Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Stauffer-V-usbank Petition for Review 9-13

Stauffer-V-usbank Petition for Review 9-13

Ratings: (0)|Views: 80|Likes:
Published by A. Campbell
Arizona Supreme Court, Bank Petition for Review "or" don't like the courts opinion
Arizona Supreme Court, Bank Petition for Review "or" don't like the courts opinion

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: A. Campbell on Sep 25, 2013
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/25/2013

pdf

text

original

 
 
ARIZONA SUPREME COURT
KARL and FABIANA STAUFFER,Plaintiffs/Appellees,v.US BANK NATIONALASSOCIATION, a national bankingassociation, as Trustee for CSMCMortgage-Backed Pass-ThroughCertificates, Series 2006-3,Defendants/Appellants.CV-13-____-PR  No. 1 CA-CV 12-00731 CA-CV 12-0132(Consolidated)Maricopa County Superior Court No. CV 2011-005567
PETITION FOR REVIEW
Barbara J. Dawson (012104) bdawson@swlaw.com Gregory J. Marshall (019886)gmarshall@swlaw.com Andrew M. Jacobs (021146)ajacobs@swlaw.com SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.One Arizona Center Phoenix, AZ 85004-2202(602) 382-6000Attorneys for Defendants/AppellantsUS Bank National Association
 
i
TABLE OF CONTENTSPage
TABLE OF AUTHORITIES .................................................................................... iiISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW ..................................................................... 1WHY THIS PETITION MERITS REVIEW ............................................................. 1FACTS MATERIAL TO ISSUES FOR REVIEW ................................................... 6ARGUMENT ............................................................................................................. 7I. A.R.S § 33-420 DOES NOT APPLY TO NOTICESOF SUBSTITUTION, OF ASSIGNMENT, OR OF TRUSTEE’SSALES .................................................................................................... 7A. A.R.S § 33-420 APPLIES ONLY TO DOCUMENTS THATCREATE FALSE CLAIMS AGAINST ONE’S OWNPROPERTY, AND THE NOTICES, WHICH ARE NOTLIENS, DON’T DO THAT ........................................................ 7B. EVEN IF A.R.S § 33-420 APPLIES MORE BROADLY, ITAPPLIES ONLY TO DOCUMENTS CREATING NEWCLOUDS UPON TITLE ........................................................... 11II. THE APPELLEES LACK STANDING TO SUE UNDER A.R.S. §33-420 FOR ERRORS IN THE NOTICES ......................................... 13CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................ 16CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE ....................................................................... 17
 
ii
TABLE OF AUTHORITIESFEDERAL CASES
McNally v. United States,483 U.S. 350, 359 (1987) ......................................................................................9Reiter v. Sonotone Corp.,442 U.S. 330, 339 (1979) ....................................................................................10
STATE CASES
Adams v. Bolin,77 Ariz. 316, 320, 271 P.2d 472, 474 (1954) .......................................................7Andreola v. Arizona Bank,26 Ariz. App. 556, 559, 550 P.2d 110, 113 (1976) ..............................................3Brandt v. Scribner,13 Ariz. 169, 175, 108 P. 491, 493 (1910) ......................................................... 11Hayes v. Cont’l Ins. Co.,178 Ariz. 264, 268, 872 P.2d 668, 672 (1994) .....................................................7Hogan v. Wash. Mut. Bank, N.A.,230 Ariz. 584, 587, 277 P.3d 781, 784 (2012) ........................................... passimRichey v. W. Pac. Dev. Corp.,140 Ariz. 597, 684 P.2d 169 (App. 1984) ..................................................... 7, 11Scottsdale Mem’l Health Sys., Inc. v. Clark,157 Ariz. 461, 467, 759 P.2d 607, 613 (1988) .....................................................9Sears v. Hull,192 Ariz. 65, 69, 961 P.2d 1013, 1017 (1998) ...................................................13Sitton v. Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co., No. 1 CA-CV 12-0557, 2013 WL 4766283, *6-*7(Ariz. App. Sept. 5, 2013). ..................................................................................14

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->