:12 PM
Clerk of the Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
AAMES HOME LOAN, a Califoria
COMPANY, a Califoria corporation;
INC., a Texas corporation; QUALITY
LOAN SERVICE CORPORATION, a
Califoria corporation; and DOES I through
X, inclusive,
Defendant.

Case No.:
Dept. No.:
19
ORDER
CV08-01709
7
20
Currently before this Court is Plaintiffs JAMES S. CARPENTIER and JOAN E
21 CARPENTIER's (collectively "the Carpentiers") Emergency Motion for TROIlnjunction; 0
22 Pled in the Alterative; Motion to Set Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment ("Emergenc
23 Motion") fled on December 31, 2011. On Jauary 4, 2012, Defendants RESIDENTIA
24 CRDIT SOLUTIONS, INC. ("RCS") and QUALITY LOAN SERVICE CORPORATIO
25
("Quality") (collectively "Defendants") fled a Request for Rule 11 Sanctions and Opposition t
26 Emergency Motion for TROIlnjunction or in the Alternative Motion to Set Aside Order Grantin
27 Summary Judgment. On Januay 11, 2012, the Carpentiers fled a Reply to Opposition t
28
1
1 Plainti's Emergency Motion for TROIlnjunction; or Pled in the Alternative; Motion to Se
2 Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment. This Order now follows.
3 BACKGROUND
4 This case involves a residential foreclosure. The real property involved is 2873 Sunn
5 Slope Drive, Sparks, Nevada 89434 ("the Property"). On May 4,2005, the Carpentiers execute
6 a promissory note for $170,800.00 in favor of Aames Funding Corporation DBA Aames Hom
7 Loan ("Aames") and secured the note with a deed of trust on the Property. The deed of trust wa
8 recorded that same day. At some point thereafer, the Carentiers defaulted on the note. 0
9 March 10, 2008, Aames allegedly assigned the deed of trust to Deutsche Bank National Trus
10 Company in its capacity as indenture trustee for the Noteholders of Aames Mortgage Investmen
11 Trust 2005-2 ("Deutsche").
12 However, two days afer that, on March 12, 2008, Quality - not Aames, the origina
13 lender or Deutsche, the purorted trustee - fled a Notice of Breach ad Default and of Electio
14 to Cause Sale of Real Property Under Deed of Trust ("NOD") concering the Property. In
15 ostensible attempt to "cure" this discrepancy retroactively, on April 18, 2008 Jennifer Lennon,
16 purorted Vice President for Deutsche, executed a Substitution of Trustee on Deutsche's behal
17 and substituted Quality as the trustee.
18 On May 9, 2008, the assignment that allegedly occurred on March 10,2008 was fnall
19 recorded, thereby making Deutsche the trustee. Again, it appears this recording was an attemp
20 to make Deutsche the trustee retroactively, which, in tum, would make valid: (a) Deutsche'
21 Substitution of Trustee to Quality and (b) Quality's fling of the NOD. According to Defendants
22 RCS has always been the servicer of the loan.
23 On June 26, 2008, the Capentiers filed a Complaint against, inter alia, Defendants an
24 Aames alleging unfair lending practices under NRS 598D.I00. The Carpentiers alleged Aame
25 intentionally infated the Capentiers' monthly income in order to qualif them for the loan. I
26 addition to treble damages, the Carpentiers sought a preliminary injunction to prevent th
27 scheduled foreclosure on the Property. On August 19,2008, this Court granted the Carpentiers'
28 request for a preliminary injunction.
2
1 Defendants fled an Answer on September 29, 2008 generally denying the Carpentiers'
2 allegations and asserting several affrmative defenses. Defendants later fled a Motion fo
3 Summary Judgment ("MSJ") on June 23, 2010. In their MSJ, Defendants averred th
4 Carentiers' Complaint focused on Aames exclusively and contained no allegations of unfai
5 lending practices against RCS or Quality, other than vague allegations that Aames and RC
6 offered to provide the Carpentiers with false or fraudulent W2 forms. On July 15, 2010, thi
7 Court granted Defendants' MSJ on the grounds that the Carpentiers "failed to fle an Oppositio
8 or any responsive pleading." Pursuat to District Court Rule 13(3), this Court construed such
9 failure as an admission that the MSJ was meritorious. The Carpentiers neither appealed thi
10 decision nor requested reconsideration.
11 On October 3, 2011, Quality recorded a Notice of Sale to commence the foreclosure. 0
12 December 31, 2011, the Carentiers, by and through teir new counsel Zach Coughlin, Esq.
13 fled the above-mentioned Emergency Motion, in which they requested an injunction to preven
14 the foreclosure, damages in excess of $10,000.00, treble damages and sactions under Nevada'
15 Foreclosure Mediation Program: In the alterative, the Capentiers requested this Court to se
16 aside the Order granting Defendants' MSJ on the grounds that Defendants' MSJ incorrect!
17 contained "Clark County" instead of "Washoe County" in the caption.
18 DISCUSSION
19 In their Opposition to the Carpentiers' Emergency Motion, Defendants aver th
20 Emergency Motion is procedurally improper under NRCP 65(b); that the Carpentiers have n
21 reasonable probability of success on the merits because judgment has already been entere
22 against them; that the Carpentiers have failed to establish excusable neglect to explain thei
23 failure to oppose Defendants' MSJ; and that the Emergency Motion is untimely under NRCP 60
24 Thus, Defendants contend the Emergency Motion should be denied. This Court agrees.
25 Legal Standards
26 '" A preliminary injunction is available when the moving party can demonstate that th
27 nonmoving party's conduct, if allowed to continue, will cause irreparable harm for whic
28 compensatory relief is inadequate and that the moving party has a reasonable likelihood 0
3
1 success on the merits.'" Finkel v. Cashman Professional, Inc., 128 Nev. Adv. Op. 6, 270, P.3
2 1259, 1262 (Mar. 1,2012) (quoting Boulder Oaks Cmty. Ass'n v. B & J Andrews, 125 Nev. 397
3 403,215 P.3d 27,31 (2009)).
4 Under NRCP 60(b), the district court may relieve a party from a fnal judgment for th
5 following reasons: (1) mistake, inadvertence, surprise, or neglect; (2) newly discovered evidence
6 (3) fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct by the adverse party; (4) void jUdgment; or (5) th
7 judgment has been satisfed, released, or discharged. The district court's grant or denial unde
8 NRCP 60(b) on the grounds of mistake, inadvertence, surprise or excusable neglect "will not b
9 disturbed upon appeal absent an abuse of discretion." Lindblom v. Prime Hospitalit Cor., 12
10 Nev. 372, 375, 90 P.3d 1283, 1284 (2004) (citation omitted). "A party must make an applicatio
11 for relief under NRCP 60(b)(1) within six months afer entry of the judgment." Id., 90 P .3d a
12 1284-85.
13 Legal Analysis
14 In this case, the merits of the Carentiers' claim, i.e. the allegations contained in th
15 Carpentiers' Complaint, have been adjudicated by this Court. See Caentier v. Aames, CV08
16 01709 (July 15, 2010). Consequently, the Carpentiers canot satisfy a necessary element of
17 preliminary injunction request, namely that the moving party-here, the Carpentiers-has
18 reasonable likelihood of success on the merits. On that ground alone, therefore, the Carpentiers'
19 Emergency Motion is DENIED. In addition, this Court concludes the Carpentiers' altemativ
20 request to set aside the Order granting su ary judgment is untimely because it was fled nearl
21 eighteen months afer the Order's entry. See Lindblom, 120 Nev. at 375,90 P.3d at 1284-85.
22 With regard to Defendants' request for Rule 11 sanctions against Mr. Coughlin, thi
23 Court fnds as follows. Notwithstanding the unprofessional character of Mr. Coughlin'
24 pleadings-particularly the excessive page length, incongruous formatting, allegations regardin
25 unrelated personal matters, and unintelligible and frivolous allegations about other collatera
26 matters-this Court will not issue sanctions against Mr. Coughlin for this conduct. This Order
27 however, shall serve as notice to Mr. Coughlin to conduct himself in the fture in accordanc
28
4
1 with NRCP 11, the local rules of practice in this district, the general rules of practice in Nevad
2 district courts, and the Nevada Rules of Professional Conduct.
3 Finally, this Court makes the following observations. The arguments raised by th
4 parties in their pleadings generally circumscribe the adjudicatory boundaries of this Court. See
5 ,Breliant v. Preferred Equities Cor., 109 Nev. 842, 847, 858 P.2d 1258, 1261 (1993
6 (stating a district court generally may not consider matters outside of the pleadings whe
7 reviewing a motion to dismiss). As such, this Court takes no position on whether the fnancia
8 institutions in this case followed the law when they were lining up the documents to foreclose 0
9 the Property. Nonetheless, the manner and timing in which these institutions-particularl
10 Aames, Deutsche, ad Quality-recorded the assignment, fled the Substitution of Trustee, a
11 fled the Notice of Default, is suspicious and troubling to this Court.
12 CONCLUSION
13 Accordingly, the Carentiers' Emergency Motion for TROIlnjunction; or Pled in th
14 Alternative; Motion to Set Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment is DENIED.
15 IT IS SO ORDERED.
16 DATED this c day of April, 2012.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
PATRICK FLANA
District Judge
1 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
2 Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I hereby certif that I a an employee of the Second Judicial
3 District Court of the State of Nevada, County of Washoe; that on this ro day of April, 2012,
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
I electronically fled the following with the Clerk of the Court by using the ECF system which
will send a notice of electronic filing to the following:
Zachary Coughlin, Esq. for the Carpentiers; and
Kristin Schuler-Hintz, Esq. for RCS.
I deposited in the Washoe County mailing system for postage and mailing with the
United States Postal Service in Reno, Nevada, a true copy of the attached document addressed
to:
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Document Code:
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
PO BOX 3961
eno, !" #9$%$
&ele: ''$(33#(#11#
)a*: 9+9(66'('+%,
ZachCoughlin-hotmail.com
.tto/ne0 1o/ 2oan and 2ames Ca/3entie/
4! &5E 6ECO!D 27D4C4.8 D46&4C& CO7& O) &5E 6&.&E O) !E".D.
4! .!D )O &5E CO7!&9 O) :.65OE
2.;E6 C.PE!&4E, E& .8,
Plainti11

<.
..;E6 )7!D4!= COP E&.8,
De1endant
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

C.6E !O: C"%#(%1'%9
DEP&: D'
MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND ORDER, OR NEW TRIAL, OR PLED IN
THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
Plainti11s 2.;E6 6. C.PE!&4E and 2O.! E C.PE!&4E?s @collecti<el0 Athe
Ca/3entie/sA>, he/eB0, th/ough thei/ atto/ne0, Zach Coughlin, Esq. )ile this aBo<e title ;otion in
/esonse to this Cou/ts /ecent O/de/ o1 +C,%C1,, Based this ;otion and the 3a3e/s and 3leadings on 1ile in
this matte/. 4t is im3o/tant to note that a !otice o1 escission 1o the !otice o1 De1ault in this case 1/om
,%%# Das 1iled on +C6C1,. .s such, this neDl0 disco<e/ed e<idence 3/o<ides a Basis 1o/ alte/ing o/
amending the /ecent O/de/ o1 this Cou/t Dhe/ein the ;otion 1o/ elie1 1/om 2udgment Das denied. &he
- 1
;O&4O! &O .8&E O .;E!D ODE, O !E: &4.8, O P8ED 4! &5E .8&E!.&4"E, ;O&4O! )O
ECO!64DE.&4O!
F I L E D
Electronically
05-07-2012:11:48:52 PM
Clerk of the Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
unde/signed taEes heed o1 the ule 11 Da/ning gi<en B0 this Cou/t and a33/eciates the o33o/tunit0 to
st/i<e to do Bette/ hence1o/th. .dditionall0, the Ft/ouBlingG as3ects o1 the <a/ious attem3ts to assign
and suBstitute &/ustee?s, /et/oacti<el0, he/e, 3/o<ide a 1/aud Based Basis 1o/ alte/ing o/ amending the
/ecent O/de/ o/ othe/Dise alloDign 1o/ some /elie1 1/om 2udgment.
7n1o/tunatel0, this 1iling is liEel0 not much o1 an im3/o<ement u3on /ecent 1ilings, hoDe<e/, the
unde/signed Das inca/ce/ated, again, 1/om .3/il 19th to .3/il ,'th due to 8aEes C/ossing /e3o/ting to
2udge Elliot dis1a<o/aBl0 u3on the unde/signed?s 3a/tici3ation in a com3etenc0 e<aluation, Dhe/ein the
unde/signed sought to maintain some sh/ed o1 3/i<ac0 <is a <is his health ca/e, and not Be 3unished 1o/
electing to utiliHe the 3uBlic de1ende/, and not to Be /etaliated against 1o/ c/iticiHing some o1 that 3uBlic
de1ende/?s a33/oaches.
Essentiall0, this ;otion seeEs to ha<e this Cou/t /ule on the 1act that the O/de/ g/anting
De1endant?s ;otion 1o/ 6umma/0 2udgment Das <oid gi<en that the P/oo1 o1 6e/<ice on that ;otion 1o/
6umma/0 2udgment indicated it Das mailed to one Dho Das no longe/ atto/ne0 o1 /eco/d, in addition to
the cou/t name o/ count0 o/ case numBe/ Being D/ong on the <a/ious ;otions to Dismiss, and o/
;otions 1o/ 6umma/0 2udgment. )ailu/e to adequatel0 add/ess the ;otion )o/ 6umma/0 Iudgment
3/esent a 6%B+ Basis 1o/ set aside gi<en the lacE o1 se/<ice o/ notice. )ailu/e o1 se/<ice o1 notice )ault0
se/<ice o1 3/ocess 3/o<ided good cause to set aside de1ault Iudgment. ;ichel <. Eighth 2udicial Dist.
Cou/t e* /el. Count0 o1 Cla/E, ,%%1, 1' P.3d 1%%3, 11' !e<. 1+$, /ehea/ing denied. F. motion to set
aside a <oid Iudgment need not Be made Dithin si* months? 3e/iod s3eci1ied B0 /ule. !CP 6%@B>.
)oste/ <. 8eDis, 196,, 3', P.,d 6'9, '# !e<. 33%. Consent Iudgment quieting title to land Dhich had
Been 3u/chased at ta* sale could Be set aside on motion o1 count0 onl0 i1 it Das <oid Dhe/e mo/e than
si* months had ela3sed since its ent/0. !CP 6%@B>. Cla/E Count0 <. 8eDis, 19',, +9# P.,d 363.G
Plainti11s De/e not de3/i<ed o1 due 3/ocess o1 laD as a /esult o1 the ent/0 o1 de1ault Iudgment against
them in state cou/t des3ite de3ut0 constaBle?s alleged 1ailu/e to se/<e 3lainti11s Dith 3/ocess, Because no
- 2
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1inal Iudgment had Been ente/ed against 3lainti11s in the state cou/t, and state laD 3/o<ided 3lainti11s
Dith the o33o/tunit0 to /equest a hea/ing to <acate de1ault Iudgment and to oBtain a t/ial on the me/its
3/io/ to ent/0 o1 a 1inal Iudgment. 7.6.C... Const..mends. $, 1+. ;cCulloch <. :ashoe Count0, 19#3,
',% ).,d 1%,%. Constitutional 8aD +%1% Plainti11s De/e not de3/i<ed o1 3/o3e/t0 Dithout due 3/ocess
o1 laD B0 ent/0 o1 de1ault Iudgment against them Based on allegedl0 1alse a11ida<it o1 de3ut0 constaBle,
Dhe/e state a11o/ded mo/e than adequate 3ostde3/i<ation /emedies Dhich, i1 3/o3e/l0 3u/sued, Dould
eliminate 3ossiBilit0 o1 suBstantial damage. !e<.ules Ci<.P/oc., ules $$@a, c>, 6%@c>J 7.6.C...
Const..mend. 1+. ;cCulloch <. :ashoe Count0, 19#,, $$1 ).6u33. 1%,,, a11i/med ',% ).,d 1%,%.
.t some 3oint the/ea1te/, the Ca/3entie/s de1aulted on the note. % ;a/ch 1%, ,%%#, .ames
allegedl0 assigned the deed o1 t/ust to Deutsche BanE !ational &/us Com3an0 in its ca3acit0 as
indentu/e t/ustee 1o/ the !oteholde/s o1 .ames ;o/tgage 4n<estmen &/ust ,%%$(, @ADeutscheA>.
5oDe<e/, tDo da0s a1te/ that, on ;a/ch 1,, ,%%#, Kualit0 ( not .ames, the o/igina lende/ o/ Deutsche,
the 3u/3o/ted t/ustee ( 1iled a !otice o1 B/each and De1ault and o1 Electio to Cause 6ale o1 eal
P/o3e/t0 7nde/ Deed o1 &/ust @A!ODA> conce/ning the P/o3e/t0. 4n ostensiBle attem3t to Acu/eA this
disc/e3anc0 /et/oacti<el0, on .3/il 1#, ,%%# 2enni1e/ 8ennon, 3u/3o/ted "ice P/esident 1o/ Deutsche,
e*ecuted a 6uBstitution o1 &/ustee on Deutsche?s Behal and suBstituted Kualit0 as the t/ustee. On ;a0
9, ,%%#, the assignment that allegedl0 occu//ed on ;a/ch 1%,,%%# Das 1inall /eco/ded, the/eB0 maEing
Deutsche the t/ustee. .gain, it a33ea/s this /eco/ding Das an attem3 to maEe Deutsche the t/ustee
/et/oacti<el0, Dhich, in tum, Dould maEe <alid: @a> Deutsche? 6uBstitution o1 &/ustee to Kualit0 and @B>
Kualit0?s 1iling o1 the !OD. .cco/ding to De1endants C6 has alDa0s Been the se/<ice/ o1 the loan. On
2une ,6, ,%%#, the Ca/3entie/s 1iled a Com3laint against, inte/ alia, De1endants an .ames alleging
un1ai/ lending 3/actices unde/ !6 $9#D.4%%. &he Ca/3entie/s alleged .ame intentionall0 in1lated the
Ca/3entie/s? monthl0 income in o/de/ to quali10 them 1o/ the loan. 4 addition to t/eBle damages, the
Ca/3entie/s sought a 3/elimina/0 inIunction to 3/e<ent th scheduled 1o/eclosu/e on the P/o3e/t0. On
- 3
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
.ugust 19,,%%#, this Cou/t g/anted the Ca/3entie/s? /equest 1o/ a 3/elimina/0 inIunction. De1endants
1iled an .nsDe/ on 6e3temBe/ ,9, ,%%# gene/all0 den0ing the Ca/3entie/s? allegations and asse/ting
se<e/al a11i/mati<e de1enses. De1endants late/ 1iled a ;otion 1o 6umma/0 2udgment @A;62A> on 2une
,3, ,%1%. 4n thei/ ;62, De1endants a<e//ed th Ca/3entie/s? Com3laint 1ocused on .ames e*clusi<el0
and contained no allegations o1 un1ai lending 3/actices against C6 o/ Kualit0, othe/ than <ague
allegations that .ames and C o11e/ed to 3/o<ide the Ca/3entie/s Dith 1alse o/ 1/audulent :, 1o/ms.
On 2ul0 1$, ,%1%, thi Cou/t g/anted De1endants? ;62 on the g/ounds that the Ca/3entie/s A1ailed to 1ile
an O33ositio o/ an0 /es3onsi<e 3leading.A Pu/suant to Dist/ict Cou/t ule 13@3>, this Cou/t const/ued
such 1ailu/e as an admission that the ;62 Das me/ito/ious. &he Ca/3entie/s neithe/ a33ealed thi
decision no/ /equested /econside/ation. On OctoBe/ 3, ,%11, Kualit0 /eco/ded a !otice o1 6ale to
commence the 1o/eclosu/e. % DecemBe/ 31, ,%11, the Ca/3entie/s, B0 and th/ough thei/ neD counsel
Zach Coughlin, Esq. 1iled the aBo<e(mentioned Eme/genc0 ;otion, in Dhich the0 /equested an
inIunction to 3/e<en the 1o/eclosu/e, damages in e*cess o1 L1%,%%%.%%, t/eBle damages and sanctions
unde/ !e<ada? )o/eclosu/e ;ediation P/og/am: 4n the alte/nati<e, the Ca/3entie/s /equested this Cou/t
to se aside the O/de/ g/anting De1endants? ;62 on the g/ounds that De1endants? ;62 inco//ectM
contained ACla/E Count0A instead o1 A:ashoe Count0A in the ca3tion.
D46C7664O!
4n thei/ O33osition to the Ca/3entie/s? Eme/genc0 ;otion, De1endants a<e/ th Eme/genc0 ;otion is
3/ocedu/all0 im3/o3e/ unde/ !CP 6$@B>J that the Ca/3entie/s ha<e n /easonaBle 3/oBaBilit0 o1 success
on the me/its Because Iudgment has al/ead0 Been ente/e against themJ that the Ca/3entie/s ha<e 1ailed to
estaBlish e*cusaBle neglect to e*3lain thei 1ailu/e to o33ose De1endants? ;62J and that the Eme/genc0
;otion is untimel0 unde/ !CP 6% &hus, De1endants contend the Eme/genc0 ;otion should Be
denied. &his Cou/t ag/ees. 8egal 6tanda/ds
- 4
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
?A . 3/elimina/0 inIunction is a<ailaBle Dhen the mo<ing 3a/t0 can demonst/ate that th nonmo<ing
3a/t0?s conduct, i1 alloDed to continue, Dill cause i//e3a/aBle ha/m 1o/ Dhic com3ensato/0 /elie1 is
inadequate and that the mo<ing 3a/t0 has a /easonaBle liEelihood % success on the me/its.?A )inEel <.
Cashman P/o1essional, 4nc., 1,# !e<. .d<. O3. 6, ,'%, P.3 1,$9, 1,6, @;a/. 1,,%1,> @quoting Boulde/
OaEs Cmt0. .ss?n <. B N 2 .nd/eDs, 1,$ !e<. 39' +%3,,1$ P.3d ,',31 @,%%9>>.
7nde/ !CP 6%@B>, the dist/ict cou/t ma0 /elie<e a 3a/t0 1/om a 1inal Iudgment 1o/ th 1olloDing
/easons: @1> mistaEe, inad<e/tence, su/3/ise, o/ neglectJ @,> neDl0 disco<e/ed e<idenceO @3> 1/aud,
mis/e3/esentation, o/ misconduct B0 the ad<e/se 3a/t0J @+> <oid I7dgmentJ o/ @$> th Iudgment has Been
satis1ied, /eleased, o/ discha/ged. &he dist/ict cou/t?s g/ant o/ denial unde !CP 6%@B> on the g/ounds
o1 mistaEe, inad<e/tence, su/3/ise o/ e*cusaBle neglect ADill not B distu/Bed u3on a33eal aBsent an
aBuse o1 disc/etion.A 8indBlom <. P/ime 5os3italit0 Co/3., 1, !e<. 3',, 3'$, 9% P.3d 1,#3, 1,#+
@,%%+> @citation omitted>. A. 3a/t0 must maEe an a33licatio 1o/ /elie1 unde/ !CP 6%@B>@1> Dithin si*
months a1te/ ent/0 o1 the Iudgment.A 4d., 9% P .3d a 1,#+(#$.G
5oDe<e/, F6i* months? limitation has no a33lication to action 1o/ /elie1 1/om Iudgment Because
o1 e*t/insic 1/aud. !CP 6%@B>.G ;an<ille <. ;an<ille, 1963, 3#' P.,d 661, '9 !e<. +#'. &he <e/0
as3ects o1 this case that this Cou/t 1ound t/ouBling 3/o<ide su33o/t 1o/ 3/oceeding unde/ this Basis.
8egal .nal0sis
&his cou/t /ecentl0 O/de/ed, F 4n this case, the me/its o1 the Ca/3entie/s? claim, i.e. the allegations
contained in th Ca/3entie/s? Com3laint, ha<e Been adIudicated B0 this Cou/t. 6ee Ca/3entie/ <. .ames,
C"%# %1'%9 @2ul0 1$, ,%1%>. Consequentl0, the Ca/3entie/s cannot satis10 a necessa/0 element o1
3/elimina/0 inIunction /equest, namel0 that the mo<ing 3a/t0(he/e, the Ca/3entie/s(has /easonaBle
liEelihood o1 success on the me/its. On that g/ound alone, the/e1o/e, the Ca/3entie/s? Eme/genc0
;otion is DE!4ED.G
- 5
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5oDe<e/, F1. :hethe/ the mo<ant has made a shoDing o1 liEelihood o1 success on the me/its.
Because this Cou/t has al/ead0 ente/ed Iudgment against o0ce in this ad<e/sa/0 3/oceeding, the Cou/t
is not 3/e3a/ed to conclude that o0ce has shoDn a liEelihood o1 success on the me/its. 5oDe<e/, Fthe
a33ellant need not alDa0s shoD a 3/oBaBilit0 o1 success on the me/itsJ instead, the mo<ant need onl0
3/esent a suBstantial case on the me/its Dhen a se/ious legal question is in<ol<ed and shoD that the
Balance o1 the equities Deighs hea<il0 in 1a<o/ o1 g/anting the sta0.G ./nold, ,'# ).3d at +39 @citations
omitted>J )i/st 6outh 6a<ings, #,% ).,d at '%+. o0ce has 3/esented tDent0(one 3oints o1 e//o/
challenging this Cou/t?s 1indings o1 1act and conclusions o1 laD. &hese 3oints o1 e//o/ include the
Cou/t?s 1indings on Dhethe/ an o3tion cont/act ma0 Be suBIect to to/tious inte/1e/ence, Dhethe/ the
Cou/t Based the 2udgment on 1acts not 3leaded, Dhethe/ o0ce had a good 1aith claim Iusti10ing its
inte/1e/ence Dith the 6a/atoga 63/ings cont/act, and Dhethe/ the Cou/t e//ed in aDa/ding consequential
damages and 3/eIudgment inte/est P.d<. Doc. !o. $%, 33. ,Q$R. :hile in this Cou/t?s <ieD o0ce does
not ha<e a high 3/oBaBilit0 o1 success, the Cou/t is unDilling to de3/i<e o0ce o1 its o33o/tunit0 to sta0
the 2udgment 3ending a33eal Dithout 1i/st conside/ing the inte/ests at staEe. 4n /e ;ounce, !o. %3Q
$$%,,, ,%%# :8 ,'1++,3, at S, @:.D.&e*. 2ul0 1%, ,%%#> @stating that F... cou/ts should not den0
a33lications 1o/ a sta0 3ending a33eal sim3l0 Because the mo<ant has 1ailed to demonst/ate its
liEelihood o1 success on the me/itsG>. .cco/dingl0, the Cou/t Deighs this 1i/st 1acto/ against the othe/
th/ee 1acto/s discussed BeloD to dete/mine Dhethe/ Fthe Balance o1 the equities Deighs hea<il0 in 1a<o/
o1 g/anting the sta0 .G ./nold, ,'# ).3d at +39. BE/tc0.6.D.&e*.,,%%#. 4n /e DecEe/ OaEs De<elo3ment
44, 8td. !ot e3o/ted in B.., ,%%# :8 ,#1,1', @BE/tc0.6.D.&e*.>. 6C ule 1,3. Citation to
un3uBlished o3inions and o/de/s. .n un3uBlished o3inion o/ o/de/ o1 the !e<ada 6u3/eme Cou/t shall
not Be /ega/ded as 3/ecedent and shall not Be cited as legal autho/it0 e*ce3t Dhen the o3inion o/ o/de/
is @1> /ele<ant unde/ the doct/ines o1 laD o1 the case, /es Iudicata o/ collate/al esto33elJ @,> /ele<ant to a
c/iminal o/ disci3lina/0 3/oceeding Because it a11ects the same de1endant o/ /es3ondent in anothe/ such
- 6
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3/oceedingJ o/ @3> /ele<ant to an anal0sis o1 Dhethe/ /ecommended disci3line is consistent Dith
3/e<ious disci3line o/de/s a33ea/ing in the state Ba/ 3uBlication. &he aBo<e is not a !e<ada 6u3/eme
Cou/t O3inion, hoDe<e/.
Dist/ict cou/t had the 3oDe/ to o/de/ 3ost3onement o1 3lainti11?s scheduled 1o/eclosu/e sale in one
o1 tDo Da0s: the mo<ing 3a/t0 could ha<e com3lied Dith the /ules 1o/ an inIunction, o/ secu/ed the
sti3ulation o1 othe/ 3a/t0. ules Ci<.P/oc., ule 6$. 6Hilag0i <. &esta, 19#3, 6'3 P.,d +9$, 99 !e<. #3+.
:hen 3/esented Dith a motion 1o/ a disc/etiona/0 sta0 3ending a33eal, Cou/t o1 .33eals em3lo0s
1ou/(3a/t test, asEing @1> Dhethe/ mo<ant has made a shoDing o1 liEelihood o1 success on me/its, @,>
Dhethe/ the mo<ant has made a shoDing o1 i//e3a/aBle inIu/0 i1 sta0 is not g/anted, @3> Dhethe/
g/anting sta0 Dould suBstantiall0 ha/m othe/ 3a/ties, and @+> Dhethe/ g/anting sta0 Dould se/<e the
3uBlic inte/estJ Dhile each 3a/t must Be met, mo<ant need not alDa0s shoD a 3/oBaBilit0 o1 success on
the me/its, But instead, need onl0 3/esent a suBstantial case on the me/its Dhen a se/ious legal question
is in<ol<ed, and shoD that the Balance o1 the equities Deighs hea<il0 in 1a<o/ o1 g/anting the sta0.
)....P.ule #, ,# 7.6.C... ./nold <. =a/locE, 4nc., ,'# ).3d +,6, $1 )ed..6e/<.3d 1,%+, @C...$
@&e*.>,,%%1>.
&his Cou/t?s /ecent O/de/ held that F4n addition, this Cou/t concludes the Ca/3entie/s? altemati<
/equest to set aside the O/de/ g/anting summa/0 Iudgment is untimel0 Because it Das 1iled nea/l
eighteen months a1te/ the O/de/?s ent/0. 6ee 8indBlom, 1,% !e<. at 3'$,9% P.3d at 1,#+(#$.G )inall0,
this Cou/t maEes the 1olloDing oBse/<ations. &he a/guments /aised B0 th 3a/ties in thei/ 3leadings
gene/all0 ci/cumsc/iBe the adIudicato/0 Bounda/ies o1 this Cou/t. 6ee T,B/eliant <. P/e1e//ed Equities
Co/3., 1%9 !e<. #+,, #+', #$# P.,d 1,$#, 1,61 @1993 @stating a dist/ict cou/t gene/all0 ma0 not
conside/ matte/s outside o1 the 3leadings Dhe /e<ieDing a motion to dismiss>. .s such, this Cou/t taEes
no 3osition on Dhethe/ the 1inancia institutions in this case 1olloDed the laD Dhen the0 De/e lining u3
the documents to 1o/eclose % the P/o3e/t0. !onetheless, the manne/ and timing in Dhich these
- 7
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
institutions(3a/ticula/l .ames, Deutsche, and Kualit0(/eco/ded the assignment, 1iled the 6uBstitution o1
&/ustee, an 1iled the !otice o1 De1ault, is sus3icious and t/ouBling to this Cou/t.
&he suBstitution o1 Kualit0 8oan 6e/<icing as the 1o/eclosu/e t/ustee Das not /eco/ded. 7nde/
the Deed o1 &/ust eco/ded on .3/il 1#, ,%%$, :indso/ ;anagement Co. Das named as the &/ustee.
!o document could Be 1ound Dith the eco/de/?s O11ice indicating an0 entit0 suBstituted Kualit0 8oan
6e/<icing as the 1o/eclosu/e t/ustee unde/ the Deed o1 &/ust.
31. De1endant?s ha<e suBstantiall0 de3a/ted 1/om the notice, manne/ o1 se/<ice, and 3/ocess
/equi/ements o1 <a/ious laD, including, But not limited to !6 1%'.%#%. :hen inqui/0 Das made Dith
De1endant?s as to the Basis, /easoning, and Iusti1ications 1o/ the de3a/tu/es, Plainti11?s De/e told that Fits
0ou/ Do/d against ou/sG and othe/Dise /es3onded to in a hostile, agg/essi<e, and dece3ti<e manne/.
;o/e disco<e/0 is in o/de/ in this /ega/d.
5oDe<e/, as ;/. ZimBelman 3/o<ided, the .3/il ,%%9 BanE/u3tc0 1iling in DelaDa/e B0
ZimBelman?s client listed, in the C/edito/ ;at/i*, a FC/edito/ !otice !ameG o1 :alsh, BaEe/, N
ose<ea/, the Ca/3entie/s then 1o/me/ atto/ne0, as 2ames :alsh?s ;otion to :ithd/aD as Counsel had
Been g/anted B0 this cou/t On 2anua/0 ,,, ,%%9, Dith :alsh 1iling a !otice o1 Ent/0 o1 that O/de/ on
2anua/0 ,6, ,%%9, in 3lent0 o1 time 1o/ ZimBelman?s client to u3date the FC/edito/ !otice !ameG and
add/ess to /e1lect the 1act that :alsh Das not atto/ne0 o1 /eco/d 1/o the Ca/3entie/s an0mo/e, and that
those notices should ha<e Been sent di/ectl0 to the Ca/3entie/s.
33.4ndeed, ;/. ZimBelman?s CE&4)4C.&E O) 6E"4CE Pu/suant to !CP $@B>, 1o/ his ;a0 19,
,%%9 1iling o1 !O&4CE O) B.!U7P&C9 )484!= .!D .7&O;.&4C 6&.9 /eads: F4 ce/ti10 that
4 am an em3lo0ee o1 PEE8 B4;8E9 88P and that on this 19th da0 o1 ;a0, ,%%9 4 caused the aBo<e
and 1o/egoing document entitled !O&4CE O) B.!U7P&C9 )484!= .!D .7&O;.&4C 6&.9 to
Be se/<ed as 1olloDs: * B0 3lacing same to Be de3osited 1o/ mailing in the 7nited 6tates ;ail, in a
sealed en<elo3e u3on Dhich 1i/st class 3ostage Das 3/e3aid in 8as "egas, !e<adaJ andCo/ * to Be sent
- 8
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
<ia 1acsimileJ to the 3a/t0@ies> andCo/ atto/ne0@s> listed BeloD at the add/ess andCo/ 1acsimile numBe/
indicated BeloD:
2ames ;. :alsh, Esq.
:alsh, BaEe/ N ose<ea/, P.C .
9+6# DouBle Bl<d. 6uite .
eno, !e<ada #9$,1
.tto/ne0s 1o/ 2ames 6. Ca/3entie/ and 2oan E. Ca/3entie/
3+.)u/the/, ;s. 6chule/(5intH 1ailed to /es3ond a33/o3/iatel0 to the O/de/ =/anting :alsh?s
:ithd/aDal as .tto/ne0 o1 eco/d, and the suBsequent !otice o1 Ent/0 o1 that O/de/ on 2anua/0 ,6,
,%%9. 5intH? ;otion to Dismiss o/ in the .lte/nati<e )o/ 6umma/0 2udgment listed :alsh 1o/ the
P/oo1 o1 6e/<ice as Dell: F 4 he/eB0 ce/ti10 that on the +th da0 o1 2une a t/ue and co//ect co30 o1
DE)E!D.!&?s E64DE!&4.8 CED4& 6O87&4O!6, 4!C., .!D K7.84&9 8O.! 6E"4CE
COPO.&4O!?6 ;O&4O! &O D46;466 O 4! &5E .8&E!.&4"E )O 67;;.9
27D=;E!& Das 1o/Da/ded B0 76 ;ail Dith 3ostage 3/e3aid to the add/esses listed BeloD:
2ames ;. :alsh
:alsh, BaEe/ N ose<ea/
9+6# DouBle Bl<d. 6uite .
eno, !e<ada #9$,1 .tto/ne0 1o/ Plainti11
)u/the/, the ca3tion on ;s. 5intH ;otion indicates the case is in De3a/tment +, des3ite the 1act
that 3m )eB/ua/0 11, ,%%9, a Case .ssignment !oti1ication Ent/0 Das ente/ed in the docEet 1o/ this
case C"%#(%1'%9, indicating this C.6E E.664=!ED &O DEP.&;E!& ' )O;
DEP.&;E!& + PE .D;4!46&.&4"E ODE.
3$.&hen, 1o/ some /eason that is not quite clea/, des3ite his co counsel 6chule/(5intH ha<ing 1iled a
;otion 1o/ 6umma/0 2udgment on 2une +th, ,%%9 in the 6econd 2udicial Dist/ict Cou/t 1o/ :ashoe
- 9
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Count0 in this action, C"%#(%1'%9, Ch/isto3e/ 5unte/, Esq. )iled a someDhat simila/ ;otion 1o/
6umma/0 2udgment in C"%9(%1'%9, @Bold em3hasis added> in a ;otion Dhich Bea/s a 1/ont 3age
heading, aBo<e the ca3tion, that /eads:
FD46&4C& CO7&
C8.U CO7!&9, !E".D.G
)u/the/, the ca3tion on ;/. 5unte/?s 2une ,3/d, ,%1%, ;otion )o/ 6umma/0 2udgment indicates
the case is in De3a/tment +, des3ite the 1act that )eB/ua/0 11, ,%%9, a Case .ssignment !oti1ication
Ent/0 Das ente/ed in the docEet 1o/ this case C"%#(%1'%9 @much less the 1ugiti<e o/ 1ictitious case
C"%9(%1'%9 that ;/. 5unte/ listed in the Ca3tion, in a Cla/E Count0 Dist/ict Cou/t case 1iled in
:ashoe Count0>, indicating this C.6E E.664=!ED &O DEP.&;E!& ' )O; DEP.&;E!&
+ PE .D;4!46&.&4"E ODE. 6o, the Ca/3entie/s De/e Bu/dened Dith Both atto/ne0s sending
im3o/tant 3leadings to one Dho Das no longe/ .tto/ne0 o1 eco/d 1o/ the Ca/3entie/s, des3ite a !otice
o1 Ent/0 o1 that O/de/ =/anting :ithd/aDal o1 2ames :alsh, Esq., in addition to ;/. 5unte/ 3utting the
D/ong cou/t and the D/ong case numBe/ on a ;otion 1o/ 6umma/0 2udgment that Dould ha<e
nonetheless
.gain, in his .ugust $, ,%%9 Ce/ti1icate o1 6e/<ice 1o/ his ;otion 1o/ 6umma/0 2udgment, ;/.
5unte/ 3uts in the ca3tion the D/ong case numBe/ and the D/ong De3a/tment numBe/, listing C"%9(
%1'%9 and De3a/tment + Dhe/e C"%#(%1'%9 and De3a/tment ' should Be. )u/the/, the 2une 9, ,%%9
!otice o1 8odgement Das sent to onl0 ZimBelman. )u/the/ in he/ Ce/ti1icate o1 6e/<ice 1o/ that !otice
o1 8odgement, 1iled se3a/atel0 on .ugust $, ,%%9, ;s. 5intH 3uts in the ca3tion the D/ong case numBe/
and the D/ong De3a/tment numBe/, listing C"%9(%1'%9 and De3a/tment + Dhe/e C"%#(%1'%9 and
De3a/tment ' should Be. 4nte/estingl0, E*hiBit 6 to 5unte/?s 2une ,3, ,%1% ;otion 1o/ 6umma/0
2udgment, Dhile containing the te*t o1 the DelaDa/e Cou/t?s O/de/ /emo<ing the sta0, doesn?t contain
the DelaDa/e BanE/u3tc0 Cou/t?s P/oo1 o1 6e/<ice 1o/ that O/de/ u3on the Ca/3entie/s....
- 10
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3'. !e*t, on 2ul0 1,th, ,%1% EK7E6& )O 67B;4664O! O) DE)E!D.!&6V E64DE!&4.8
CED4& 6O87&4O!6 , 4!C. .!D K7.84&9 8O.! 6E"4CE COPO.&4O!V6 ;O&4O! )O
67;;.9 27D=;E!&, 5unte/ again 3uts De3a/tment + in the case ca3tion Dhe/e De3a/tment '
should Be.
)inall0, on 2ul0 1$, ,%11 this Cou/t g/anted Dist/ict Cou/t ule 13 @3> 3/o<ides, A)ailu/e o1 the
o33osing 3a/t0 to se/<e and 1ile his D/itten o33osition ma0 Be const/ued as an admission that the
motion is me/ito/ious and a consent to g/anting the same.A &hus, in this case, the cou/t const/ues
Plainti11s?, 2.;E6 6. C.PE!&4E and 2O.! E. C.PE!&4E, and De1endants?, ..;E6
)7!D4!= COPO.&4O! and :4!D6O ;.!.=E;E!& CO;P.!9?6 1ailu/e to o33ose
De1endants? C6 and K86?s ;otionCo/ 6umma/0 2udgment as admission that the ;otion is
me/ito/ious.G
&he 2ul0 1$, ,%1% !otice o1 Ent/0 o1 O/de/ inco//ectl0 list De3a/tment + instead o1 De3a/tment ' in the
ca3tion.

44. 8.: .!D .=7;E!&
4. &he O/de/ =/anting 6umma/0 2udgment Ente/ed .gainst Plainti11 6hould Be 6et .side o/ "acated
Due to it Being "oid )o/ 8acE o1 2u/isdiction =i<en the !umBe/ous De1iciencies in 6e/<ice o1
Essential Pleadings and !otices 73on the Plainti11s, E*cusaBle !eglect, )/aud on &he Cou/t, an
4nte/<ening Decision o1 the !e<ada 6u3/eme Cou/t, &Do o1 them, 1/om 2ul0 ', ,%11, and &he O<e/l0
8ong Passing o1 &ime BetDeen !oD and the =/anting o1 the 6umma/0 2udgment O/de/.
&he e*cusaBle neglect a/gument is quite st/ong gi<en 5itnH and ZimBleman?s continual 1ailu/e to
a33/o3/iatel0 add/ess thei/ P/oo1?s o1 6e/<ice 1o/ <e/0, <e/0 im3o/tant documents. ;ight Be a <oidness
Basis 1o/ 6etting .side the O/de/ .s :ell. )u/the/, the O/de/ g/anting 6umma/0 2udgment is <oid
- 11
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
gi<en the lacE o1 Iu/isdiction 3ossessed B0 this Cou/t Dhe/e so man0 essential de1iciencies e*ists in this
matte/ /elated to the most 3e/tinent 1ilings and notices 3ossiBle.
F.cco/dingl0, Dhen this cou/t issues an inte/<ening decision that constitutes a change in cont/olling
laD, cou/ts ma0 de3a/t 1/om the decided laD o1 the case and a33l0 the neD /ule o1 laD.G 5su <. Count0
o1 Cla/E. 6ee, e.g., 5o3Eins <. D0e/, 1%+ Ohio 6t.3d +61, #,% !.E.,d 3,9, 333 @,%%+> @holding that an
inte/<ening o3inion issued B0 the Ohio 6u3/eme Cou/t constituted a change in cont/olling laD
necessitating de3a/tu/e 1/om the laD o1 the case doct/ine>J Dedge <. 6tate, #3, 6o.,d #3$, #36
@)la.Dist.Ct..33.,%%,> @noting that a decision B0 the )lo/ida 6u3/eme Cou/t to enact a neD 3/ocedu/al
/ule constituted a change in cont/olling laD>. FBecause De dete/mine that the change in cont/olling laD
e*ce3tion to the laD o1 the case doct/ine a33lies, De do not conside/ Dhethe/ this cou/t should also
1o/mall0 ado3t the FsuBstantial neD e<idenceG o/ Fclea/ e//o/ /esulting in mani1est inIusticeG e*ce3tions
to the laD o1 the case doct/ine. W 5oDe<e/, De oBse/<e that, des3ite the landoDne/s? contentions,
disco<e/0 o1 a /elati<el0 mino/ 1actual e//o/ in ou/ o/de/ in 5su 4 suggesting that the landoDne/s? had
oBtained a $%(1oot height <a/iance 1o/ const/uction o1 a BillBoa/d on thei/ 3/o3e/t0 does not constitute
FsuBstantial neD e<idenceG that Iusti1ies de3a/tu/e 1/om the laD o1 the case doct/ine. W Ou/
dete/mination in 5su 4 that the landoDne/s had not demonst/ated the 1utilit0 o1 e*hausting thei/
administ/ati<e /emedies /ested on se<e/al 3ie
.))4;.&4O! Pu/suant to !6 ,39B.%3%
D.&ED this '
th
da0 o1 ;a0, ,%1,:
CsC Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
.tto/ne0 1o/ Plainti11s 2oni and 2ames Ca/3entie/
- 12
ECO!64DE.&4O!
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
POO) O) 6E"4CE
4, Zach Coughlin, decla/e, that on this date 4 caused the 1o/going to Be deli<e/ to all named
De1endant?s in this action, B0 elect/onic 1iling to:
U/istin .. 6chule/(5intH, Esq.
;cCa/th0 N 5olthus, 88P
9$1% :. 6aha/a .<e., 6uite 11%
8as "egas , !" #911'
Phone: '%,(6#$(%3,9
)a*: #66(339($691
EhintH-mcca/th0holthus.com
.tt0 1o/ DE)&?6 E64DE!&4.8 CED4& 6O87&4O!6 4!C, .!D K7.84&9 8O.! 6E"4CE
COPO.&4O!?6
.nd <ia deli<e/ing to thei/ atto/ne0?s o1 /eco/d B0 1a*, email and de3ositing a t/ue and co//ect co30 o1
this document in the 76 mail Dhe/e such 3a/ties a/e not e1ile/s on this date add/essed to:
E/ic B. ZimBelman, Esq.
Peel B/imle0, 88P
,%1+ E. ;adison, 6uite 1%%
6eattle , :. 9#1,,
Phone: ,%6(''%(3339
)a*: ,%6(''%(3+9%
eHimBelman-3eelB/imle0.com
.tt0 1o/ DE)&?6:4!D6O ;.!.=E;E&! CO. .!D .CCED4&ED 5O;E 8E!!DE6,
4!C. .6 67CCE66O 4! 4!&EE6& &O ..;E6 )7!D4!= COPO.&4O! DB. ..;E6
5O;E 8O.!
D.&ED this '
th
Da0 o1 ;a0, ,%1,
CsC Zach Coughlin
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
.tto/ne0 1o/ Plainti11s 2oni and 2ames Ca/3entie/
- 13
ECO!64DE.&4O!
F I L E D
Electronically
05-17-2012:03:50:09 PM
Clerk of the Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Phone (702) 685-0329
Fax (866) 339-5691
JAMES S. CARPENTIER; and JOAN E. ))
10 CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs ~
Department No: 7
11
12
13
vs. ~ ~
14 AAMES HOME LOAN, a California )
CORPORATION'S REQUEST FOR RUL
MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND
ORDER, OR NEW TRIAL, OR PLED IN
THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, I N C . ~
Corporation; and DOES I - XX, inclusive, ~
Defendants
22 COMES NOW Defendants, Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. ("RCS") and Quality Lo
23 Service Corporation ("Quality" and collectively "Defendants"), by and through its counsel 0
24
record, Christopher M. Hunter, Esq., of McCarthy & Holthus, LLP, and files this Request fo
25
26
27
28
Imposition of Rule 11 Sanctions against Plaintiffs' Counsel and Opposition to Plaintiff's Motio
to Alter or Amend Order, or New Trial, or Pled in the Alternative, Motion for Reconsideratio
("New Motion").
- 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Las Vegas, NV 89117
Phone (702) 685-0329
Fax (866) 339-5691
JAMES S. CARPENTIER; and JOAN E. ))
10 CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs ~
Department No: 7
11
12
13
vs. ~ ~
14 AAMES HOME LOAN, a California )
CORPORATION'S REQUEST FOR RUL
MOTION TO ALTER OR AMEND
ORDER, OR NEW TRIAL, OR PLED IN
THE ALTERNATIVE, MOTION FOR
RECONSIDERATION
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS, I N C . ~
Corporation; and DOES I - XX, inclusive, ~
Defendants
22 COMES NOW Defendants, Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. ("RCS") and Quality Lo
23 Service Corporation ("Quality" and collectively "Defendants"), by and through its counsel 0
24
record, Christopher M. Hunter, Esq., of McCarthy & Holthus, LLP, and files this Request fo
25
26
27
28
Imposition of Rule 11 Sanctions against Plaintiffs' Counsel and Opposition to Plaintiff's Motio
to Alter or Amend Order, or New Trial, or Pled in the Alternative, Motion for Reconsideratio
("New Motion").
- 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
This Opposition is based upon this Notice, the attached Memorandum of Points an
Authorities, and upon all pleadings and documents herein, as well as any argument that may b
presented at the hearing of this, or any other motions/matters; the Court is requested to tak
Dated: 5/17/2012 McCarthy & Holthus, LLP
IslChristopher M. Hunter
BACKGROUND
This action concerns real property in Washoe County, Nevada known as 2873 Sunn
Slope Dr., Sparks, Nevada ("Subject Property"). Plaintiffs filed this action on July 8, 2008. 0
June 23, 2010, Defendants filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and served the Motion 0
Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs did not oppose the Motion and on July 15,2010 the Court entered an Orde
granting the Motion for Summary Judgment. Notice of Entry of the Order was filed b
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Defendants and served on Plaintiffs on July 15, 2010. Plaintiffs never filed a Motion t
Reconsider the Order and never appealed the Order.
On December 31, 2011, eighteen months after entry of the summary judgment Order
Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Set Aside the Judgment. This Court denied that Motion pursuant t
Order dated April 20, 2012.
Now, almost one month later, Plaintiffs' counsel has essentially filed the same Motion t
Set Aside Judgment as he previously filed. Plaintiffs' counsel again ignores the Rules of Civi
Procedure by filing an improper Motion for Reconsideration once again including completel
improper and unprofessional allegations (this time that counsel was incarcerated because of som
question regarding his competency).
- 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
LEGAL ANALYSIS
"A district court may reconsider a previously decided issue if substantially differen
evidence is subsequently introduced or the decision is clearly erroneous." Masonry & Til
Contractors Ass'n ofS. Nevada v. Jolley, Urga & Wirth, Ltd., 113 Nev. 737, 741, 941 P.2d 486
489 (1997). Indeed, the Nevada Supreme Court has made it clear that reconsideration is onI
appropriate in "very rare instances" where new issues of law or fact support a contrary ruling.
Moore v. City of Las Vegas, 92 Nev. 402, 405, 551 P.2d 244,246 (1976). Moreover, a motio
for reconsideration which raises no new issues oflaw or fact is superfluous. Id.
Here, Plaintiffs fail to present any new evidence and repeat the arguments presented i
the previous Motion to Set Aside. This Court has already entertained Plaintiffs' claims an
issued a well reasoned opinion explaining why they are unavailing. Now, in the absence of an
new evidence or change in controlling law, Plaintiffs bring the New Motion hoping the Co
will change its mind. As evidenced by the legal standard set out above, the purpose 0
reconsideration is to correct clear error or account for changed circumstances-not to give eve
sore loser a "do over."
Even more egregious is the "new evidence" which counsel cites-the fact that the previou
foreclosure has now been rescinded. Plaintiffs' counsel may, in fact, not even be in touch wit
his clients because Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. has now entered into a loan modificatio
agreement which, in turn, gave rise to the rescission of the foreclosure. The rescission of th
foreclosure results in all of the issues being raised by counsel being rendered moot.
- 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
l3
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
SANCTIONS SHOULD BE LEVIED AGAINST PLAINTIFFS' COUNSEL
The New Motion filed by Plaintiffs calls out for Rule 11 sanctions. The document i
wholly frivolous, indicates a disregard for the spirit, intent and processes of the Court system an
sanctions may be the only manner in which Mr. Coughlin will be deterred from such frivolou
filings in the future. Please see generally, Greenburg v. Saia, 822 F .2d 882, 885 (9th Cir. 1987
which holds that a violation of Rule 11 is complete when the improper Complaint is filed. Pleas
see also Circuit Judge Goodwin's concurring opinion in Headwaters, Inc. v. Us. Forest Service
399 F.3d 1047, at 1057 where, in a case involving issues of res judicata, the Judge stated:
"I concur in the majority opinion, but write separately to remind the district court
on remand that if the factual record developed after remand shows that a party or
counsel were, as suspected by the district court, in fact gaming the system to
prolong unnecessary litigation, the court has discretionary remedies in the nature
of costs and fees to protect the court from imposition."
Based on the fact that a loan modification has been entered into it strongly appears tha
Mr. Coughlin has not consulted with his clients before filing the New Motion.
CONCLUSION.
For the foregoing reasons, Defendants request that this Court deny Plaintiffs' Motion an
award sanctions against Plaintiffs' counsel for the cost of defending the Motion.
21 Respectfully submitted by:
22
IslChristoher M Hunter
23 Christopher M. Hunter, Esq.
9510 W. Sahara, Suite 110
24 Las Vegas, Nevada 89117
25
26
27
28
- 4
AFFIRMATION
1
2 The undersigned affinns that this document does not contain the social security number
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
of any person.
Dated: 5/17/2012 McCarthy & Holthus, LLP
IslChristopher M. Hunter, Esq.
I hereby certify that on the 17th day of May, 2012, a true and correct copy of th
foregoing Request for Imposition of Rille 11 Sanctions against Plaintiffs' Counsel an
Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Reconsideration was forwarded by United States Mail
postage prepaid and by fax to the addresses listed below.
Henderson, NV 89074
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
P.O. Box 3961
Reno, NV 89505
Is/Joni Rispalje
- 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Document Code:
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Nevada Bar No: 9473
! B!" 39#$
%eno, N& '9()(
*ele: 77(+33'+'$$'
,a-: 949+##7+74).
ZachCoughlin/hotmail.com
0ttorne1 2or Car3entiers
4N *5E 6EC!ND 78D4C409 D46*%4C* C!8%* !, *5E 6*0*E !, NE&0D0
4N 0ND ,!% *5E C!8N*: !, ;065!E
7im and 7oan Car3entier<
lainti22s,
vs.
0ames et al
De2endants.
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

C06E N!: C&)'+)$7)9
DE*: #
Opposition to Request for Sanctions etc.
C!>E6 N!;, 3art1 designated as re3resented, ?1 and through attorne1, Z0C50%:
B0%@E% C!8A594N, E6B., and 2iles the a?ove named document and moves this Court 2or the
relie2 requested herein. *his 2iling is 2urther ?ased u3on the 3a3ers and 3leadings on 2ile herein and
the >emorandum o2 oints and 0uthorities su?mitted hereCith and an1 oral argument this Court ma1
desire.
- 1
!!64*4!N *! %EB8E6* ,!% 60NC*4!N6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
*he undersigned did meet Cith ?oth clients, together, at the same time, and discussed the N%C (9 motion 2iled.
No?od1 said an1thign a?out a loan modi2ication ?eing entered into then, and neither client is indicating an1 such
modi2ication had ?een entered into as o2 this time. 4t is curious that a33arentl1 >cCarth1 5olthus oCns either %C6 or
B96 or one o2 those entities, and 1et those entities continue to call m1 clients, the Car3entiers, outside m1 3resence, in
3erha3s a violation o2 the %C against communicating Cith re3resneted 3arties, to the e-tent %C6 or B96 is an e-tension
o2 >cCarth1 5olthus. %egardless, no .$ da1 sa2e har?or sanction motion Cas served, thus N%C $$, and there?1 N%6
7.)'( and N%6 $'.).)D.=D?= are unavailing.
AFFIRMATION Pursuant to NRS 23!."3"
*he undersigned does here?1 a22irm that the 3receding document does not contain the social
securit1 num?er o2 an1 3erson.
D0*ED this 7une (, .)$..
EsE Zach Coughlin, signed electronicall1
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
0ttorne1 2or Car3entiers
- 2
!!64*4!N *! %EB8E6* ,!% 60NC*4!N6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
PROOF OF SER#I$E
4, Zach Coughlin, declare:
!n this date, 4, >r. Zach Coughlin served the 2oregoing document ?1 2a-ing and
serving u3on registered e2ilers via electronicall1 2iling:
C5%46*!5E% 58N*E% 0ND
@%46*4N 6C589E%+54N*Z !,
>CC0%*5: 5!9*586
0**!%NE:6 ,!% DE,END0N*6
B96 0ND %C6
0ND
E%4C Z4>B9E>0N
0**!%NE: ,!% 00>E6
D0*ED this 7une (, .)$..
EsE Zach Coughlin, signed electronicall1
Zach Coughlin, Esq.
033ellant
- 3
!!64*4!N *! %EB8E6* ,!% 60NC*4!N6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Zach Coughlin, Esq.
Nevada Bar No: 9473
PO BOX 39!
"eno, N# $9%&%
'ele: 77%(33$($!!$
)a*: 949(7(74&+
,--orne. /or Car0en-iers
1N '2E 3ECON4 5641C1,7 413'"1C' CO6"' O) '2E 3','E O) NE#,4,
1N ,N4 )O" '2E CO6N'8 O) 9,32OE
5a:es and 5oan C,"PEN'1E", E',7
Plain-i//,
vs.
,,;E3 )6N41N< CO"P., E',7=
4e/endan-.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Case No: CV08-01709
Dept No: D7
MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL OF RECORD
CO;E3 NO9, Car0en-ier?s? counsel o/ record Z,C2 CO6<271N, E3@., and /iles -his
:o-ion seeAing an Order <ran-ing 2is 9i-hdraBal as Counsel o/ "ecord.
FACTS
!. Coughlin?s license -o 0rac-ice laB Bas -e:0oraril. sus0ended C. -he Nevada 3u0re:e Cour- on
5une 7-h, +&!+.
LAW
94C" "uleD+3.DD,00earances= suCs-i-u-ions= Bi-hdraBal or change o/ a--orne.s.
!.DD9hen a 0ar-. has a00eared C. counsel, -ha- individual canno- -herea/-er a00ear on hisEher oBn Cehal/ in -he case
Bi-hou- -he consen- o/ -he cour-. Counsel Bho has a00eared /or an. 0ar-. shall re0resen- -ha- 0ar-. in -he case and shall Ce
recogniFed C. -he cour- and C. all 0ar-ies as having con-rol o/ -he clien-Gs case, un-il counsel Bi-hdraBs, ano-her a--orne.
- 1 -
MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL
F I L E D
Electronically
08-20-2012:09:57:43 PM
Clerk of the Court
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

is suCs-i-u-ed, or un-il counsel is discharged C. -he clien- in Bri-ing, /iled Bi-h -he /iling o//ice, in accordance Bi-h 3C"
4 and -his rule. 'he cour- in i-s discre-ion :a. hear a 0ar-. in o0en cour- al-hough -he 0ar-. is re0resen-ed C. counsel.
+.DDCounsel in an. case :a. Ce changed:
Ha>D9hen a neB a--orne. is -o Ce suCs-i-u-ed in 0lace o/ -he a--orne. Bi-hdraBing, C. -he Bri--en consen- o/ Co-h
a--orne.s and -he clien-, all o/ Bhich shall Ce /iled Bi-h -he cour- and served u0on all 0ar-ies or -heir a--orne.s Bho have
a00eared in -he ac-ion= or
HC>DB. order o/ -he cour-, u0on :o-ion and no-ice as 0rovided in -hese rules, Bhen no a--orne. has Ceen re-ained -o
re0lace -he a--orne. Bi-hdraBing=
H!>D1/ such :o-ion is :ade C. -he a--orne., counsel shall include in an a//idavi- -he address, or las- AnoBn
address, a- Bhich -he clien- :a. Ce served Bi-h no-ice o/ /ur-her 0roceedings -aAen in -he case in -he even- -he a00lica-ion
/or Bi-hdraBal is gran-ed, and counsel shall serve a co0. o/ such :o-ion and su00or-ing 0a0ers u0on -he clien- and all
o-her 0ar-ies -o -he ac-ion or -heir a--orne.s= or
H+>D1/ such :o-ion is :ade C. -he clien-, -he clien- shall s-a-e -herein -he address a- Bhich -he clien- :a. Ce
served Bi-h no-ice o/ all /ur-her 0roceedings in -he case in -he even- -he a00lica-ion is gran-ed, and shall serve a co0. o/
-he a00lica-ion u0on -he a--orne. and all o-her 0ar-ies -o -he ac-ion or -heir a--orne.s.
3.DD,n. /or: o/ order 0er:i--ing Bi-hdraBal o/ an a--orne. suC:i--ed -o -he cour- /or signa-ure shall con-ain -he
address a- Bhich -he 0ar-. is -o Ce served Bi-h no-ice o/ all /ur-her 0roceedings.
4.DDE*ce0- /or good cause shoBn, no a00lica-ion /or Bi-hdraBal or suCs-i-u-ion shall Ce gran-ed i/ a dela. o/ -he -rial
or o/ -he hearing o/ an. o-her :a--er in -he case Bould resul-. 4ischarge o/ an a--orne. :a. no- Ce grounds -o dela. a -rial
or o-her hearing.
%.DD, cor0ora-ion :a. no- a00ear in 0ro0er 0erson.
1- is no- en-irel. clear i/ a /inal order or Iudg:en- has Ceen en-ered in -his :a--er, Cu- given
-he na-ure o/ cus-od. :a--ers, Coughlin assu:es one has no- Ceen. "egardless, Coughlin is no-
licensed -o a00ear /or his clien-, Bhe-her or no- -he Cargained /or services have Ceen 0er/or:ed in /ull
alread., as such an Order <ran-ing his 9i-hdraBal as counsel o/ record is noB sough- 0ursuan- -o
3.C.". 4, hereC. Bi-hdraBs as a--orne. o/ record in -he aCove(ca0-ioned ac-ion. 'his Bi-hdraBal is
also Cased u0on -he co:0le-ion o/ -his :a--er and /ul/ill:en- o/ counselGs con-rac-ual oCliga-ion -o
4e/endan-.
AFFIRMATION PURSUANT TO NRS 239 B. 0 3 0
'he undersigned does hereC. a//ir: -ha- -he 0receding docu:en-:
JJXJJ 4oes no- con-ain -he social securi-. nu:Cer o/ an. 0erson.
JJJJJ 4oes con-ain -he social securi-. nu:CerHs> o/ an. 0ersonHs> as required C. a
Con/iden-ial )a:il. Cour- 1n/or:a-ion 3hee-, HN"3 !+%.+3& K N"3 !+%B.&%%>.
4,'E4 -his +&-h o/ ,ugus-, +&!+
JJEsE Zach Coughlin
Fach coughlin
a--orne. /or 2arris
- 2 -
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

CERTI FI CATE OF SERVI CE
Pursuan- -o N"CP %HC>, 1 cer-i/. -ha- 1 a: an e:0lo.ee o/ Zach Coughlin, and -ha- on -his da-e 1
caused -he /oregoing a--ached docu:en-Hs>on all 0ar-ies in -his ac-ion C. Placing an original or -rue
co0. -hereo/ in a sealed, s-a:0ed envelo0e 0laced /or :ailing in -he 6ni-ed 3-a-es Pos-al Co* a-
"eno, Nevada or elec-ronicall. serving a co0. -hereo/ u0on an. regis-ered e/iler:
Lris-in 3chuler(2in-F, Esq, and Chris-o0her 2un-er, Esq. /or "C3E973
5i: and 5oni Car0en-ier
+$73 3unn. 3lo0e 4r.
30arAs, N# $9434
4,'E4 -his +&-h o/ ,ugus-, +&!+
JJEsE Zach Coughlin
Fach coughlin
- 3 -
F I L E D
Electronically
08-21-2012:04:29:54 PM
Clerk of the Court
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION, dba
corporation, et aI.,
Defendants.
_______________________________ .1
Procedural History
Dept. No.: 7
ORDER
On April 20, 2012, this Court entered its Order denying Plaintiffs', James Carpentier and
Joan E. Carpentier's Emergency Motionfor TROIlnjunction; or Pled in the Alternative; Motion
to Set Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment. On May 7, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their Motion
to Alter or Amend Order, or New Trial, or Pled in the Alternative, Motionfor Reconsideration.
On May 17,2012, Defendants, Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., and Quality Loan Service
Corporation, filed its Request for Rule 11 Sanctions and Opposition to Motion to Alter or Amend
Order, or New Trial, or Pled in the Alternative, Alotionfor Reconsideration. On June 5, 2012,
Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Request for Sanctions, etc. On July 12, 2012, Defendants
submitted the matter for decision.
III
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CARPENTIER,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
AAMES FUNDING CORPORATION, dba
corporation, et aI.,
Defendants.
____________________________
Procedural History
Dept. No.: 7
ORDER
On April 20, 2012, this Court entered its Order denying Plaintiffs', James Carpentier and
Joan E. Carpentier's Emergency Motionfor TROIlnjunction; or Pled in the Alternative; Motion
to Set Aside Order Granting Summary Judgment. On May 7, 2012, Plaintiffs filed their Motion
to Alter or Amend Order, or New Trial, or Pled in the Alternative, Motionfor Reconsideration.
On May 17,2012, Defendants, Residential Credit Solutions, Inc., and Quality Loan Service
Corporation, filed its Request for Rule 11 Sanctions and Opposition to Motion to Alter or Amend
Order, or New Trial, or Pled in the Alternative, Alotionfor Reconsideration. On June 5, 2012,
Plaintiffs filed their Opposition to Request for Sanctions, etc. On July 12, 2012, Defendants
submitted the matter for decision.
III
Zach Coughlin, Esq., has been admonished on numerous occasions to conform his
2 pleadings to the simple requirements of the Rules of Civil Procedure. Despite repeated warnings,
3 Mr. Coughlin continues to files specious motions, replete with repetitive arguments made in
4 pleadings in excess of the page limits set by local rule. These deliberate actions burden this court
5 with unnecessary review of immaterial and irrelevant material which unjustifiably consumes
6 precious judicial time and resources.
7 The Court finds sanctions against Mr. Coughlin appropriate in this case. Defendants'
8 Request for Sanctions pursuant to NRCP 11 is GRANTED. Defendants' counsel, McCarthy &
9 Holthus, LLP, is awarded $5,000 to be assessed against Mr. Coughlin personally.
10 Plaintiffs' Motion to Alter or Amend Order or for a New Trial and/or Alternatively,
11 Motionfor Reconsideration is DENIED.
12 DATED this d(/ day of August, 2012.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
2
3 Pursuant to NRCP 5(b), I hereby certify that I am an employee of the Second Judicial
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
District Court of the State of Nevada, County of Washoe; that on this :{I day of August,
2012, I electronically filed the following with the Clerk of the Court by using the ECF system
which will send a notice of electronic filing to the following:
Kristin Schuler-Hintz, Esq. for Residential Credit Solutions, et al.; and
Zach Coughlin, Esq. for James and Joan Carpentier
I deposited in the County mailing system for postage and mailing with the United States
Postal Service in Reno, Nevada, a true copy of the t t c h ~ d document addressed to:
3

6 28 08 To 8 21 12 Most of Cv08-01709 Carpentier Flanagan Ocr Opt A9

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

6 28 08 To 8 21 12 Most of Cv08-01709 Carpentier Flanagan Ocr Opt A9

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Case Information

Case Description: CV08-01709 - J CARPENTIER, ETAL/ AAMES FUNDING

before me, olary.Public,

odv< ~ I RP2 cIns i:l . t,

!y =r`s Mm< ^ % P L \|-8>

Traded on Wall St.

Stage J. The Pooling and Servicing Agreement Process

Assets are locked as a permanent

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen