Docket & Affidavit in Disposed Case No. 09-6016-CA
Docket & Affidavit in Disposed Case No. 09-6016-CA
Docket & Affidavit in Disposed Case No. 09-6016-CA
BANKUNITED,
non-successor in interest to [lawfully seized] BANKUNITED, FSB.,
purported plaintiff(s),
vs.
DISPOSED CASE NO.: 09-6016-CA
_________________________________________________________________________/
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF COLLIER
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority personally appeared Jennifer Franklin-Prescott, who
3. “COUNT I (reestablishment of lost instrument)” was facially frivolous, because the “lost
“BankUnited”] as a “lender”.
4. In its facially frivolous and insufficient “complaint for mortgage foreclosure”, “plaintiff”
1
5. “BankUnited, FSB” was not any “plaintiff” in this disposed action.
6. The electronic docket in this disposed action had erroneously listed “BankUnited, FSB” as a
7. In this disposed action, “Plaintiff” “BankUnited” had deceptively alleged “that all conditions
“General Allegations”).
8. The “subject mortgage referenced” in the wrongful complaint identified “BankUnited, FSB”
9. The “logo” of bankrupt and lawfully seized “BankUnited, FSB” included a palm tree and
“BANKUNITED”.
10. “Plaintiff BankUnited” had falsely alleged that “The plaintiff [is] named in the attached
complaint [“BankUnited”] is the creditor to whom the debt is owed … The undersigned
attorney represents the interest of the plaintiff.” See “Notice Required by the Debt Collection
11. “Plaintiff BankUnited” was not any “creditor” in the disposed wrongful action.
12. Jennifer Franklin-Prescott did not owe any debt to “plaintiff BankUnited” pursuant to the
13. Undersigned “Camner Lipsitz, PA”, and/or founder of bankrupt and defunct “BankUnited,
FSB”, Alfred Camner, Esq., “represented the interest of the plaintiff [BankUnited]”.
14. “BankUnited” had fraudulently alleged in the Complaint (¶ 16, Count II) that “plaintiff”
15. The purported note and/or mortgage within the four corners of the disposed complaint did
2
16. The purported note/mortgage identified “BankUnited, FSB” as a “lender”.
17. No admissible evidence of any obligation to pay money to “BankUnited” existed on the
record of this disposed wrongful action, and Jennifer Franklin-Prescott was not obligated to
18. “Plaintiff BankUnited’s” purported “01/12/2011 Affidavits as to amounts due and attorneys
fees” were fraudulent and not founded on any note and/or mortgage identifying
“BankUnited” as a “lender”.
19. An affidavit that is not executed in accordance with the requirements of Ch. 92, Florida
21. “BankUnited” has had no right to enforce the falsely pretended mortgage/note.
25. “BankUnited” could not have possibly been entitled to any summary disposition and/or
26. “Pedro Luis Licourt” is not any known party to the disposed action, Case # 09-6016-CA
27. The purported “Amended Motion for Summary Judgment and for Attorney Fees against
Pedro Luis Licourt” was erroneous, irrational, and irrelevant to said disposed action.
28. Said action was disposed, because here no note and/or mortgage had been “transferred”” to
“BankUnited”.
3
29. The record and/or docket of this disposed action conclusively evidenced the “genuine issues
of material fact”, which prohibited any summary disposition after the 08/12/2011
disposition.
30. The “02/08/2011 “Amended Mtoin for Summary Judgment and for Attorney Fees against
Pedro Luis Lizourt” was erroneous, irrational, and irrelevant to said disposed action.
31. There was no service of notice of 02/14/2011 hearing upon Jennifer Franklin-Prescott nor
32. There was no service of notice of 02/22/2011 hearing upon Franklin-Prescott, and the
33. In this disposed action, the purported “Defendant’s motion to dismiss/motion to enjoin” was
34. Jennifer Franklin-Prescott was never properly served either by personal service of process or
by any other service of process in strict compliance with Chapters 48 and 49, Florida
Statutes.
35. “BankUnited” failed to conduct a diligent search in strict compliance with the Florida
36. The record established that the falsely alleged service by publication was void.
37. Florida’s Statutes governing service of process are to be strictly construed to assure that
38. Any judgment against a defendant based upon improper service by publication would have
4
2/18/2011 Public Inquiry
Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - A LL / C ase - 112009C A0060160001XX
(FAX) NO TIC E O F O PPO SITIO N & O PPO SITIO N EVIDENC E/FR AUD EVIDENC E &
UNAVAILABILITY IN DISPO SED AC TIO N/NO TIFIC ATIO N O F C O URT & C LER K ET AL
02/07/2011 NO TIC E
O F FR AUDULENT AFFIDAVITS BY JASO N M TAR O KH ESQ & O F UNLAW FUL/
UNAUTHO R IZED AC T BY ALBER TELLI LAW (UNSIGNED)
02/08/2011 NO TIC E O F HEARING
02/22/11 @10:00A.M., DEFENDANT'S MO TIO N TO DISMISS/MO TIO N TO ENJO IN
02/08/2011 AMENDED NO TIC E O F HEAR ING
02/14/11 @3:30P M AMENDED MO TIO NFO R SUMMAR Y JUDGMENT AND FO R
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 1/2
2/18/2011 Public Inquiry
02/14/11 @3:30P.M. AMENDED MO TIO NFO R SUMMAR Y JUDGMENT AND FO R
ATTO R NEY FEES AGAINST PEDR O LUIS LIC O UR T
02/08/2011 AMENDED
MTO IN FO R SUMMAR Y JUDGMENT AND FO R ATTO R NEY FEES AGAINST P EDR O LUIS
LIC O UR T
02/09/2011 DEMAND
O F FO R ENSIC R EVIEW & AUDIT AND NO TIC E O F FR AUDULENT AND/O R INAC C UR ATE
AC C O UNTING IN DISPO SED AC TIO N
W e dne sday night is re gular m a inte nance tim e on our se rve rs; as a re sult brie f o utage s m ay o ccur.
W e apologize in advance for any inconve nie nce.
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 2/2
2/18/2011 Public Inquiry
Home / Records Search / Court Records / Public Inquiry / Search Results - A LL / C ase - 112009C A0060160001XX
W e dne sday night is re gular m a inte nance tim e on our se rve rs; as a re sult brie f o utage s m ay o ccur.
W e apologize in advance for any inconve nie nce.
apps.collierclerk.com/…/Case.aspx?UC… 1/1