You are on page 1of 1
notice to Defendants’ counsel or otherwise without Defendants’ counsel’s consent (the Motion for Substitution”), 9. Based upon the representations of Shapiro & Fishman, the Court entered the order substituting Chase as the party plaintiff in place of WAMU (the “Order Substituting Party Plaintiff”), 10, The Court finds Chese, WAMU, and CTX are without standing to pursue this forectosure action, The Court further finds that Shepico & Fishman, at all times material, filed the Complaint, the Assignment, and the Motion for Substitution with actual knowledge thet the averments and representations made in those papers were false. 11. The Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that WAMU, Chase and Shapiro & Fishman committed freud on this Court 12. The Court finds that WAMU and Chase made representations to this Court during the course of the instant action that are known to be felse. ‘The Court also finds that Shapiro & Fishman had actual knowledge of the falsity of any avermemts and representations made on behalf of the current servicer of the Mortgage. Throughout the litigation, WAMU and Chase and Shapiro & Fishman have represented to this Court that plaintiif owns and holds the note and mortgage. It did so in its original compleint on March 27, 2008; in its First Amended Complaint filed on January 29, 2009 and in its Exparte Motion to Substitu'e Party Plaintiff on February 5, 2009. Moreover, WAMU end Shapiro & Fishman created a false Assignment of Morigege dated April 11, 2008 as evidence of these assertions. 13. The Court finds by clear and convincing evidence that these acts committed by WAMU, Chase and Shapiro & Fishman amount to a “knowing deception intended to prevent the defendants from discovery essential to defending the claim” and are therefore fraud, Gerhmann