Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 603 views

    Holder in Due Course Script2

    Uploaded by

    TRISTARUSA
    The document discusses a court case, In re Weissman, where a judge found that banks were committing fraud by foreclosing on homeowners without being the true holder in due course. It argues that the defendants in the instant case, along with their attorneys, have also violated various laws by commencing a non-judicial foreclosure as a party that is not the holder in due course. The document asserts that the defendants have claimed a perfected title through foreclosure yet cannot be the lawful creditor or holder in due course based on the note and relevant laws.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Holder in Due Course Script2

    Uploaded by

    TRISTARUSA
    603 views5 pages
    The document discusses a court case, In re Weissman, where a judge found that banks were committing fraud by foreclosing on homeowners without being the true holder in due course. It argues that the defendants in the instant case, along with their attorneys, have also violated various laws by commencing a non-judicial foreclosure as a party that is not the holder in due course. The document asserts that the defendants have claimed a perfected title through foreclosure yet cannot be the lawful creditor or holder in due course based on the note and relevant laws.

    Original Description:

    holder in due course script

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses a court case, In re Weissman, where a judge found that banks were committing fraud by foreclosing on homeowners without being the true holder in due course. It argues that the defendants in the instant case, along with their attorneys, have also violated various laws by commencing a non-judicial foreclosure as a party that is not the holder in due course. The document asserts that the defendants have claimed a perfected title through foreclosure yet cannot be the lawful creditor or holder in due course based on the note and relevant laws.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    603 views5 pages

    Holder in Due Course Script2

    Uploaded by

    TRISTARUSA
    The document discusses a court case, In re Weissman, where a judge found that banks were committing fraud by foreclosing on homeowners without being the true holder in due course. It argues that the defendants in the instant case, along with their attorneys, have also violated various laws by commencing a non-judicial foreclosure as a party that is not the holder in due course. The document asserts that the defendants have claimed a perfected title through foreclosure yet cannot be the lawful creditor or holder in due course based on the note and relevant laws.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as doc, pdf, or txt
    of 5
    At a glance
    Powered by AI
    The document discusses arguments regarding holder in due course and fraudulent foreclosure. It cites several important cases and laws.

    In re Weisband (March 29, 2010) and A.R.S. § 47-3302 are mentioned as important to understand holder in due course and fraudulent foreclosure.

    The argument is that the defendants are not the true holder in due course and are unlawfully foreclosing without being able to prove they are the creditor or holder in due course.

    Additional material for Script for Holder in Due Course

    Pursuant to A.R.S. Title 47 [UCC 3-3 !" Section 33 ! Para#rap$ d% e% and #% t$e onl& parties t$at can foreclose are t$e Holder in Due Course. And Pursuant to t$e 'n re (eis)and Decision% *arc$ !+t$% ! , % Honora)le -ud#e Hallo.ell/s decision pro0es conclusi0el& t$at t$e 1an2s are not t$e Holder in Due Course and t$e&% alon# .it$ t$eir attorne&s are committin# fraud )& commencin# a non-3udicial foreclosure. -ud#e Hallo.ell $as defined 0er& succinctl& .$at [T$e *ort#a#er" 4*AC .as doin# to t$e $omeo.ner .as fraud% .$ic$ is e5actl& .$at t$ese Plaintiffs are doin# to me6 Plaintiffs and7or Plaintiffs/ attorne&8s9 $a0e incontro0erti)l& 0iolated% inter alia% A.R.S. : 47-3302(d),(e) and (g)% and% inter alia% A.R.S. Sup. Ct. Rules 42 E.R. 3.3 and 8.4 )& 2no.in#l&% intelli#entl&% and .illfull& con0enin# a non-3udicial foreclosure proceedin# for a part& t$at is NOT t$e HOLDER IN DUE COURSE.

    Impor !" #!$e$ !"d %!&$ o ge ! gr!$p o'(


    See; 'n re (eis)and% *arc$ !+% , , % -ud#e Hallo.ell )UDUCI*L NOTICE( Plaintiff $ere)& notices t$is Court of U.S.D.C.% District of Ari<ona% t$e Honora)le -ud#e =illeen Hallo.ell/s *emorandum Decision for; See; 'n re (eis)and% *arc$ !+% , , % .$erein -ud#e Hallo.ell descri)ed succinctl& t$e fraud t$at t$e 1an2s are committin# a#ainst t$e )od& politic and $omeo.ners in t$e Countr& )& unla.full& foreclosin# on Real Propert& .$en t$e 1an2s are >?T t$e H?@D=R '> DU= C?URS=.

    Accordin#l&% and pursuant to A.R.S. : 47-33 ! [UCC 3-3 !" 8d9% 8e9 and8#9% t$e Defendants in t$is instant matter% .it$ t$e assistance of Defendants/ attorne&s% $a0e unla.full& commenced a non-3udicial foreclosure proceedin# .it$out )ein# t$e H?@D=R '> DU= C?URS=. To )rin# a fraudulent action% 2no.in#l&% intelli#entl&% and .illfull&% into court is a contempt of court. Defendant/s o.n acts of fraud upon t$is court% Plaintiff% and t$e pu)lic in #eneral are t$e sin#le cause of t$is parado5 and a)sent Defendant Astatin# t$e claimB t$e& are t$e CREDITOR and HOLDER IN DUE COURSE in t$is matter, t$is court cannot $ear from Defendant. Defendants and7or Defendants/ attorne&8s9 $a0e incontro0erti)l& 0iolated% inter alia% A.R.S. : 47-3302 [UCC 3-3 !" (d),(e) and (g)% and% inter alia% A.R.S. Sup. Ct. Rules 42 E.R. 3.3 and 8.4 )& 2no.in#l&% intelli#entl&% and .illfull& con0enin# a non-3udicial foreclosure proceedin# for a part& t$at is NOT t$e HOLDER IN DUE COURSE. *.R.S. + 47-3302. [UCC 3-3 !" Ho%der ," d-e #o-r$e. D. 'f% under section 47-33 3 [UCC 3-3 3"% su)section A% para#rap$ ,% t$e promise of performance t$at is t$e consideration for an instrument $as )een partiall& performed% /e /o%der m!0 !$$er r,g/ $ !$ ! /o%der ," d-e #o-r$e o' /e ,"$ r-me" o"%0 o /e 'r!# ,o" o' /e !mo-" p!0!1%e -"der /e ,"$ r-me" e2-!% o /e 3!%-e o' /e p!r ,!% per'orm!"#e di0ided )& t$e 0alue of t$e promised performance. E. 'f t$e person entitled to enforce an instrument $as onl& a securit& interest in t$e instrument and t$e person o)li#ed to pa& t$e instrument $as a defense% claim in recoupment or claim to t$e instrument t$at ma& )e asserted a#ainst t$e person .$o #ranted t$e securit& interest% t$e person entitled to enforce t$e instrument m!0 !$$er r,g/ $ !$ ! /o%der ," d-e #o-r$e o"%0 o !" !mo-" p!0!1%e -"der /e ,"$ r-me" &/,#/, at t$e

    time of enforcement of t$e instrument% does not e5ceed t$e amount of t$e unpaid o)li#ation secured. 4. T$is section is su)3ect to an& la. limitin# status as a $older in due course in particular classes of transactions. 57* *.R.S. S-p.C .R-%e$, R-%e 42, R-%e$ o' 6ro'.Co"d-# , *r,7o"! Re3,$ed S ! - e$ *""o ! ed R-%e$ o' /e S-preme Co-r o' *r,7o"! 8',"d 9o-r r-%e$ /! #orre%! e: ;. Reg-%! ,o" o' /e 6r!# ,#e o' L!& D. L!&0er O1%,g! ,o"$ R-%e 42. *r,7o"! R-%e$ o' 6ro'e$$,o"!% Co"d-# <!," !,","g /e I" egr, 0 o' /e 6ro'e$$,o" ER 3.3. C!"dor To&!rd /e Tr,1-"!% 8a9 A la.&er s$all not 2no.in#l&; (5) m!=e ! '!%$e $ ! eme" o' '!# or %!& o ! r,1-"!% or '!,% o #orre# ! '!%$e $ ! eme" o' m! er,!% '!# or %!& pre3,o-$%0 m!de o /e r,1-"!% 10 /e %!&0er. (3) o''er e3,de"#e /! /e %!&0er ="o&$ o 1e '!%$e. I' ! %!&0er, /e %!&0er>$ #%,e" or ! &, "e$$ #!%%ed 10 /e %!&0er /!$ o''ered m! er,!% e3,de"#e !"d /e %!&0er #ome$ o ="o& o' , $ '!%$, 0, /e %!&0er $/!%% !=e re!$o"!1%e remed,!% me!$-re$, ,"#%-d,"g, ,' "e#e$$!r0, d,$#%o$-re o /e r,1-"!%. * %!&0er m!0 re'-$e o o''er e3,de"#e, o /er /!" /e e$ ,mo"0 o' ! de'e"d!" ," ! #r,m,"!% m! er, /! /e %!&0er re!$o"!1%0 1e%,e3e$ ,$ '!%$e. 8)9 A la.&er .$o represents a client in an ad3udicati0e proceedin# and .$o 2no.s t$at a person intends to en#a#e% is en#a#in# or $as en#a#ed in criminal or fraudulent conduct related to t$e proceedin# s$all ta2e reasona)le remedial measures% includin#% if necessar&% disclosure to t$e tri)unal.

    ER 8.4. <,$#o"d-# 't is professional misconduct for a la.&er to; 8a9 0iolate or attempt to 0iolate t$e Rules of Professional Conduct% 2no.in#l& assist or induce anot$er to do so% or do so t$rou#$ t$e acts of anot$erC 8)9 commit a criminal act t$at reflects ad0ersel& on t$e la.&erDs $onest&% trust.ort$iness or fitness as a la.&er in ot$er respectsC (#) e"g!ge ," #o"d-# ,"3o%3,"g d,$/o"e$ 0, 'r!-d, de#e, or m,$repre$e" ! ,o". 8d9 en#a#e in conduct t$at is pre3udicial to t$e administration of 3usticeC De'e"d!" $? ! or"e0$ !re !$$,$ ,"g De'e"d!" $ ," #omm, ,"g 'r!-d( -po" /e Co-r , /e S ! e o' @@@@@@, !"d /e 1od0 po%, ,# o' /e $ ! e. Defendant/s appearance on t$e deed of trust renders t$e mort#a#e deed or deed of trust E?'D. See; *?RT4A4= =@=CTR?>'C R=4'STRAT'?> SFST=*S% '>C.% Appellant% 0. @'SA *AR'= CH?>4% @=>ARD =. SCH(ARTG=R% 1A>HRUPTCF TRUST==. Defendants $a0e claimed APerfected TitleB t$rou#$ t$e action of non3udicial foreclosure% &et% cannot% under an& circumstances% )e t$e la.ful CR=D'T?R and7or H?@D=R '> DU= C?URS= of t$e alle#ed de)t as e0idenced )& t$e >ote t$e& claim to )e Trustee for t$e Holders. see: Carpenter v. Longan, 83 U.S. 271, 274 21 L.Ed. 313 (1872). The note and ortgage are !nsepara"#e, the $or er as essent!a#, the #atter as an !n%!dent&' add!ng that an ass!gn ent o$ the note %arr!es the ortgage (!th !t, (h!#e an ass!gn ent o$ the #atter a#one !s a n)##!t*.& Pursuant to; +n ,e Le!s)re T! e Sports, +n%. 1-4 ..,. 8/-, 801 (-th C!r%)!t 1--0) stat!ng that 1a2 se%)r!t* !nterest %annot e3!st, )%h #ess "e trans$erred, !ndependent $ro the o"#!gat!on (h!%h !t se%)res and that, !$ the de"t !s not trans$erred, ne!ther !s the se%)r!t* !nterest.& Defendants $a0e not% and cannot e0er% e0idence to t$is Court t$at it $as

    acted in #ood fait$ and $as AClean HandsB in t$is Court. T$e securit& interest cannot 0est in Defendants due to fatal process as .ell as lac2 of standin# to act as CR=D'T?R and7or H?@D=R '> DU= C?URS= .$en% in fact% it is not. See: 4e##* v. Upsha(, 3- Ca#. 2d 17-, 1-2, 240 5 2d 23 (1-/2) ass!gn!ng on#* the 6eed (!tho)t a trans$er o$ the 7ote !s %o p#ete#* !ne$$e%t!ve' see a#so: ,estate ent (3d) o$ 5ropert* (8ortgages) 9 /.4 stat!ng: : ortgage a* "e en$or%ed on#* "*, or !n "eha#$ o$, a person (ho !s ent!t#ed to en$or%e the ;.L+<:T+;7 that the ortgage se%)res&. As Hell& esta)lis$es% t$is is true under California la.s and t$erefore applies $ere. See: S:=;7 8;,T<:<E SE,>+CES, +7C., ET. :L., 5L:+7T+??S >. ,UT@+E .. @+LLE,, 6E?E76:7TS. 7o. CAB8A43/7 E8C, (6o%Cet 7o. 7), Un!ted States 6!str!%t Co)rt $or the 7orthern 6!st. ;$ Ca#!$orn!a, 2BB8 US 6!st. Le3!s 1BBB/0. Defendants cannot )e t$e CR=D'T?R and7or t$e H?@D=R '> DU= C?URS= as one or more of t$e Defendants .as and7or is t$e D=1T?R pursuant to A.R.S. : 47-+, ! [UCC +-, !"; A.R.S. : 47-+, !. Definitions and inde5 of definitions A. 'n t$is c$apter% unless t$e conte5t ot$er.ise reIuires; !J. KDe)torK means; (1) * $e%%er o' !##o-" $, #/! e% p!per, p!0me" ," !"g,1%e$ or prom,$$or0 "o e$. or (#) * #o"$,g"ee.

    You might also like