Professional Documents
Culture Documents
12 31 10 - 45894095 Amicus Curiae NJ R2 Lr1
12 31 10 - 45894095 Amicus Curiae NJ R2 Lr1
InTheMatterofResidentialMortgageForeclosure PleadingandDocumentIrregularities
HonorableMaryC.Jacobson,P.J.Ch.
AmicusCuriae
PleaseTakeNotice
http://www.scribd.com/doc/45894095/Amicus‐Curiae‐NJ‐R2‐Lr1 AdditionalWritings:http://www
ribd.com/alviec (FriendoftheCourt)
TableofContents
1.TheCreationoftheMortgageNoteandSecurityInstrument UniformCommercialCodeandR
ents 2.Tangible–PersonalPropertyversusRealProperty FailuretoMaintainContinuous
alObligee(Lender)TakesPossessionoftheSecuredMortgageNote ProperParties 4.Origi
)SellsTheSecuredMortgageNote ObligeeIndorsesMortgageNoteto”InBlank”Indorsee 5
ellsanUnsecuredMortgageNote(MERSasNominee) MERSHidestheFraud 6.CONFUSION Hidi
storDoesNotOwntheMortgageNoteandSecurityInstrument TheMortgageNoteDoesNotIde
er&HolderoftheMortgageNoteortheSecurityInstrument 8.TheFirstNegotiationinBl
9.WHYTHECHAINSDONOTMATCH “MERS” 10.TheSecondNegotiationinBlankUnidentifiedIn
llUsingtheFirst“InBlank”IndorsementFailuretoNegotiate 11.MERSandTransferableR
egotiableInstrumentsWhenUCCGoverns 12.TheThirdandFourthNegotiationinBlank Subs
nbyanUnidentifiedSubsequentIndorsee“InBlank”toadditional SubsequentPurchasers“I
dHolderinDueCourse,InnocentPurchaser (A)OnecanbetheholderoftheMo
olderinduecourse. (B)Onecanbetheownerofthenoteandnotbetheholderorhaveri
eCourse (D)InnocentPurchaser
14.ClosingStatement
December25,2010 HonorableCourt SuperiorCourt,ChanceryDivision,GeneralEquityP
reet Trenton,NewJersey08625 Re:InTheMatterofResidentialMortgageForeclosurePl
regularities HonorableMaryC.Jacobson,P.J.Ch. JamesMcGuirerespectfullysubmitsthi
tertoaidinprovidinga clearunderstandingofsomeofthehiddenfactssoelusivelyavo
Background
Iretiredfromnearly40yearsinMechanicalEngineeringandDesign.
Approximatelyadecadeandahalfhaspassedsincemyfirstbecominginvolvedin understan
gageNoteandSecurityInstrumentbeingusedin securitizationgovernedbytheUniformCom
tesequivalence,ESIGN (ElectronicSignaturesinGlobalandNationalCommerceAct,2000),
ectronicTransactionAct,1999),staterecordationstatutes(specificallyforTexasanda
andinginotherstates).Ihavenograduatedegreeineitherthelegalor financialfield
yorrequiredtocomprehendthefraud committed;further,Idonotdesiretohavesuchacc
sed:anengineer’smentalitytocomprehendandapplypresentday
factstocurrentlawsaswritten.ThelastnumberofyearsIoperatedundertheoversighto
severallegalcounselorsinresearchingthedepthofthedeception.Myconversationswith
ssubjectarewithverylearnedpersonsintheacademicareaandwith multiplelegalcouns
://www.scribd.com/alviecoverahundreddocumentsthat
explainingreatdetailthefaultswithinthecurrentsecuritizationprocess.Arecentarti
tatedthatwhatwas“fringe”1onlyacoupleofmonthsagoisheretoday. Othersskilledin
esofaroutonthefrontedgeof thecurvethatonlyafewacademicscanfullycomprehend
hisAmicusCuriaeisinthisfrontedgeofthecurve;the“fringe”todaymayat firstloo
unchbowl.
1.TheCreationoftheMortgageNoteandSecurityInstrument
UniformCommercialCodeandstaterecordationrequirements TheHomeowner(Obligor)signs
daSecurityInstrument.Upon
signingoftheSecurityInstrumentandbyoperationoflaw,theSecurityInstrumentis aut
otheMortgageNoteandtemporaryperfectionisestablished.The SecurityInstrumentwhen
dstransformsatemporaryperfectionintoa permanentperfectionandisnoticetotheworl
rtheMortgageNote issoldtoasubsequentpurchaser,recordationoftheSecurityInstrum
nentlyperfectthelien.TheSecurityInstrumentaffectstitletoRealProperty,andas su
dictiongovernandsuchrequirementtocomplywithlocallaws ofjurisdictioniscontained
strumentitself.Thefilingofrecordserves
1
http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2010/12/19/the‐pools‐are‐empty‐and‐the‐sec‐is‐coming/
asecondanddistinctivepurpose:itcreatesthepriorityofperfectionamongsubsequent p
gageNoteandisnotaddressedfurtherinthisdocument.Upon attachmentandperfectionof
ttotheMortgageNote,theMortgage Notebecomesanindebtednessthatis“Secured.”
2.Tangible–PersonalPropertyversusRealProperty
FailuretoMaintainContinuousPerfection TheMortgageNoteandtheSecurityInstrument
sonal
Propertyandweshallconsiderthetwoitemsintandemtobecalledthe“Mortgage”and suc
perty.Onemustnotforgettheterms containedwithintheSecurityInstrumentaffectani
dthese termsrequirecompliancewithallapplicable,federal,stateandlocallawsandth
ithintheSecurityInstrumentitself.Failuretocomplywiththelawsgoverning theconten
rumentorlanguagewithintheSecurityInstrumentwould rendertheSecurityInstrumentan
ityInstrumentbecomesanullity, thentheclassificationoftheMortgageNoteisreduced
ecured”andasaresultoftheSecurityInstrumentbecominganullitythe“Powerof SaleC
yInstrumentwouldalsobenullity. TheMortgagebeingaPaymentIntangiblecanbenegot
securityforthisPaymentIntangibleistherighttocollectmoniesfromthe(MortgageNote
nstrumentascollateral).Thus,the(MortgageNoteandSecurity Instrumentascollateral)
aymentIntangibleanditisthissecuritythat
followstheMortgage(PaymentIntangible)wheretheMortgageistheownerofthe Mortgage
idperfectedSecurityInstrument.Again,the MortgageisnothingmorethanaPaymentIntan
perty)andthesecurity forthisPaymentIntangibleistherighttocollectmoniesnotedi
ecurity,theMortgageNote.ThePaymentIntangible’ssecurityalsoconsistsofavalid per
umentalongwithanyvalidAssignmentofMortgagefiledofrecord totransferlienrights
tgoverntheSecurityInstrument. RegardlessofthehierarchyofownershipofthePaymen
e,
MortgageNoteorSecurityInstrument,thetermscontainedwithintheSecurityInstrument m
h,andthisauthorhasnotseenaSecurityInstrumentthatdoesnot itselfrequirecomplia
callaws.Failuretocomplywiththelawsof localjurisdictionthatgovernthetermswith
twouldrenderthe SecurityInstrumentanullityandtheMortgageNotewouldthenbereduc
ge(PaymentIntangible)wouldthenbeleftwithoutavalidperfectedliento allowforeclo
.Additionally,iftheSecurityInstrumentwas renderedanullitybyfailuretocomplywit
inedwithinthe SecurityInstrument,thesecondarymarkethasnotpurchaseda“Secured”in
adebyasubsequentpurchaserincludingTrustsarewithoutrightsto enforcethe“Powerof
eispossible.Thisfailuretoprovidea completeMortgagetothesecondarymarketisthe
nstitutions aretryingtoconceal.
EvenwithanullifiedSecurityInstrument,ifavalidMortgageNotewithacomplete
ChainofIndorsementisproved,theHolder/OwnerwithrightasHolderinDueCourse could
sdiction. SowhenitissaidtheMortgagefollowstheNote,onemustrememberthatthe
SecurityforthePaymentIntangiblefollowsthePaymentIntangiblewithoutfilingofrecord
heunderlyingMortgageNotewouldbefollowedbyavalidcontinuous perfectedSecurityIns
ompliancewithapplicablelawstomaintain perfectionoftheSecurityInstrument.
3.OriginalObligee(Lender)TakesPossessionoftheSecuredMortgage Note
ProperParties OriginalObligeetakespossessionoftheMortgageNoteandpermanentlype
theSecurityInstrumentbyfilingofrecordintheOriginalObligee’sname.Failuretoname
ossiblybeafataltotheenforcementofthetermsintheMortgage NoteorSecurityInstru
4.OriginalObligee(Lender)SellsTheSecuredMortgageNote
ObligeeIndorsesMortgageNoteto“InBlank”Indorsee TheOriginalObligeesellstheMor
er.Proper
procedureistonegotiatetheMortgageNoteundercoverofaBailee’sLettertothe subseq
fertherightstotheSecurityInstrumentbyfilingof
recordthenameofthesubsequentpurchaserwhopurchasedtheMortgageNoteand completing
tiationbynotingtheownernameintheblank. OriginalObligeeindorsestheMortgageNo
subsequentpurchaser(SecondObligee).SecondObligeethencompletesthenegotiationby fi
k,ifnegotiatedinblank,thenfilesofrecordanassignmentofthe mortgagetotransfer
rument’slienintotheSecondObligee’s name.IftheSecondObligeefailstocompletethe
ipinthe “blank,”thentheSecondObligeemayhavebecometheholderofthenotebuthas
ievedholderinduecoursewithrightsto enforcetheMortgageNotestermsorthetermswi
t. Additionally,failuretofileofrecordtheAssignmentoftheSecurityInstrumentfails
tsandthisfailuretotransferlienrightshasrenderedaoncesecured MortgageNoteto“
5.OriginalObligee(Lender)SellsanUnsecuredMortgageNote (MERSasNominee)
MERSHidestheFraud WhereMERSisfiledofrecordastheMortgageeasNomineeforalen
lender’sassigns,andwherethefirstnegotiationoftheMortgageNoteisexecuted“In Bla
drepresentanunidentifiedIndorsee.Inmost casesthisunidentifiedIndorseeceasestoe
onofthesecuritytrustand maynothaveexistedupontheclosingoftheloan.Thisunide
subsequentunidentifiedIndorseeswouldconstituteabreakinthe“Chains.”Therearetwo
sthatofindorsementsnotedonthefaceoftheMortgageNote andthepubliclyrecordedch
nperfection.ThisPaperwillnot dwellintotothedetailsofthe“Chains.”AsMERSclai
randlender’sassignsandastheMortgageNoteisnegotiatedinblankthrougha numberof
earlyobservablefromthefactsthatcontinuous perfectionoftheSecurityInstrumenthas
ewiththelawsoflocal jurisdictionwhichgoverntheSecurityInstrument.Thechainof
sofatalasan“INBLANK”unidentifiedpartycannotnegotiatetheMortgage Note.
6.CONFUSION
HidingtheFraud WallStreetisbuyingaPaymentIntangible(PersonalProperty)andass
ownerandholderofthatPaymentIntangibleandthelawsthatgovernthePayment Intangibl
ypossession.ThePaymentIntangible’ssecurityisthe Mortgages(PersonalProperty)conta
lateralpool.Remember,the Mortgageactuallyconsistsoftwoparts,theMortgageNoteand
sly perfectedSecurityInstrument.Soitisnowsafetosaythesecurityfollowsthenote,
llowsthenotemayinfactbeanullitybythehierarchyownership’s failuretocomplywit
trument.Bottomline,theMortgage Notemaybeprovedupwithaproperchainofindorsement
ation butlossofperfectioncanneverbeproveduponcelostandthereforeWallStreetma
onlyboughtanunsecuredMortgageNote.TheauthorwillnotcommentonREMICIRStax issue
eissue,multiplepurchasesbyWallStreetmayhavenot beenthatoftheMortgageNotesbu
hichisregistered withintheMERSsystem.
7.WhytheInvestor DoesNotOwntheMortgageNoteandSecurityInstrument
TheMortgageNoteDoesNotIdentifytheSubsequent Owner&HolderoftheMortgageNoteor
tated,theMortgageNoteandtheSecurityInstrumentisPersonalPropertyand
iscommonlycalledthe“Mortgage.”ThisMortgagewhichispersonalpropertyisofferedup
tangibleintheformationoftheTrust.Toexplain,wemust presenttheTrustinreverseo
neficialinterestinTrust Certificates.TheTrustownstherighttothemoniescollected
ible. ThePaymentIntangibleownstherighttocollectmoniesowedundertheMortgageNot
dPaymentIntangiblesarepersonalproperty;thelocallawsof jurisdictionthataffectre
irectmanner.TheTrustdocuments provideaprecisemechanismfornegotiatingtheMortgage
strument intotheMortgage(PaymentTangible)Pool.Themajorityofnotesthisauthorhas
leindorsementinblankfromtheOriginalObligee,whichraisessevere concernsthatacha
singfromtheMortgageNotetoshowa completechainofnegotiationthatisrequiredbyla
owa true“ChainofTitle”.The“ChainofTitle,”anAssignmentofMortgage(TheSecurity
Instrument))thatisproperlyfiledofrecordwouldbenoticeofaperfectedlienandthe
tpurchasersoftheMortgageNote.Filingfortransferring perfectionofthelien(Securit
ngfornoticeofprioritytosubsequent purchasersoftheMortgageNotetoestablishwhoh
toneinthe same.Failuretoproperlynegotiatedoesnottransfer“HolderinDueCourse”
ualification/legalstatusetc.,accordingtotheUCCgoverning law)toasubsequentparty
geNote.
8.TheFirstNegotiationinBlank
OrHowNotTo WheretheMortgageNotewasbeingusedascollateralinaMortgageBacked
Security(MBS),andanunknown“IndorseeinBlank”wouldneedtobethefirstentityinthe
ntaintheidentityofthatpartytoallow additionalnegotiationoftheMortgageNotetof
ust. Additionally,wemustquestionthemeansandthemethodsemployedbyMERStobea Mo
nidentified“InBlank”oranytypeofagency relationshiptoanunidentifiable“InBlank.”
ans offeredtoidentifyanunidentified“InBlank”iscontainedwithinaPoolingandServi
Aidentifiesallthepartiesthatwouldneedtoappearinthechain ofindorsementsandch
inofindorsementisnotwhatisusually foundonthefaceoftheMortgageNote.TheMortg
le“In Blank”throughmultipleunidentifiedindorseesisnotincompliancewiththePSA,t
ceoftheUCC,andthefailuretofileofrecordthenamedparty
Indorsee,“InBlank”partyalsocreatesabreakinthechainoftitleinpublicrecords.T
entifiedonthefaceoftheMortgageNote,chainof indorsements,doesnotmatchthechain
,Rivet,”addanallonge andaffixit.
9.WHYTHECHAINSDONOTMATCH
“MERS” HowwouldonerecordofrecordanunidentifiedIndorsee“InBlank”?The
unidentifiedIndorsee“InBlank”isnotarealperson,notacompany;infact,the unident
ntparty,orisit?Astheauthorhasnoted, theevidenceofferedtoidentifytheIndorsee
racts usedinthecreationoftheinvestmentvehicleandthisunidentified“InBlank”Indo
ocatedwithintheMERSsystemandwouldappearinaMERS’ AuditTrail.Asitcanbeseen,
ee“InBlank;”butcan anunidentifiedIndorsee“InBlank”benamedasapartyandfiledo
ementsonthefaceoftheMortgageNotedoesnotmatchthe ChainofTitlefiledinpublic
dnotethelegalparty entitledtoacontinuousperfectedlien.TheSecurityInstrumentf
mporaryperfectionandattachmentintoapermanentperfectedlien,whilethefilingof rec
dIndorsee“InBlank”transfersnothing.Intheauthor’sopinion, MERSalludesthattheya
oavoidtheproblemswith filingofrecordanunidentifiedIndorsee“InBlank.”Theproces
neseriousquestion,howdoesanunidentifiedIndorsee“InBlank”indorseanoteinblank
toasubsequentunidentifiedIndorsee“InBlank”andcomplywithlocallawsofjurisdiction
strumentthatwastosecuretheMortgageNote? Failureto
followthetermswithintheSecurityInstrumentwouldbreachtheSecurityInstrument contr
rtgageNoteunsecured.NotonlywastheMortgageNotenot properlynegotiatedtotheWall
tipleunidentified“InBlank” Indorsees,buttherewasalsoafailuretotransferaperfec
. Note:theseconditionsalsoapplytoFannieMae,FreddieMacandcertainprivate invest
mercialMortgageBackedSecurities.
10.TheSecondNegotiationinBlank UnidentifiedIndorsee“InBlank”Indorses“InBlank”
StillUsingtheFirst“InBlank”IndorsementFailuretoNegotiate Thesecondnegotiation
tionwouldbefromthecreator
ofthetrusttothedepositorofthetrust,butinactualitythe“FirstIndorsementinBlan
n.Again,thereisanunknownpartyallegingtobetheHolderand OwneroftheMortgageNo
tiationisusually indorsed“InBlank”utilizingthe“InBlank”fromtheOriginalIndorser
nsferlienrightstothesecond“InBlank”Indorsee.
11.MERSandTransferableRecords
15USC7003,ExcludesNegotiableInstrumentsWhenUCCGoverns
Foramomentwehavetostepbacktothe“OriginalObligee”tounderstandthe
movementoftheMortgageNote.Thisauthorhasnotedsomecommentatorsareadamant thatth
stroyedatanystepintheprocessandweshallfollow thatreasoningforthemoment.Inc
omewhatagreedthat theMortgageNotesareplacedwithincustodyofaDocumentCustodian.
ddressmanycourtfilingsofcopiesoftheMortgageNotessubmittedbythe financialinsti
nalscannotbefoundanditiscommontoonlyseean “IndorsementinBlank”fromtheOrigi
ossiblyoccurred.Simply,iftheOriginalObligeeplacedtheMortgageLoanpackagewithin
ianandtheMERSsystemtrackeda“TransferableRecord”alleging tobethelawfulnegotiat
dwasrequiredforproof,the currententityclaimingrightswouldretrievewhateverdocum
riginal custodian.
12.TheThirdandFourthNegotiationinBlank
SubsequentNegotiationbyanUnidentifiedSubsequentIndorsee“InBlank”toadditional Sub
s“InBlank” ThethirdstepintheMortgageNotenegotiationwouldbefromthedepositor
trusttotheTrusteeoftheTrust,butagain,inactualitythe“FirstIndorsementinBlank”
n.Again,thereisanunknownpartyallegingtobetheHolderand OwneroftheMortgageNo
ThefourthstepintheMortgageNotenegotiationwouldbefromthetrusteeofthe
trusttotheTrust,butagain,inactualitythe“FirstIndorsementinBlank”isutilizedfo
reisanunknownpartyallegingtobetheHolderandOwnerofthe MortgageNotebyanegot
13.Holder,OwnerandHolderinDueCourse,InnocentPurchaser
(A)OnecanbetheholderoftheMortgageNote andnotbetheownerorhaverightsashold
espossiblycouldbecometheholderofthenoteandclaimthey
representtheownerandtheholderinduecourse,however,ifpropernegotiationofthe M
srequired,thetruststhatthesetrusteesrepresentdonot holdsufficientlegalrightst
rtgageNotes,muchlessenforce thetermsinanullifiedSecurityInstruments. (B)Oneca
otbetheholderorhaverightsasholderinduecourse. Thetrustmayclaimtoownthe
tion.
ThetrustwhereMERSisinvolvedownstherightstoa“TransferableRecord”wherethat rec
ustodianthatholdstheMortgageNote,ifandwhen avaultedcopydoesexist,andcontrol
eofrecord. (C)HolderinDueCourse
HolderinDuecoursewherepropernegotiationwasnotfollowedwouldstillreside
withtheOriginalObligee,butissuesstillexistastoacontinuousperfectedSecurity In
iformCommercialCodeasubsequentpurchasercouldnotachieve
“HolderInDueCourse”wherefraudwascommittedbyoneoftheUnidentified“InBlank” Ind
. (D)InnocentPurchaser Astoaninnocentpurchaser,apartytothecreationofthetr
involvedandnamedinthePSAorotherdocumentsofincorporationhasactualnoticeof MER
recannotclaimtobeaninnocentpurchaser.
14.ClosingStatement
OnehastoconsiderunderTitle15USC,77nnn,thefilingofcompliancereportsis
notincompliancebasedontheproceduralactionsthatwereimplementedinthecreation of
sbythefinancialinstitutions.FannieMae’sandFreddieMac’s roleincreatingsecuritiz
udcreationpracticesarenotaddressed inthiswriting. Withallthefailureofcompl
hesecondarymarket
trusts,thiswriterisalarmedthatthe“Robo‐Signing”and“Robo‐Verification”willonly s
ithadiversionarymethodtoconcealagreaterfraud.The “Robo”actionsandaccountingfo
ywithlawsofgovernance
showproofthefinancialinstitutionwillcommitanynumberoffraudstoprotecttheir Fri
lTowerBonuses. Itmaybe,justmaybepossibletoproveuptheMortgageNotebutyoucan
ardlessofthenumberofAffidavitsfiledwiththecourts andregardlessofthenumberof
edofrecord,noneofthese actionswillperfectalienonceperfectionhasbeenlost.Pro
coveryofanunsecurednote‐‐suitformonies:“butyoucannotforeclose.”“THEYARE SUING
LE,”iffilingforforeclosure. Nobodywillhavegottenanythingforfree,thehomeiswit
ageNoteandthebankcanstillsueunderthedefaultontheMortgageNoteifsuch noteha
ntionalactasnotedintheUCC. Over2000yearsago,Jesusbeganthisfightwiththemone
rththestampedeofPalehorsestofightthisevilandtheriders’namesare“ThePeople.”
eplanetandhaslawsofjusticeunparalleledby anyothercountry;thefinancialinstitu
erica’sjudicial systembyuseofslickerytrickerywording,lies,fraudanddeceitandma
stocreatelawstohelpconcealthefraud.Sufficientlawsdoexistandtheyare justla
ialinstitutions. Finalwords:the“Robo”actionsarejustthetipoftheicebergbut
allowedpartoftheicebergtobeseen. GODBLESSTHISCOUNTRY
JamesMcGuire POBox1352 Bedford,Texas76095‐1352 j.mcguire@swbell.net 817420‐4151
gServices Memphis,Tennessee 901896‐9989