Showing posts with label Texas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Texas. Show all posts

Tuesday, August 23, 2011

KANSAS ATTORNEY GENERAL DEREK SCHMIDT, YOU SAY YOU ARE COMMITTED TO FRAUD, SO PLEASE DO SOMETHING. LOOK INTO QUESTIONABLE MORTGAGE DOCUMENTATION FILED IN THE STATE'S REGISTER OF DEEDS OFFICES, PARTICULARLY THOSE LINKED TO DOCX, LPS, AND MERS -- JUST AS MICHIGAN ATTORNEY GENERAL BILL SCHUETTE, ALONG WITH CALIFORNIA, NEVADA, NEW YORK, MASSACHUSETTS, AND DELAWARE ATTORNEYS GENERAL HAVE COMMITTED TO DOING. WHAT DOES IT TAKE TO GET KANSAS INVOLVED?


Servicer Sues LPS-DOCX OVER ROBO-SIGNING

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

EDITOR’S NOTE: I find it interesting that LPS continued to fabricate and forge documents after AHMSI told them to stop. It could only mean that they were really taking orders from someone else. The ankle biting is escalating.
AHMSI sues LPS and DocX over ‘surrogate’ signing scandal
by KERRY CURRY
Tuesday, August 23rd, 2011, 10:43 am
[[Update 1: Changes terminology from robo-signing to surrogate signing.]]
Lender Processing Services Inc. (LPS: 17.045 -2.43%) and its DocX affiliate causedAmerican Home Mortgage Servicing Inc. to lose millions from the robo-signing of mortgage documents, a lawsuit filed Tuesday contends.
Coppell, Texas-based AHMSI filed suit in a Dallas district court against Jacksonville, Fla.-based LPS alleging more than 30,000 residential mortgages across the country were affected by  “improper execution, notarization and recording of assignments of mortgage.”
LPS could not immediately be reached for comment.
The lawsuit comes on the heels of AHMSI’s unsuccessful attempt to recover its losses during more than a year of talks with LPS. AHMSI said the defendants first promised to indemnify AHMSI and then later claimed it had no duty to do so because the contract involved with the faulty assignments had already expired.
But AHMSI contends the “defendants conveniently ignore that they created tens of thousands of assignments of mortgage and accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars in payment in accordance with the terms of a supposedly nonexistent contract.”
The lawsuit seeks a declaratory judgment that the contract between the parties is binding and an order compelling LPS and DocX to arbitrate AHMSI’s claims of breach of contract and indemnification. It seeks an unspecified amount of damages, but puts the figure in the millions.
“DocX prepared, executed and recorded lien releases, assignments of mortgage and related documents for AHMSI from April 2008 through November 2009,” AMSI said.
Certain DocX and LPS employees were appointed by AHMSI’s board of directors as “special officers” of AHMSI with powers limited to executing mortgage-related documents, according to the mortgage servicer.
“However, in late November 2009, LPS informed AHMSI that from March 2009 through October 2009, a substantial number of assignments of mortgage were executed by ‘surrogate signers,’ that is, by individuals who were not designated as special officers, but who signed in the name of one or more of the designated special officers. At no time did AHMSI sanction or know of the ‘surrogate signing’ practices of LPS and DocX,” AHMSI said.
The servicer said it terminated its contract with DocX after the revelation and conducted a 50-state remediation effort to correct affected assignments.
“Defendants practice of ‘surrogate signing’ has forced AHMSI to address a myriad of legal issues, problems and proceedings in venues across the country,” the lawsuit alleges.
AHMSI is one of the largest mortgage servicers in the country. It manages nearly $72.5 billion in loan servicing, representing about 384,000 customers, the company said.
In October, LPS said varying signature styles from its subsidiary, DocX, resulted from a DocX practice that has been discontinued and only affected two lenders/servicers, but did not identify those servicers. LPS said at the time that it had not executed affidavits with substantive information on behalf of its clients since 2008, and said it has been mischaracterized in the media in terms of its default-related services.
Since then, LPS and DocX have the the source of several investigations. In April, Michigan Attorney General Bill Schuette said he would look into questionablemortgage documentation filed in the state’s Register of Deeds offices, particularly those linked to DocX.
Also in April, LPS signed a consent order with the Federal Reserve to settle a federal investigation into foreclosure practices at the firm and major mortgage servicers. LPS was required to boost oversight of its processes.
Write to Kerry Curry.
Follow her on Twitter @communicatorKLC.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Tuesday, August 9, 2011

JURISDICTIONARY SHOWS YOU HOW TO WIN YOUR CASE WITH, OR WITHOUT, A LAWYER!






Lawsuit Self-Help ... Step-by-StepTips & Tactics


 
Video   |   Learn More   |   American Justice Foundation
 


 
 
 



How to Cite Controlling Law ...

Jones v. Smith, 287 So.2d 145 (Fla. 4th DCA, 1998)

CORRECTION SEE BELOW!

Do you want to win in court?Shelf of Law Books
You must learn citation rules!
What are all those numbers?
What do they mean?
Does it seem complicated?
It's really simple.
Simple, that is, once you see how we explain it for you.
I'l tell you a few things today in this Tips & Tactics and leave the rest for you to learn with my affordable, official, 24-hour Jurisdictionary "How to Win in Court" step-by-step self-help course.
The first part is easy, of course.
The names of the parties are separated with a "v." This means "versus" (as you already know), just as it will be Yankees v. Boston Red Sox in the 2011 World Series.
Right?
There may be other parties (more than just "Jones" and "Smith" in the fight) but a citation is still good if it names the prominent parties.
Now, what about "287 So. 2d 543"?
This is also simple (just like everything I explain in my affordable, official, 24-hour Jurisdictionary "How to Win in Court" step-by-step self-help course you should order today, if you haven't already).

CORRECTION HERE:

The first number is the book where the "Jones v. Smith"written appellate court opinion appears. Tough? Not at all. It's just a book number. Nothing more. See? It's easy!
The second number is the page where "Jones v. Smith"appears in book number 287.
No excuse. Just got in a hurry to get this out and didn't go back and EDIT as I always teach others to do. The FIRST NUMBER (287) IS THE BOOK NUMBER IN THE SET OF VOLUMES. THE SECOND NUMBER (543 in this example) is the PAGE NUMBER.
And, "So.2d" between the two numbers?
That's just an abbreviation for a particular set of books known as "reporters" (i.e., books that "report" opinions of appellate court justices that control trial judges and their lower level decisions). In this example it stands for the "Second Edition" of the Southern Reporter. These contain written opinions of appellate courts in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, and Mississippi. A complete set of the Southern Reporter, Second Edition will cost you around $14,566 but you don't need to buy all those books once you know what I teach in my affordable, official, 24-hour Jurisdictionary"How to Win in Court" step-by-step self-help course.
And that's just the Second Edition. If your case were in one of these states (before the internet) you'd have to have access to the First and Third Editions. And, in addition (no pun intended) you'd need nearly $50,000 worth of National Reporters to have complete access to all federal cases, including U.S. Supreme Court cases, to be "in the know".
Ahhh. How sweet the internet, because today we have access to all of this for pennies ... and it's all searchable using Boolean operators (also explained in my course).
Alright, what about "(Fla. 4th DCA, 1998)"?
That's even easier! The case is clearly in the appellate courts of Florida. It is from the Fourth District Court of Appeal (operating from West Palm Beach). The case was decided in 1998.
See? I do know how to make this stuff easy! Right?
Who said law is too hard for pro se people to learn?
If someone said that to you, it's probably because they just didn't know that my course exists and is affordable!
YOU WILL LOSE ... if you don't learn how to cite "legal authority" as explained clearly in my official step-by-step, 24-hour Jurisdictionary "How to Win in Court" course!
The only opinions that count in court are the recorded opinions of appellate justices who stand in judgment over trial level judges and have power to reverse them if they disagree with the appellate courts' decisions in any way!
Your opinions of law count for nothing in court.
You must know how to (1) find appellate court opinions that control your judge and (2) know how to properly cite those cases in the papers you file and the statements you make in open court.
Show the judge the law so he knows the appellate court will reverse his decision if he rules against YOU!
This is how smart pro se people win!

Enhanced by Zemanta

Monday, August 1, 2011

PRO SE LITIGANTS, OR THOSE HELPING YOUR ATTORNEY. DO YOU HAVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF? ARE YOU SURE? IF YOU DO, HAVE YOU MET IT?



Tips & Tactics
 
Video   |   Learn More   |   American Justice Foundation
 
 
 
 

Force Your Opponents to Pay Up!

Win with Jurisdictionary!
Even experienced lawyers fail to force their opponents to meet the Burden of Proof.
It's like making your enemies "pay up", to prove what they say!
You never have to prove you don't owe!
Nor are you required to prove your dog didn't bite your neighbor, or your driving didn't cause the accident.
Everyone demanding any right in court has a burden to prove they're entitled to have the court enforce the right!
If they can't meet their burden, they lose and, if you're the defendant, you win!
Of course, if you're a plaintiff, it's your job to meet the burden of proof to show you deserve the court's favor.
Knowing how the burden works (there's quite a bit more to it than I can explain in this short newsletter) gives you power to win instead of being just another victim!
The burden is always on the party making claims.
The burden is never on defenders - unless the burden shifts once the claimant meets his burden of proof.
In civil cases, the burden is met by presenting the greater weight of admissible evidence (sometimes called the "preponderance of evidence") in support of the fact elements necessary to prevail on at least one "cause of action" (explained in the course and essential knowledge, if you want to win).
In criminal cases, the state's burden is met only by presenting evidence that proves the fact elements of the crimes alleged beyond and to the exclusion of any reasonable doubt. 
The burden of proof is always on the party asserting a claim, making a motion, demanding a right, etc.
Before a court can lawfully grant relief of any kind, the party seeking relief must carry his burden to prove he's entitled to relief ... whether the case is civil or criminal.
Some may say, "It's just your word against his."
That's never true in court.
One side always has the burden.
Just like in a tennis match, the ball is always on one side of the net!
The burden of proof may shift back and forth during a complicated lawsuit, depending on who claims what and when, however the burden is always on the side seeking relief at any particular moment, the party making a claim, the litigant moving the court, the claimant alleging a fact, etc.
WARNING:
Lawyers will try to put you "on the defensive".
Lawyers will try to trick you into struggling to prove a negative, e.g., that you didn't do something or that something did not happen. Don't get sucked in!
People who don't have the official Jurisdictionary "How to Win in Court" course go out of their way to show they were out of town that day or confined to a wheelchair or otherwise struggle to dis-prove something that is entirely the burden of the other side to prove.
This is what crooked lawyers do.
BEWARE!
BE WISE!
If a defendant ignorantly tries to dis-prove what his opponent has the burden to prove, his opponent is spared the labor of proving his case! The waters are muddied. The real issues get lost. The judge gets sidetracked. And YOU come out on the short end of the stick every time!
Smart people who use the official Jurisdictionary "How to Win in Court" course know how to move the court to take judicial notice that "the burden is on the moving party to prove whatever he claims" and, if the other side cannot prove what he claims, Jurisdictionary students know how to move the court for summary judgment and put an end to their troubles then-and-there!
Put the ball in the court where it belongs!
Learn more about the burden of proof and "How to Win in Court" ... without a lawyer!
================================
Read the testimonials ⇒
"So easy an 8th grader can do it!"
- - - - - - -
Click HERE to start receiving "Easy Money" !Easy Money
Receive THOUSANDS monthly.
Just post your affiliate link in social networking sites, blogs, web pages, and the automatic footer/signature in all your outgoing emails. It's EASY!
Just a few minutes of your time.
Your affiliate link is totally FREE.
What will YOU receive each month?
1-2 = 10% - 2/mo., receive $49/mo.
3-5 = 15% - 5/mo., receive $186/mo.
6-10 = 20% - 10/mo., receive $498/mo.
11-20 = 25% - 20/mo., receive $1,245/mo.
21-30 = 30% - 30/mo., receive $2,241/mo.
31-50 = 35% - 50/mo., receive $4,357/mo.
51+ = 40% - 200/mo., receive $19,920/mo.
Click HERE to start receiving "Easy Money"!
- - - - - - -
Help Your Friends!
Forward this email and this link so they can get the
Lawsuit Flowchart
so your friends can see how easy it is to win.
Learning due process iseasy with Jurisdictionary!
Force the court to protect your rights!
... Dr. Frederick D. Graves, JD
If you have the course, get an affiliate link, tell your friends, and earn easy money every month!

Nobody makes it easier than Jurisdictionary!
Do what Jurisdictionary teaches, and you'll be pleasantly surprised when judges rule in your favor!
Do what Jurisdictionary teaches, and you'll appreciate what it's like to have rights with teeth in them!
Do what Jurisdictionary teaches, and your life and the life of your family will be much, much happier!
You can finish my course in less than 24-hours.
Learning due process is easy with Jurisdictionary!
Force the court to protect your rights!
... Dr. Frederick D. Graves, JD

Enhanced by Zemanta