Zero Sum

Verbiage taken from a Deed of Trust filed of record in Tarrant County, Texas as
instrument #0207209495:
(H) "Loan" means the debt evidenced by the Note, plus interest, any
prepayment charges and late charges due under the Note, and all
sums due under this Security Instrument, plus interest.
(F) "Note" means the promissory note signed by Borrower and dated
JUNE 7, 2007. The Note states that Borrower owes Lender "SEVEN
HUNDRED SEVENTY THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED FOUR AND
NO/100 ************** Dollars (U.S. $770,904.00) plus interest".
Borrower has promised to pay this debt in regular Periodic Payments
and to pay the debt in full not later than July 1, 2037.
(E) "MERS" is Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc, MERS
is a separate corporation that is acting solely as a nominee for Lender
and Lender's successors and assigns. MERS is the beneficiary under
this Security Instrument. MERS is organized and existing under the
laws of Delaware, and has an address and telephone number of P.O.
Box 2026, Flint, MI,48501-2026, tel. (888) 679-MERS.
This writer will not entertain item (E) if MERS is a beneficiary or the Lender with
rights is the beneficiary, this matter is best left to the courts.
Verbiage from a Fannie Mae #3210 Uniform Note:
10. UNIFORM SECURED NOTE
This Note is a uniform instrument with limited variations in some
jurisdictions. In addition to the protections given to the Note Holder
under this Note, a Mortgage, Deed of Trust, or Security Deed (the
Security Instrument), dated the same date
as this Note, protects the Note Holder from possible losses which
might result if I do not keep the promises which I make in this Note.
That Security Instrument describes how and under what conditions I
may be required to make immediate payment in full of all amounts I
owe under this Note. Some of those conditions are described as
follows:
Attention is directed to verbiage:

That Security Instrument describes how and under what conditions I may
be required to make immediate payment in full of all amounts I owe under
this Note.[Bold Emphasis added by writer]
Questions arise.
1. Were a party to apply 11 USC 524 to a discharged obligation evidenced
by the Note, would a violation of a court injunction exist for a party to try
to collect the alternate means (a once valid security instrument0 of value
secured to a note that evidences a Zero Sum owing?
2. If monetary value (evidenced by a note) was discharged in a bankruptcy
proceeding resulting in a Zero Sum being owed would it be true that a
Zero Sum owing is all that is legally available for collection?
3. Whereas if value of a Note is evidenced by a non Zero Sum being owed,
then is it possible to sale the debt obligation for value? Hence in reverse,
if value of a Note is evidenced to be Zero Sum owing (by discharge) is it
possible to possible to sale the debt obligation for Zero Sum?
4. Whereas if the obligation evidenced by a Note is of Zero Sum value, does
a legal right exist for a party to claim an interest in the alternate means to
collect value by using a Security Instrument that secures a Note for Zero
Sum?
Where it maybe and probably is true, placing a Notice of Discharge upon a
partys credit report does not constitute an action to collect a discharge debt in
bankruptcy; however a purchaser of a bankruptcy discharged debt more than likely
in attempting to take action utilizing the security instrument is in violation of the
discharge injunction.
Simple mathematical way to examine the scenario:
1. Note evidences a debt.
2. Security Instrument evidences an alternate right to collect the debt evidenced
by the Note.
3. Obligation evidenced by bankruptcy discharge by proxy also discharges any
alternate right to collect value once evidenced by the Note.
4. Attempt to collect value by the alternate instrument (Security Instrument)
could be construed as violating the bankruptcy discharge injunction.
5. Whereas there is no value obligation to collect upon would it also be a party
would be subject to Unclean Hands Doctrine for misleading a court to
believe rights exist?