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
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
VEAL Order Denied Motion to Vacate

VEAL Order Denied Motion to Vacate

Ratings: (0)|Views: 9|Likes:
Published by divinaw
Bankruptcy court denies lender's motion for relief of stay.
Bankruptcy court denies lender's motion for relief of stay.

More info:

Published by: divinaw on Jun 23, 2011
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

06/23/2011

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728While not formally consolidated, these two related appeals
*
were heard at the same time, and were considered together. Thissingle disposition applies to both appeals, and the clerk isdirected to file a copy of this disposition in each appeal.
ORDERED PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANELOF THE NINTH CIRCUIT
In re: )BAP Nos.AZ-10-1055-MkKiJu)AZ-10-1056-MkKiJuHOWARD RICHARD VEAL, JR., and )(Related Appeals)
*
SHELLI AYESHA VEAL, ))Bk. No. 09-14808Debtors. )))HOWARD RICHARD VEAL, JR.; )SHELLI AYESHA VEAL, ))Appellants, ))v. )
O P I N I O N
)AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SERVICING,)INC.; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., as )Trustee for Option One Mortgage )Loan Trust 2006-3 Asset-Backed )Certificates, Series 2006-3, and )its successor and/or assignees, ))Appellees. ))Argued and Submitted on June 18, 2010at Phoenix, ArizonaFiled - June 10, 2011Appeal From The United States Bankruptcy Courtfor the District of ArizonaHonorable Randolph J. Haines, Bankruptcy Judge, Presiding Appearances:Trucly D. Pham of John Joseph Volin, P.C., arguedfor Appellants Howard Richard Veal, Jr. and Shelli
FILED
JUN 10 2011
SUSAN M SPRAUL, CLERK
U.S. BKCY. APP. PANELOF THE NINTH CIRCUIT
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
 
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282Ayesha Veal; and Kevin Hahn of Malcolm Cisnerosargued for Appellees American Home MortgageServicing, Inc. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., asTrustee for Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-3Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-3, and itssuccessors and/or assignees. Before: MARKELL, KIRSCHER and JURY, Bankruptcy Judges.
Table of ContentsI. INTRODUCTION........................3II. FACTS...........................4
A.AHMSI’s Proof of Claim and the Veals’ Claim Objection...........................5B.Wells Fargo’s Relief from Stay Motion and the Veals’Response.......................C.Joint Hearing on the Claim Objection and the Relief from Stay Motion..................10
III. DISCUSSION.......................11
A.Standing in Mortgage Cases.............12
1.Constitutional Standing............122.Prudential Standing..............133.Prudential Standing and the Real Party in InterestDoctrine....................144.Real Party in Interest Status and Its Policies........................15
B.The Substantive Law Related to Notes Secured by RealProperty......................1
1.Applicability of UCC Articles 3 and 9.....172.Article 3 of the UCC and the Concept of a “PersonEntitled to Enforcea Note..........203.Article 9 and Transfers of Ownership and OtherInterests in a Promissory Note.........24
C.Wells Fargo’s Lack of Standing to Seek Relief from theAutomatic Stay...................2
1.Standing to Seek Relief from Automatic Stay..272.Wells Fargos Argument Regarding Standing...303.Wells Fargo’s Lack of a Connection to the Note........................32
D.AHMSIs Lack of Standing To File Proof of Claim...3
1.The Lack of Findings on Central Issues.....392.Analysis of the Record and AHMSI’s Status as aPerson Entitled to Enforcethe Note.....42
IV. CONCLUSION........................46
* * * * *
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728Unless specified otherwise, all chapter and section
1
references are to the Bankruptcy Code, 11 U.S.C. §§ 101-1532, all“Rule” references are to the Federal Rules of BankruptcyProcedure, Rules 1001-9037, and all “Civil Rule” references areto the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.The bankruptcy court had jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
2
§§ 1334 and 157(b)(2)(B) and (G), and we have jurisdiction under28 U.S.C. § 158.3
I. INTRODUCTION
In the first of these two related appeals, debtors andappellants Howard and Shelli Veal (the “Veals”) challenge thebankruptcy court’s order granting relief from the automatic stayunder § 362(d) to appellee Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee
1
for Option One Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-3, Asset-BackedCertificates Series 2006-3 (“Wells Fargo”). In the second
2
appeal, the Veals challenge the bankruptcy court’s orderoverruling their objection to a proof of claim filed by appelleeAmerican Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc. (“AHMSI”). This proof ofclaim relates to the same obligation that is the focus of WellsFargo’s motion for relief from the automatic stay.In each appeal, the issue presented is whether the appelleeestablished its standing as a real party in interest to pursuethe relief it requested. With respect to Wells Fargo’s requestfor relief from the automatic stay, we hold that a party hasstanding to seek relief from the automatic stay if it has aproperty interest in, or is entitled to enforce or pursueremedies related to, the secured obligation that forms the basisof its motion. With respect to AHMSI’s proof of claim, we holdthat a party has standing to prosecute a proof of claim involving
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com

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)//-->