Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Motion - Substantiated Allegations of Foreclosure Fraud That Implicates the Florida Attorney General’s Office and The Florida Default Law Group

Motion - Substantiated Allegations of Foreclosure Fraud That Implicates the Florida Attorney General’s Office and The Florida Default Law Group

Ratings: (0)|Views: 18,192|Likes:
Published by Foreclosure Fraud
Pay attention all!

We have been sitting on this information for some time now due to ongoing investigations but since the cat is out of the bag here we go...

Over at Matt Weidner's Blog

He reports on the transcript and motion from a hearing held in a Volusia County Courtroom from Ice Legal.
Bombshell- Substantiated Allegations of Foreclosure/Affidavit Fraud That Implicates the Florida Attorney General’s Office

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the attorneys at Ice Legal may be the most aggressive and hard charging Foreclosure Fraud Fighters in Florida. When this whole system comes crashing down and when judges and the Florida Supreme Court put an end to the systemic abuses of the court process being perpetrated by the foreclosure mills, the attorneys at Ice Legal will rightly take their fair share of the credit.

Attached here is a must read Motion along with a copy of a transcript from a hearing held in a Volusia County Courtroom. The Motion lays out a very disturbing set of allegations…

This is a foreclosure action filed by WELLS FARGO BANK, NA (the “BANK”). The BANK is represented by Florida Default Law Group, P.L. (“FDLG”). On behalf of the BANK in this case, and on behalf of other clients in other cases, FDLG filed affidavits to establish that the attorneys’ fees it was allegedly paid were reasonable. The affidavits purport to have been executed by Lisa Cullaro, the appointed expert on attorneys’ fees. The notary who allegedly administered the expert’s oath and vouched for her signature was Erin Cullaro, a former employee of FDLG and now an Assistant Attorney General in the Economic Crimes Division of the Office of the Attorney General.

Not only was Erin just a former employee, she was one of the lead counsel for Michael Echeverria, the owner of FDLG (Florida Default Law Group)

Just recently their website http://www.echevarria.com/AttorneyProfiles.htm went "offline" but Google cashed version is here...

I also archived it here...

The public records request also revealed that Ms. Cullaro completed a “Request for Approval of Dual Employment” (From the Florida Attorney General’s Office) in which she certified that her secondary job notarizing documents “does not create a conflict of interest (as specified in Chapter 112, Part III, Florida Statutes) nor the appearance of impropriety…” Ms. Cullaro’s dual employment was limited to Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays between 7:00 p.m. to 7:15 p.m. Defendants proffer that they will show affidavits executed on days other than those approved by the Office of the Attorney General and that travel records suggest that Ms. Cullaro would have not been present in Florida on the date and time that an affidavit was notarized.

Here are the signatures to compare...


Focusing just on Erin Cullaro, the sampling of her alleged signatures below, demonstrate remarkable differences. And while, she proffers that she has abbreviated her signature over the years, the sampling reveals that more than one “abbreviated” signature has appeared over her signature line.

Indeed, if the signatures are fraudulent, proof of the intent to defraud may well hinge on the fact that these signatures were on documents used as summary judgment evidence in a court of law.
In any event, not all the signatures in Defendants’ collection are from affidavits. Obviously, Defendants should be permitted to inquire as to the obvious differences in signatures purporting to be that of the witnesses, regardless of where those signatures were made.

So the allegations made in this Motion are that Affidavits are being submitted in courtrooms across the state and Ice Legal questions the veracity of those affidavits.

* They have compared the alleged signatures and do not believe the signatures were made by the person allegedly signing.
* They have compared dates and determined that the Affiant or Signer was not in the state on the date of the alleged signing.
* An attorney who works in the Office of the
Pay attention all!

We have been sitting on this information for some time now due to ongoing investigations but since the cat is out of the bag here we go...

Over at Matt Weidner's Blog

He reports on the transcript and motion from a hearing held in a Volusia County Courtroom from Ice Legal.
Bombshell- Substantiated Allegations of Foreclosure/Affidavit Fraud That Implicates the Florida Attorney General’s Office

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, the attorneys at Ice Legal may be the most aggressive and hard charging Foreclosure Fraud Fighters in Florida. When this whole system comes crashing down and when judges and the Florida Supreme Court put an end to the systemic abuses of the court process being perpetrated by the foreclosure mills, the attorneys at Ice Legal will rightly take their fair share of the credit.

Attached here is a must read Motion along with a copy of a transcript from a hearing held in a Volusia County Courtroom. The Motion lays out a very disturbing set of allegations…

This is a foreclosure action filed by WELLS FARGO BANK, NA (the “BANK”). The BANK is represented by Florida Default Law Group, P.L. (“FDLG”). On behalf of the BANK in this case, and on behalf of other clients in other cases, FDLG filed affidavits to establish that the attorneys’ fees it was allegedly paid were reasonable. The affidavits purport to have been executed by Lisa Cullaro, the appointed expert on attorneys’ fees. The notary who allegedly administered the expert’s oath and vouched for her signature was Erin Cullaro, a former employee of FDLG and now an Assistant Attorney General in the Economic Crimes Division of the Office of the Attorney General.

Not only was Erin just a former employee, she was one of the lead counsel for Michael Echeverria, the owner of FDLG (Florida Default Law Group)

Just recently their website http://www.echevarria.com/AttorneyProfiles.htm went "offline" but Google cashed version is here...

I also archived it here...

The public records request also revealed that Ms. Cullaro completed a “Request for Approval of Dual Employment” (From the Florida Attorney General’s Office) in which she certified that her secondary job notarizing documents “does not create a conflict of interest (as specified in Chapter 112, Part III, Florida Statutes) nor the appearance of impropriety…” Ms. Cullaro’s dual employment was limited to Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays between 7:00 p.m. to 7:15 p.m. Defendants proffer that they will show affidavits executed on days other than those approved by the Office of the Attorney General and that travel records suggest that Ms. Cullaro would have not been present in Florida on the date and time that an affidavit was notarized.

Here are the signatures to compare...


Focusing just on Erin Cullaro, the sampling of her alleged signatures below, demonstrate remarkable differences. And while, she proffers that she has abbreviated her signature over the years, the sampling reveals that more than one “abbreviated” signature has appeared over her signature line.

Indeed, if the signatures are fraudulent, proof of the intent to defraud may well hinge on the fact that these signatures were on documents used as summary judgment evidence in a court of law.
In any event, not all the signatures in Defendants’ collection are from affidavits. Obviously, Defendants should be permitted to inquire as to the obvious differences in signatures purporting to be that of the witnesses, regardless of where those signatures were made.

So the allegations made in this Motion are that Affidavits are being submitted in courtrooms across the state and Ice Legal questions the veracity of those affidavits.

* They have compared the alleged signatures and do not believe the signatures were made by the person allegedly signing.
* They have compared dates and determined that the Affiant or Signer was not in the state on the date of the alleged signing.
* An attorney who works in the Office of the

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: Foreclosure Fraud on Mar 26, 2010
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

05/12/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 I
CE
L
EGAL
,
 
P.A.1975
 
S
ANSBURYS
W
AY
,
 
S
UITE
104,
 
W
EST
P
ALM
B
EACH
,
 
FL
 
33411
 
 
T
ELEPHONE
(561)
 
729-0530
 
 
F
ACSIMILE
(866)
 
507-9888
 
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE 7TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,IN AND FOR VOLUSIA COUNTY, FLORIDA
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA,Plaintiff,vs.GENERAL JURISDICTIONDIVISIONCASE NO.2009 20298 CINSDONALD W. NEEDHAM; THE UNKNOWNSPOUSE OF DONALD W. NEEDHAM;BLAIR BERGSTROM; THE UNKNOWNSPOUSE OF BLAIR BERGSTROM; ANYAND ALL UNKNOWN PARTIESCLAIMING BY, THROUGH, UNDER, ANDAGAINST THE UNKNOWN NAMEDINDIVIDUAL DEFENDANT(S) WHO ARENOT KNOWN TO BE DEAD OR ALIVE,WHETHER SAID UNKNOWN PARTIESMAY CLAIM AN INTEREST AS SPOUSES,HEIRS, DEVISEES, GRANTEES. OROTHER CLAIMANTS; TENANT #l,TENANT #2, TENANT #3, TENANT #4,TENANT #5, TENANT #6, TENANT#7,TENANT #8 the names being fictitious toaccount for parties in possession,Defendants.___________________________________/ Defendants, DONALD W. NEEDHAM and BLAIR BERGSTROM, file thismemorandum of law in opposition to Motion for Reconsideration/Rehearing on [the Cullaros’]Motion for Protective Order on the grounds that:
 
This Court heard and considered the Cullaros’ position because the Plaintiff’sattorney represented he was authorized to speak for the Cullaros and theirattorney;
 
The Cullaros’ attorney never asked that the hearing be rescheduled toaccommodate a personal scheduling conflict;
DEFENDANTS, DONALD W.NEEDHAM AND BLAIRBERGSTROM’S, MEMORANDUMIN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FORRECONSIDERATION/REHEARINGON NON-PARTIES’ MOTION FORPROTECTIVE ORDER
 
 
CASE NO. 2009 20298 CINS2
I
CE
L
EGAL
,
 
P.A.1975
 
S
ANSBURYS
W
AY
,
 
S
UITE
104,
 
W
EST
P
ALM
B
EACH
,
 
FL
 
33411
 
 
T
ELEPHONE
(561)
 
793-5658
 
 
F
ACSIMILE
(866)
 
507-9888
 
 
The Defendant’s allegations of misconduct have a good faith basis;
 
Other grounds as stated below.
I.
 
Introduction and Background.
This is a foreclosure action filed by WELLS FARGO BANK, NA (the “BANK”). TheBANK is represented by Florida Default Law Group, P.L. (“FDLG”). On behalf of the BANKin this case, and on behalf of other clients in other cases, FDLG filed affidavits to establish thatthe attorneys’ fees it was allegedly paid were reasonable. The affidavits purport to have beenexecuted by Lisa Cullaro, the appointed expert on attorneys’ fees. The notary who allegedlyadministered the expert’s oath and vouched for her signature was Erin Cullaro, a formeremployee of FDLG and now an Assistant Attorney General in the Economic Crimes Division of the Office of the Attorney General.The undersigned defense counsel set the depositions of Lisa and Erin Cullaro, startingwith the case of 
The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Co. NA v. Sanchez
, Case No. 50 2008 CA027182XXXX MB (Palm Beach County) (“
Sanchez
”). At first, neither FDLG nor the affiant,opposed the deposition other than to demand that the expert witness be paid for her time.Defense counsel readily agreed and sent FDLG a check for the expert witness fee.FDLG then filed a motion for protective order arguing that the duces tecum requests inthe deposition notices were a “fishing expedition.”
1
FDLG also filed objections to non-partyproduction, claiming that the Defendants’ routine requests for communications between theattorney and the expert actually sought “privileged and confidential” information.
2
 
1
Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order, dated November 12, 2009 in
Sanchez
.FDLG,
2
Plaintiff’s Objection to Nonparty Production, November 10, 2009 in
Sanchez
.
 
CASE NO. 2009 20298 CINS3
I
CE
L
EGAL
,
 
P.A.1975
 
S
ANSBURYS
W
AY
,
 
S
UITE
104,
 
W
EST
P
ALM
B
EACH
,
 
FL
 
33411
 
 
T
ELEPHONE
(561)
 
793-5658
 
 
F
ACSIMILE
(866)
 
507-9888
 however, stated that Plaintiff would “produce the witnesses after reasonable exhibits for theirdepositions have been determined.”
3
Based on this unusual representation that FDLG controlled the witnesses’ depositionattendance and that communications with them were privileged, Defense Counsel asked FDLGwhether it represented the witnesses as their attorney, to which FDLG responded that it did. 
4
 When Defense Counsel pointed out that such a relationship would be highly inappropriate and aconflict of interest, FDLG responded “upon further investigation, our firm does not represent theCullaros.” FDLG further asserted it would be withdrawing the affidavit and “[t]herefore, thedeposition will not be necessary.”
5
FDLG then withdrew its affidavit in
Sanchez
and severalother cases, including this case.
6
The Defendants maintained, however, that the depositions were still relevant because, if the BANK had knowingly submitted affidavits that were false or unlawfully executed, it couldnot escape the repercussions by simply withdrawing them. With Lisa Cullaro having beenwithdrawn as an expert, Defendants subpoenaed both Cullaros for deposition as fact witnesses toany litigation misconduct surrounding the affidavit.The Cullaro witnesses then retained their own attorney, John J. Cullaro of the CullaroLaw Firm, who filed a Motion for Protective Order on behalf of Cullaros.
7
 
3
Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order, dated November 12, 2009 in
Sanchez
, ¶ 5.The witnesses arguedthat FDLG had withdrawn the affidavit—not to obviate the deposition—but because it was “no
4
Email exchange between FDLG and Defense Counsel, November 13, 2009 (Exhibit A).
5
Email exchange between FDLG and Defense Counsel, November 14 and 17, 2009 (Exhibit A).
6
Notice of Withdrawal of Affidavit as to Reasonable Attorneys Fees, December 10, 2009.
7
Motion for Protective Order, dated November 24, 2009.

Activity (0)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
sacasagroup liked this
Joe Garrity liked this
computax53 liked this
leolamboy6954 liked this
Jmitchdominion liked this
americanreply liked this
americanreply liked this
Mayra Consuegra liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

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